54
Trump, 79, chickens out of public showdown with Mamdani, 34
(www.thedailybeast.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2025
54 points (100.0% liked)
politics
26496 readers
839 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Honestly, I think this is the best option. Nothing good would have come of their conversation being in public.
Why not? Mamdani would absolutely smoke him
I just don’t think that’s the purpose of them talking. It’s not meant to be a public fight between 2 people, which is what it would turn into.
I imagine Trump will possibly be more receptive to Mamdani’s comments in that private than in public.
In what way? Because I hate to remind you but Trump is a literal fascist.
It's now after the meeting, go watch the press conference and tell me trump isn't absolutely smitten with Mamdani.
Well I guess I'll be eating my words I have no idea what the hell is going on here.
In the same way that the 50 year mortgage guy got Trump on board despite all his aides and everyone else hating it. Hes not a hard man to trick.
He keeps trying to pass himself off as a smart man, and there's just no way to keep up that act if you've got an actually smart man talking to you.
You're right, there are secret meetings between powerful individuals that should remain hidden from public knowledge
Not every conversation needs to be public.
Not every conversation, but every conversation between powerful individuals.
And maybe that's an impractical standard, but the spirit of it is more liberating than letting corruption fester in the darkness.
It is an impractical standard. While I understand where you’re coming from, I think sometimes you need to allow people an opportunity to talk without every word being judged.
If the meeting is public, then it will never be a true conversation. It will be 2 people giving prepared statements in the form of a conversation.