this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2025
444 points (96.2% liked)

politics

24346 readers
3378 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In the wake of the U.S. airstrikes on Iran, Democrats are pointing to Trump's own promises that he wouldn't ensnare the country in foreign conflicts.

Democrats are seizing on Donald Trump’s surprise attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities to make the case that the world is becoming more dangerous on his watch, not less, and that he is reneging on a promise to avoid foreign military interventions.

The argument strikes at Trump’s contention that his blend of negotiating skills and toughness is enough to keep the United States safe.

In the space of a few days, Trump has made the United States a combatant in another Middle East war that exposes soldiers to potential deadly reprisals, Democrats contend.

In a statement, Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin pointed to Trump's inaugural address, in which he said he would measure his success by “the wars we never get into.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] distantsounds@lemmy.world 40 points 2 days ago (1 children)

He enabled Israel by continuing to supply their genocide. The US was getting roped into Israel’s war either way. Both are senile assholes. Kamala never had a chance because Biden’s hubris

[–] chortle_tortle@mander.xyz 53 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

She might have had a chance, but at every turn she chose to say she would be no different from Biden. The fundamental reality is that people are disgusted by the status quo and don't show up for those that say nothing will change.

[–] arrow74@lemm.ee 36 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I still swallowed my pride and voted for her anyway, but I've never been so insulted as when I heard the "greatest economy ever" line over and over.

[–] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It was great, just not for the regular working people that normal economic barometer's used by governments ignore.

[–] arrow74@lemm.ee 20 points 2 days ago

That's exactly why it was insulting. It's basically saying "I'm sorry you can't afford a house, but the stock market is great!"

[–] SaltySalamander@fedia.io 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I still swallowed my pride and voted for her anyway

Any reasonable voter did.

[–] EndlessApollo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Tell yourself that all you want buddy. I wish I hadn't voted for her, it was stupid voting for someone who clearly gives no shits about fighting fascism or preventing genocide, and I won't be voting for blue presidents ever again bc they're only going to get further and further right

[–] arrow74@lemm.ee -2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Because it makes so much more sense to abstain from voting so now your vote is for fascism as opposed to picking the non-fascist.

It's peak denial of reality

[–] EndlessApollo@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

"as opposed to picking the non-fascist" Liberals are fascists. They have done nothing at all to oppose trump. When they stop siding with fascists over progressives literally every single time, maybe you'll have something remotely resembling a point

When there's 9 people at a table and a fascist sits, etc etc

[–] arrow74@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Liberals I'd say are to the immediate left of fascism. They definently enable policies that allow fascists to exist. While never taking that power themselves.

What people like you seem to forget is that our voting system is fundamentally broken and flawed. It limits our voice so short of a revolution we have to pick damage contol.

Funnily enough the only people that have tried to fix it are the democrats. Plenty of states under democratic control have pushed for a popular vote for president. It's not going to fix the voting system, but it would be a big improvement and then you would actually have a significantly better chance to get a third party canidate elected. Then you would have a point.

[–] EndlessApollo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

I'm cool with fighting for some things liberals also fight for, especially those kinda of voting reforms, bc along with ensuring conservatives lose every election, i bet it'd force liberals to actually appeal to the left to not risk losing to real progressives. Sadly they'll prob stop supporting that the moment it actually threatens to change the status quo at all

[–] EndlessApollo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO PEOPLE TO VOTE FOR

QUIT EXCUSING YOUR UNCONDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR LIBERALS

Just say you love killing gazans and getting fascists into office, there's no other explanation for thinking democrats are even remotely decent

[–] SaltySalamander@fedia.io -1 points 1 day ago

REPUBLICAN VOTERS ALWAYS VOTE REPUBLICAN. So if you want to split the liberal vote, you guarantee a Republican victory, because the ONLY FUCKING PEOPLE that will vote for this mythical 3rd option IS THE FUCKING LIBERALS.

[–] arrow74@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

All caps doesn't make you right buddy. I hate it, but until we can reform our fundamentally flawed system there are two options. Especially for president. If you split a state to a progressive canidate you almost garuntee a Fascist/Republican victory. The system itself is flawed. I'm sorry it's a harsh reality to accept. I was like you once. I made this very mistake back in 2016, and I vowed to never be such a fool again.

Don't chose fascism friend.

Just say you love killing gazans

Save the weak and overdone character attacks. The apartheid state of Israel has no right to exist. Unfortunately that wasn't on my ballot and no torching my vote didn't put it on the ballot either.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

So what have you done in the previous nine years to reform the voting system?

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago

Only one of two people can win. Feel free, vote for Vermin Supreme. You and the other 2 people who voted for him will be very happy you threw away your vote.

The rest of us got Trump, thanks.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermin_Supreme

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago (2 children)

don’t show up

They did show up. Kamala Harris won more votes than Barack Obama.

People talk like the Democrats didn't successfully twist arms and browbeat supporters into showing up for them in droves. 75,017,613 people voted for Kamala Harris, despite her vile stench.

Trump simply brought in more.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You were correct until the last sentence.

HitlerPig cheated, and we all know it. Cheating is their brand. They would cheat even if they KNEW they were going to win.

Dems went right to the "fair & square" line IMMEDIATELY after the election without even taking the slightest look at the evidence.

Now we are finding evidence in many places of very weird results, and the Dems are still trying to sell the concept of voters who voted a straight Democratic ticket, except HitlerPig at the top. I'm sure there are a few, but they are as rare as white squirrels. I've never met one, and I've never seen anyone claim to be one in the media, either. If there are so many of them that it SWUNG THE ELECTION, then let's talk to these people. Where are they?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

HitlerPig cheated, and we all know it.

Nixon accused JFK of buying votes all through Illinois after the 1960 election. And we have ample statistical and anecdotal evidence to suggest the Dem machine in Chicago was absolutely stacking the deck in JFK's favor. But we also have ample statistical and anecdotal evidence to suggest the GOP machine was stacking the deck in the south of the state.

Subsequently, when Nixon recaptured the executive branch in '68 (following a series of very convenient political upheavals) he implemented the "Southern Strategy" to win over Dixiecrat leadership and cement a Republican majority across the Gulf Coast for the next 80 years. The same Democrats who had been winning elections on the back of that machine in the 60s/70s became Republicans winning with the same machine at their backs in the 80s/90s.

This isn't a problem unique to Trump. It's baked into the decentralized, county-lead, deliberately opaque and byzantine electoral counting and reporting system. Katherine Harris was fucking with Florida elections in 2000 the same way Brad Raffensperger fucked with Georgia elections in 2024.

And don't look too hard at California's ascendancy of Silicon Valley shills or the cop-lead effort to elevate Eric Adams to the NYC Mayorship or the Richie Torries seat in the Bronx or the current ratfvckery with Cuomo.

[–] dinren@discuss.online 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There is that part about the voting machines and how certain districts got literally 100% Trump votes, which is… pretty impossible.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There's the "machines are rigged" explanation, which I've been torn on.

But there's also the far more likely "the city officials simply don't let you in if they think you're not going to vote for Trump" which I find much more believable.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Watch HBO's documentary Hacking Democracy, and then realize that Republicans, Sociopathic Oligarchs, Russia, China, North Korea, and others, have been operating sophisticated hacking programs ever since. You won't be torn anymore.

To believe that extremely powerful forces have NOT been trying to control our elections for years, is extremely naive.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

You won’t be torn anymore.

I've seen bits of it and heard some of the highnotes covered in other media. I think one of the producers was on the TrashFuture podcast at one point... or another one I listen to.

Either way, the Russia/China/North Korea/Insert-Evil-Foreigner-Here (but never Israel or Saudi Arabia or Qatar, because we're friends and they would never dream of...) angle was overhyped, while the degree to which local county clerks and judges fuck with this was under reported.

To believe that extremely powerful forces have NOT been trying to control our elections for years, is extremely naive.

Election manipulation, particularly domestically, is a very touchy subject. It's been proven to depress voter turnout in the receptive demographic. So you're stuck with this dilemma of trying to alert people to manipulation without deterring them from turning out in the next cycle. The line that both liberals and conservatives throw out is "We have to vote in such huge numbers that they can't cheat us!" which can be an effective rallying cry in the moment. But it doesn't work if you don't ever do anything to address the claims down the line.

Even when Obama's campaign swept the Atlantic Coast in 2008, what did his DOJ do to confront all the Bush-era fuckery thereafter? Same with Trump in 2016, screaming "Lock her up!" at Hillary while insisting she's rigged the whole vote, then... just shrugging and ignoring her while in office. Really kicks the legs out of your base when you spend a year complaining about how inherently unfair the election process has become and then announcing "We won so I guess everything is fine".

I was so hopefully after she picked Walz. And then she fucking chained herself to Biden and all my hope faded.

[–] distantsounds@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I agree 100%. She would have been better in that she’s coherent, but just another neolib failing to address systemic problems.

[–] dinren@discuss.online 0 points 1 day ago

We would have been able to focus on international issues and not worrying about the entire country crashing down around us like some handmaids tale nightmare.