this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2025
204 points (99.5% liked)

politics

26300 readers
2644 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
 

The shutdown debate over expiring enhanced ObamaCare subsidies has put Republicans on the defensive over health care, reopening old wounds over the 2017 attempt to repeal and replace the law.

Fifteen years since the Affordable Care Act was passed, the scars from the repeal effort and the GOP’s lingering disgust for the law are influencing the party’s scattered response.

While Republicans are united in criticizing the law and the need for subsidies, there is no clear plan on how to deal with rising premiums if those subsidies are allowed to expire.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I think you overestimate the median solvency of the average GOP voter

[–] TehWorld@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There always seems to be plenty of money to support a failing pillow grift.

[–] vividspecter@aussie.zone 7 points 1 week ago

There's always plenty of money in the ~~banana~~ pillow stand.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't think it's about the solvency, I am more willing to talk with and interact with the homeless than most and there are a dangerously high number of the homeless who are pro-Republican even though a lot of those policies make their already difficult lives harder.

I mean this genuinely, they would become homeless to stick it to the libs and nothing will change their mind, even losing house and home.

[–] lauha@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

So they chose to be homeless then