this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2025
86 points (89.8% liked)

politics

26427 readers
2809 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
 

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) signaled in an interview with Axios on Monday that she would not support New York City Council member Chi Ossé in a primary challenge against House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.).

Why it matters: Ocasio-Cortez is one of several high-profile progressives distancing from Ossé's potential run, arguing that it is a distraction from New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani's victory.

Ocasio-Cortez told Axios during a brief interview at the U.S. Capitol that she was "not aware" that Ossé was challenging.

"But," she added, "I certainly don't think a primary challenge to the leader is a good idea right now."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pigup@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago (3 children)

It's because in the real world, you have to deal with reality, not only the couple of pet possibilities that people want to consider. I think AOC is the best shot that any decent person in the US has. She would if she could, but in the real world, these are not actual options.

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 11 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Part of me agrees with this, part of me thinks that these people are too far into the weeds to know what's possible. Change brings chaos. And when you're at your stressful job with a shitty machine that you are constantly trying to keep running, eventually you reach a point where the thought of turning off the machine is unthinkable.

From an outside perspective, it seems obvious. The machine is bad. We should get rid of it and try something different. But that concept is terrifying to the people who work on the machine. Turn it off? But they've spent years learning how to work with the machine! They know how to sometimes get the machine to do what they want! If they replace the machine with something else, what if they can't figure out how to work the new system? Maybe someday they can replace the machine, but right now? In the middle of everything else? No, no, far too risky. Best to try to keep working with the same old machine.

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

How living in the real world been working for her? Oh thats right they passed over giving her a more powerful position for a old man with terminal cancer who already left.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Leftists need to stop showing loyalty to a party that uses them and then throws them away.

The DNC is not a viable path twoards the left.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

Oh you and your reasonable explanations, with their rational basis in organizational communications.

I’m a PoliSci major and I’m baked AF! Now who knows more?!