politics
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
view the rest of the comments
Oddly enough I've seen the purported progressives on here already trying to claim he's bad on a few occasions.
i most see then angry he's not a far left communist and only a 'mere' social democrat.
Hate to break it to you, but people can lie about what they believe and who they are...
Especially on the internet.
No one knows youre a dog on the internet
Yeah, and the legitimate lefties out there are awesome and I hope they get their way.
Then there are the ones who preach disengagement because "both sides" / "blue-maga"...
I mean, shits been fucked up largely due to neoliberals controlling the DNC...
That changed with the last chair electuon, and some people are genuinely ignorant of that fact. Others want people on the actual left to be disengaged for the next primary.
The DNC is neo-liberal, period. They are center right everywhere in the world.
You don't understand that the chair has complete control...
Otherwise when Obama was elected youd have been saying "the president" and holding Obama accountable for everything GW did before Obama even ran for president.
At least, I'm hoping the problem here is ignorance, like I said a lot of people are lying to depress Dem turnout in the next presidential primary.
I do understand that the DNC has complete control. We've seen many example of that, the most egregious being Bernie vs Clinton.
US society is fundamentally to the right and the DNC will keep it that way.
That creates an issue where changing the Democrat Party will take a long long time. So the better option would be a real left party, but that would mean that Republicans would be in power for a while, until the politcal landscape changes and stabilise with 3 parties. And that's not accounting for the DNC that will work against the newly formed party.
Denying that the DNC is neo-liberal to its core is deliberate ignorance.
Any prominent member that has an ounce of progressism has to fight the DNC at every corner to get through, like we've seen Mamdani.
Meanwhile, progressives should definitely vote for the Democrats. But this is a different issue. The vote turnout is terrible in North America (we have the same problem in Canada).
I've never seen anyone here (or anywhere on the Fediverse) actually preach disengagement. Pointing out that both sides suck isn't preaching disengagement.
Eh, tomato/potato, the 'genocide joe' mantra and then immediately turning that hate on Harris when he stepped down, essentially demanding an ethically pure option...
It all ends up in the same place, a disenfranchised apathetic public leaving the door open for the current shitshow whose voters eagerly embrace the terrible options they're offered. Perfect being the enemy of the less bad and all that.
Yeah that's not "potato potato" that's called fucking lying. Criticizing the options offered and preaching disengagement are two completely different things. It's completely possible to denounce genocide Joe and "nothing comes to mind" Harris and call not for less, but for more (and more radical) engagement. No way in hell, say, Uncommitted was "preaching disengagement," and if you feel the need to lie about people for opposing genocide you should seriously reconsider your beliefs.
Really? But he's basically a progressive dream come true? Maybe because his Trump visit? But he really did great there too.
when all you have is a wedge, everything is a crack
Reminds me, I need to finish Adam Savage's audiobook.
The only consistent thing about the left since its existence is infighting and self-sabotage.
There is absolutely room for criticism against Zohran. I wholeheartedly support that voting for him was still the correct choice and I hope he really does unleash significant progressive policy for NYC. I also believe he deserves the criticism for manufacturing consent for action against Venezuela and Cuba by calling their presidents dictators in the context of today's likelihood of attack against the former; and for his redundancy on pinning the Isntreali genocide of Palestinians on October 7th.
they are dictators. most of the world sees them as dictators.
whether or not that justifies military action is another question, but they are certainly not freely elected representatives, anymore than Putin is. And the countries that do recognize the legitimacy of their elections... are also dictatorships.
They definitely aren't freely elected. You can't have free elections when the US government is interfering in them by sanctions.
As stated in the memorandum on the sanctions in the office of the historian governmental website:
Yes, because people are either good or bad, and thus everything they do is either good or bad. Depending of course on whether they are good or bad only.
Everyone sucks in their own, terrible way.
The Tankies are already calling him the next Obama
Then they aren't progressives.