this post was submitted on 21 May 2026
25 points (96.3% liked)

politics

29839 readers
2850 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
 

Ever since the 2024 election, Democrats have been searching for answers as to what went so wrong to possibly have re-installed Donald Trump as president.

And for much of that time, there’s been anticipation about an “autopsy” from the Democratic National Committee that drilled down on that precise question.

Except that autopsy never actually arrived. And eventually DNC Chairman Ken Martin said he wouldn’t release it.

But now Martin is reversing course and releasing an incomplete version of the document, after an outcry from some in the party.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kylie_kraft@lemmy.world 8 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

This report is deeply flawed and embarrassing in its lack of data and depth. However, it needed to be released when the DNC said it would be. A simple majority of Americans trust Democrats less than Republicans, and the sudden reversal around its release widened the gulf.

Even now, what was released is incomplete and has annotations that indicate DNC denial of even its most plausible claims. This against the backdrop of Trump's Epstein files release, which was also delayed, incomplete, and accompanied with denials. The Dems made a fuss about that (characteristically toothless, but a fuss), but then did the same with one of their own reports months later. It's a ridiculous, unprovoked self-own that lowers the DNC's already guttered credibility at a critical moment.

All that said, the report itself is worthless because it refuses to acknowledge the elephants in the room:

  1. The RNC and DNC are paid from the same pockets. The DNC refuses to even acknowledge this to itself, let alone propose any policy or reforms that endanger donations from corporations and the mega wealthy. This leads to over-focus on wedge issues, and the Republicans are experts in creating and exploiting divisions.

  2. Refusal to address Israel in any meaningful way. I am not optimistic that either party will break from Israel. They are pouring billions into military contracts and buying lawmakers hand over fist. US military bases in Israel are seen as critical to its Middle East strategy. However, the failure to even establish a line in the sand that a Harris administration would not cross increased the feeling that there was no difference between the two parties on policy, just personality.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 5 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Israel got much more aggressive in the whole region after Trump took power so I'd disagree that there isn't a difference in the two parties.

[–] mrdown@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 hours ago

Bullshit. Israel is more agressive because the whole world is coward. Fuck the usa, russia, china , canada and europe for doing nothibg and even buy and sell weapons from israel

[–] kylie_kraft@lemmy.world 4 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not saying that there isn't a difference, just that the Dems didn't adequately make a case that there would be a difference. I don't see Israel going total annihilation in Gaza without the moral and material support of the Trump administration. That was the Dems point to make, and they didn't make it.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world -1 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

Harris says will end Gaza war in final election appeal to Arab Americans.

In her closing pitch for the presidency of the United States, Democrat aspirant Kamala Harris has promised to end the war in Gaza.

Campaigning in the swing state of Michigan, home to many Arab Americans, Harris, 60, on Sunday tried to reach voters disgruntled by the ongoing genocide, which has killed more than 43,000 Palestinians and displaced almost the entire 2.3 million residents of Gaza.

Sounds like they did though.

[–] mrdown@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 hours ago

She lied . She claimed that Hamas was the reason there is no cease fire but it was Israel who blocked it.

[–] kylie_kraft@lemmy.world 4 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I said that they didn't adequately make the case, not that they never said anything. This is one campaign rally, in November. Before this, Harris's responses were much more typical of Dems of the time: Israel was attacked, Israel has the right to defend itself, but killing Palestinians bad.

She had a three month campaign.