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
I would like to say: clinton didn't lose because she's a woman, she lost because she's a sleazeball. harris didn't lose because she's a woman, she lost because she was courting the right wing for some reason. AOC can win because she's not a sleazy right winging neolib. I'd vote for her for president.
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but don’t underestimate the role of misogyny. A commentator on a podcast i listen to was in the US in the run-up to the last election and they said that something they heard over and over again in the people they talked to was variations on “i hate Trump and everything he stands for, but i couldn’t trust the country to a woman”
I had one friend like this. Basically all he talked about was how much he hates Trump, then come election he said he wasn't voting at all because "Trump is bad, but Harris is worse because she's a woman".
In the sake of honesty, it wasn't just that. He also said a few times that she's worse than Trump because she claimed to be from a working class family, but almost always it was that she was a woman that was his reasoning.
What you said is true. But any woman, even a great one, is going to have a tougher time than a man would. Sexism is still a problem in this country.
Both Harris and Clinton position themselves as more of the status quo. Trump both time always positions himself as an outsider who taps into to racism and white rage. The only time you can win off a status quo type deal if the Dem admin was doing amazing during when they had power.
Support for what ever she decides is next, although I feel like the senate would be a better step. However the democrats dont really have a face to back that isnt some centerist that thinks its ok to play with the bully after they have taken your lunch money or someone that is older than Wonder Bread (tm).
I'm not sold on his face, but I do like the way Pritzker swings a bat. He's a bit centrist, but at least he's a fighter.
His problem is he's a billionaire. But as a stop gap, I think he could work.
At this point, he is a billionaire by choice. He could donate to groups that work towards equitable living for the marginalized, but he doesn't. He only has a couple billion, but that's enough to make a very real impact for a lot of vulnerable people. This is very nearly the trolley problem. He can do nothing and let a lot of people die or he can intervene and save most but not all.
As Rush said (the band, not Limbaugh lol), If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
A female president of a normal age would be an amazing change for the US. Why does it always have to be geriatric males?
One of the few sitting Dems I'd vote for.
I don't know if AOC is the right pick but I do know she's closer to the target than Gavin Newsom. Nothing against him, but the Democratic party needs a candidate that can inspire people.
But that's getting ahead of things. First the american people need to primary ~50% of sitting democrats in the midterms.
There's plenty to be against Newsome for considering he platformed fascists, attacks the homeless for fun, and isn't supportive of the LGBTQ+ community.
I appreciate Bernie for being an adult and helping to boost up the people that will be here after him.
Most every other politician, when they aren't cramming their unqualified, entitled broodspawn where they don't belong, is gnawing off limbs trying to make sure they're entombed with their positions like the pharaohs.
I'm a big fan of AOC, but I think I'd rather her wait until 2032. The next presidency (if there even is one) is going to be a fucking shitshow trying to clean up Trump's messes. I'd rather her get the opportunity to be a "get shit done" President, instead of having to spend all her time rooting out Trump's traitors in the government while getting villainized in the media.
I'm not sure she has the thunder she had in 2018. BUT If she calls for a general strike in the next 6 weeks, and then starts to be the lead organizer of said strike, she's my gal. I really hope she learns from Bernie in specifically how he's organized his national campaigns.
Look at this point you could literally run George Washington himself as a Democrat and MAGA wouldn't vote for him.
Also, compared to the current guy, a rancid portion of tuberculotic lung coughed up in a pool of fetid blood on the floor of some 18th century eastern European sanitarium is a "very good politician".
And the status quo liberals will coalesce like Voltron to stop her just like they did with Bernie.
I saw this coming a mile away and I hope she does win the Presidential Election to break barriers and to end the nonsense going on currently.
Problem is the conservatives will argue/debate no woman should be in power followed by countless historical references to prove their point. Then someone will show even more historical references of conservatives causing twice to three times the issues. This will turn into one giant circle jerk of why they (conservative) won't listen to a woman when they don't even listen to their own parents.
The greater risk isn't misogynist republicans IMO, it's misogynist liberals who will cynically use her gender and ethnic background as examples of her unelectability instead of addressing their opposition to her populist agenda.
"I don't take issue wither her being a woman, but dumb rural americans will, so we can't nominate her"
Every time a populist candidate gains momentum in the democratic party, democrats suddenly become greatly concerned about electability. See: Obama, Sanders, Mamdani, Fatah, ect.
Maybe if democrats placed as much emphasis on a popular policy agenda as they do on identity, they wouldn't have as much of an electability problem.
Love the optimism that there will be elections in the US in the foreseeable future!
Lol the DNC has chosen Newsom as the new golden boy.
The DNC would run the corpse of Hillary Clinton again before letting a progressive have power.
I would love for AOC to actually be allowed to be voted on, because she would probably win the popular vote like progressives almost always do.
Give me the most balls left big balls fucking make my day powerful bitch we got. We have SO MUCH bullshit to undo and redo.
If it's AOC, she better do it right.
Give me the most balls left big balls fucking make my day powerful bitch we got
one of us is having a stroke
Non an american but I feel like US needs a revolutionary candidate to come back from Trump. It has to be someone strong enough to put nazis back into their place.
It's still early to talk about this though right? From what I understand the upcoming midterms will shape everything else.
As inappropriate and watered down as it sounds, I honestly don't think this country is going to vote in a female president this decade. Race plays a part too, but I honestly think that this country is more sexist than it is racist when it comes to presidential voting. It's partially a gut feelings, but I think gender played a bigger role than many people think in the 2016 and 2024 elections. As messed up as it sounds, I think Bernie POTUS with AOC VP would stand a better chance of winning right now as opposed to the other way around. Even with all of the socialist/communist boogie-man bullshit that Bernie gets thrown at him.
I like AOC and agree with her on a lot. And I really would like to see how she would handle it. But as a straight white guy in his 40's that honestly wants to see things get better for everyone I also dread the tidal wave of dog whistle reasons the GOP will bring out for why she is unfit.
I know that is the point, but the constant avalanche of ignorant talking points that hearken back to "the good ole days" when men were men, women were arm candy, and brown people shared a corner on the floor with the family dog in these peoples minds that they disguise as honest engagement with a legitimate issue in the country is starting to burn me out.
I mean how many times do we have to learn the hard way that America won't elect a woman to be president?
Look at this country.
It's a shitshow.
It didn't elect a woman when the other option was a felon, rapist, insurrectionist manchild with one failed presidency and two impeachments already under his belt.
Do we really want to do this again when the stakes are so unbelievably high?
Goddamn. People need to get their heads screwed on straight. She isn't just a woman, she's also profoundly hated by a lot of Americans for being so progressive. Why the fuck would we do this to ourselves? I mean America wouldn't even elect Bernie, the male version of her with a lot more experience.
WE NEED TO START LIVING IN REALITY.
I like AOC. I respect her for what she does. But she's not going to be president in 2028.
I think it's not necessarily "because she was a woman", though without a doubt it was factor.
it was also because they were out of touch neoliberals. Hillary was clearly playing dirty with Bernie, and Kamala was actively participating a genocide.
AOC vs Erica Kirk.
The brown girl vs all that is white and right beauty pageant queen pick me. I can already call it. She will be the pied piper leading all the women into the Handmaids Tale.
I vote yes.
I don't see anyone better for the job.
Certainly not that transphobic piece of shit from California, that's for damn sure.
To get her elected we will have to fight the oligarchs, Israel, the Republicans and the Democrats. But I'm with her. I'd vote for her and Crockett.