this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2025
574 points (96.7% liked)

politics

26814 readers
2507 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
 

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez holds a slight lead over Vice President JD Vance in a hypothetical 2028 presidential matchup, according to a new poll.

The New York Democratic congresswoman, known as AOC, edges the likely Republican nominee 51% to 49%, in The Argument/Verasight survey released on Tuesday. However, the result was within the poll's 2.7 percentage point margin of error, making the two candidates statistically tied. The poll asked voters who they would vote for if the election was between the two of them.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 165 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Just another example of how America is collapsing under the weight of its own corporate/oligarch dictatorship, corruption, ignorance, racism, and mental illness epidemic.

An intelligent, empathetic leader is basically tied with a traitorous, criminally sociopathic, con artist who possesses zero morals or ethics, and literally works for someone he previously called Hitler...

If the US weren't a failed state, Trump would be in prison and Vance would be a fucking nobody.

[–] Damage@feddit.it 40 points 6 days ago (5 children)

JD Vance has zero charisma, idk how he can be in the race but, well... Trump.

[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 14 points 6 days ago

Because he gets a baseline of like 35% just for having R next to his name.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] nforminvasion@lemmy.world 50 points 6 days ago (4 children)

Ahh yes... The very free and fair 2028 elections we'll being having. The Republicans definitely won't try every trick in the book to manipulate them or stop them outright. Nevermind establishment Dems fucking over primaries to shoehorn in their milquetoast candidates, while fucking over actual progressives!

I am so looking forward to voting our way out of fascism/ a dictatorship, as has absolutely been exhibited to work multiple times through history.

[–] bigfondue@lemmy.world 16 points 6 days ago (1 children)

My fucking neighbor has a Trump 2028 sticker right under his Israeli flag

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 30 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

The DNC will use all their resources to sabotage her and place a Israeli loyalist that supports insider trading, forgiving the criminals in charge now, not reversing any of the shareholder first policies and deregulation and continuing to ratchet us to Nazi land while gaslighting us about how great the economy is because line go up for the capitalist class.

[–] buttnugget@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago

Part of the reason why social democracy is so important on the path to socialism is because line must go up for everyone or we’re totally screwed. I have no doubt the DNC will do whatever it can to undermine a candidate like AOC, but if we can implement a policy like Medicare for all, that will be a massive win for getting to the goal in more ways than one.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] foggy@lemmy.world 46 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Vance won't be the candidate and everyone knows it but Vance.

I'd bet on Tucker Carlson. 🤢

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 36 points 6 days ago

It's going to be Donald Trump Jr. They won't even need to change the hats.

[–] DokPsy@lemmy.world 28 points 6 days ago (5 children)

I fear it'll still be Trump, assuming he's alive

Is it in any way legal? No. Has that stopped him yet? Also no.

[–] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 30 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I really want him to think he's going to run again so that he'll undermine anyone else that tries to run. And then he can croak or something after ruining the primaries and getting his followers to hate any would be successor.

[–] DokPsy@lemmy.world 19 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I've stopped being so hopeful. The best I can hope for at this point is President Camacho

[–] human@slrpnk.net 14 points 6 days ago (3 children)

He actually listened to the experts.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] OldChicoAle@lemmy.world 31 points 6 days ago (6 children)

I had no idea who this JD Vance person was until he became trump's running mate. Dude you're not popular or interesting on your own. Don't act like people actually like you, couch fucking baby.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You've been flying blind. JD's been the spectre haunting American politics since the Obama Era. That creepy little turd's backed his way up the drainpipe of American politics with the help of everyone from James Dobson to Oprah. He's the Republicans' Hillary Clinton.

[–] bigfondue@lemmy.world 22 points 6 days ago

He's a Peter Thiel project. They met when Vance was in either college or law school. Shillbilly never would have met any of those people without Thiel's help. Probably would never even have gotten a book deal trashing his family.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 33 points 6 days ago (24 children)

JFC, "JD" "Vance" is about as appealing as a bucket of piss. How in the fuck is this even close?

I get it - AOC doesn't have a dong and so a lot of mouthbreathers rule her out on that alone. But still, Christ. This is the stupid bootlick that called Donvict a Nazi and is now his VP and sits there and chastises one of our allies like some kind of cartoon bully.

load more comments (24 replies)
[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Shame AOC and Bernie could not hijack the Democratic Party like Krasnov did to the fucking GOP.

I wish her the best of luck if she decides to run and she would stomp on Vance.

[–] vega208@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 days ago

I blame suburbanites and another group of people we're not ever allowed to blame for anything ever no matter what.

They didn't want to pay more in taxes and it was 'her turn.'

This is why we have fascism.

[–] HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world 30 points 6 days ago (10 children)

I greatly fear that if AOC were to run, the terminally online left would pull the rug out from under her.

Any time she's ever done any action that went not 100% in favor of the delusional mindset of idiots who think single politicians can usher in perfect communism, the TOL screamed bloody murder and withdrew all support and hype.

The same would happen in Nov 2028

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 19 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Mamdani had not even started his term and has already being cancel by the TOL.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] devolution@lemmy.world 17 points 6 days ago

AOC didn't support Gaza and is not communist enough!!! I will protest vote Jill Stein or not vote at all.

  • Tankies and oblivious leftists (these people are the reason progressive causes never go anywhere).
[–] TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I'm not sure the terminally online left you mention make up a significant enough portion of any electorate to impact the race in this way.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] DylanMc6@lemmy.ml 8 points 5 days ago

alexandria ocasio-cortez should indeed run for president. seriously!

[–] skozzii@lemmy.ca 20 points 6 days ago (15 children)

I'm all for a women president eventually, but perhaps the elections during an attempted fascist take over isn't the time.

Some men will simply not vote for a woman, it's sad, but it's reality. If a woman is on the ballot the democrats will lose again.

The time will come, just not yet with stakes this high. I would love to see AOC as the first female president.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 37 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (29 children)

Attitudes like yours are why Democrats lose elections. We talk ourselves out of our best candidates. We try to compromise with Republicans right out the gate, and try to select the more moderate 'electable' candidate.

Your line of thinking got us Kerry, Clinton, and Biden.

Trying to select a candidate based on "electability" is bullshit, because you just end up selecting for the most uninspiring centrist who can't get people to the polls.

You think you're selecting for winners, but you're taking your strongest pieces off the board.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 9 points 6 days ago (16 children)

This argument is frequently made on Lemmy. I’d like it to be true. But I just don’t know.

Makes sense in places like California or New York. But I don’t know about places in the Midwest e.g.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

"We've never tried the inspiring candidate, but without evidence, I must insist that they're unelectable."

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I mean, we did run the inspiring candidate. Obama. It was a huge success.

Did he turn out to be everything that everyone hoped and dreamed? No. But he energized the hell out of the base and at least the best president of the past few decades.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nednobbins@lemmy.zip 8 points 6 days ago

I hear you, but we've tried the strategies of the mainstream Democrats and they've failed hard.

Hopefully the recent ACA votes taught the Democrats that voting to end the shutdown was a terrible idea and that they should never again compromise with Republicans for mere promises of future consideration.

The Democrats should rally behind AOC and primary all corrupt bastards that enable the Republicans.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)
[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 17 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I'm still of the VERY strong opinion that Hillary and Kamala didn't lose because they were women, but because they were Hillary and Kamala.

I don't know, but maybe we shouldn't base our gender litmus test off of literally the most unlikeable women the DNC could have picked.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 12 points 6 days ago

I fear you are right. And with numbers like this, the Democrats have an uphill battle anyway, with all the rigging and ratfucking that the Republicans do, not to mention the EC system itself.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 8 points 6 days ago (4 children)

Some men will simply not vote for a woman, it’s sad, but it’s reality.

Can we all agree that those men are trash? I don't care what else they've got going on, if they refuse to vote for a woman because she's a woman, they deserve to go into the dumpster.

I'm so sick of all these sacks of shit making the world worse

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] JonEFive@midwest.social 13 points 6 days ago

Awww, that's fun. People think we're going to have an election in 2028.

Fuuuuck yes!!!!

[–] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago (2 children)

The election isn't won by getting the most total votes which means getting more than 50%+1 of liberal states isn't worth anything and losing 1% of swing states loses you the whole thing.

Anyone who is statistically tied with couch fucker is not a great bet

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 10 points 6 days ago (1 children)

People didn't want Kamala because she wasn't democratically elected as the leader of the party in a primary so they let full blown fascism take over instead. They felt it was more important to send the Democrats a message instead of actually keeping some minimal form of democracy and freedom. 🙄

So they'll probably not vote for AOC if she becomes leader of the Democratic party anyway because of some minor excuse, like how she supported Israel's right to exist, or something. And the US will end up with a third Trump mandate.

I hope the US will prove me wrong. My hope in Americans doing the right thing is pretty low.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] thevoidzero@lemmy.world 12 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

51?

This is what's wrong with people.

Even if trump had lost the election I was gonna be horrified if he had even gotten 30% of the votes. But this... Again. It doesn't matter if AOC wins if half the country is basically saying, after all this, they want more.

[–] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 14 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

These numbers mean absolutely fucking nothing. They could have surveyed people if they thought a rotten apple or pile of shit had a chance to win the white house and it would have been 49% to 51%

[–] TheRealKuni@piefed.social 13 points 6 days ago (5 children)

As we’ve seen in every election from 2016 on, election polling is useless now.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] flandish@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago (1 children)

why the fuck are we even entertaining who is going to be the next when we are not even one year into this current nazi’s 2nd regime?

is news that slow?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 10 points 6 days ago

I didn't think anyone liked Vance. But I guess there are a lot of sexists and Republican cultists out there.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago (9 children)

This is off topic but God does she have a pretty smile.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›