this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2026
108 points (100.0% liked)

politics

27380 readers
3031 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
top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 47 points 4 days ago

Remember when Schumer refused to pick a fight over the budget last March?

Its why were here.

[–] Prox@lemmy.world 18 points 4 days ago

It'll be super fun to see them totally drop the health cost issue, opting to lose this DHS battle instead. Fucking worthless.

Dems politicians whom have positions of powers on committees support republican policies. PRIMARY THEM ALL

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 4 days ago (1 children)

We have two conservative parties in the US.

Actual centrism doesn't even get representation, let alone leftism.

Just Nazi Right and Diet Nazi Right.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago (3 children)

That sounds exactly like what someone would say who had a vested interest in making people give up on voting.

[–] bendovertherainbow@lemmynsfw.com 8 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Not really.

I think it makes the point that if youre at the vote and those are the options, youre starting too late.

You still vote for the best option (as in, least horrendous), but you need another option to actually move anything left by voting.

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

If you’re poor, that option is called “voting in the primary”. If you’re rich, that option is called giving or withholding candidate money.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Voting is not the only tool we have to put pressure on politicians who actually believe in democracy. They will respond to public outcry. The problem is politicians who don't believe in democracy because all that moves them is money.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Name an issue and I'll show you how the ratcheting effect works. Sorry if reality conflicts with blueMAGA

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Ranked choice voting/instant runoff voting.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'll admit that it's not an issue that I'm especially familiar with. What are they doing to implement it on the national level? The best the Democrats can do is promise it for 2028 primaries. In my eyes that's just more delay tactics

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If you are interested in breaking the two party system, it is literally the most important issue out there. IMO there is no way, outside of violent revolution, of breaking up the two party system besides this.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 days ago

I agree with that much, but I'm not familiar with it as a political issue outside of "Republicans hate it, democrats are tepid"

[–] Tehbaz@lemmy.wtf 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Many former two party countries have managed to elect third, fourth and fifth+ parties, usually once the voters are sick enough of being forced to vote for the lesser evil every cycle.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

I don't know which examples you are thinking of, but I would bet that is after changes in the law or without an explicit constitutional procedure on voting.

As far as voting for the lesser evil, that is beyond naive. Every election is voting for the leaser evil. If you expect to find a candidate you agree with 100%, you will be waiting til the heat death of the universe.

[–] galoisghost@aussie.zone 10 points 4 days ago

WTF? They are just collaborating at this point.

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

In endorsing a bill that would carry forward a huge spike in funding to ICE, Rep. Rosa DeLauro (Conn.), the senior Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, acknowledged it excludes most of the ICE reforms Democrats have demanded since the Jan. 7 shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis. But a shutdown or a short-term spending patch, she argued, would be worse.

“A continuing resolution will jettison the guardrails we have secured while ceding authority to President Trump, Stephen Miller, and [DHS] Secretary [Kristi] Noem,” she said Tuesday morning.

New regulatory guardrails aren't going to even slow down ICE a little bit, we already have a mountain of examples of them ignoring their current regulations and lying about their conduct constantly. The only thing that will restrain them is denying them the resources they need to carry out their campaign of oppression.

What's really frustrating tho is I'm sure Rep DeLauro knows all of that already and she's just trying to push this bullshit through anyway.

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

ICE is doing a bunch of illegal stuff and Democrats are like “surely if we make a law and ask them to ~~stop~~ slowdown nicely…”