this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2026
96 points (97.1% liked)

politics

28509 readers
2792 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
 

Crockett was reportedly the GOP’s preferred opponent in the 2026 Senate elections in Texas, but had not been considered as a potential contender in the race by her own party

The Republican Party allegedly promoted favorable polls about Representative Jasmine Crockett as part of a plan to goad the outspoken Democrat into running for the Senate.

Crockett was reportedly the GOP’s preferred opponent in the 2026 race in Texas, but had not been considered as a potential contender in the race by her fellow Democrats.

That prompted Senate Republicans to disseminate a poll in July suggesting that she would be the frontrunner in the Democratic primary.

“When we saw the results, we were like, ‘OK, we got to disseminate this far and wide,’” a source familiar with the plan told NOTUS.

top 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 42 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

It makes sense that political consultants would want to run against a woman of color in deep red state. I really hope it backfires on the and she wins.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 16 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

That's not her issue. It's not why she's struggling.

Her issue is she's an pro Israel, hollow corporatist. Her outrage is pure kayfabe.

The outrage and anger and clap backs, that's the only reason she's still in this race. People eat that shit up even though she's about as empty as Mayo Pete when it comes to substance.

And that's the difference. Talarico has substance.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Her issue is she’s an pro Israel, hollow corporatist. Her outrage is pure kayfabe.

Fuck! Are you sure?

https://www.trackaipac.com/states/texas

Looks like no money from AIPAC (yet) but she is pro-israel.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I didn't say she took money from Israel. I said she is objectively pro-israel in her voting record and that her outrage is manufactured.

She got her start with Jonny Cochran.

[–] ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 8 hours ago

They said that about AOC without discussing why she voted the way she did. It's not all black and white.

[–] fedupwithbureaucracy@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago

Talarico is also pro-israel

[–] PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world 10 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Doubt she will win the primaries.

[–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I like how she’s willing to fight back. Democrats desperately need non-corporate candidates that are willing to fight.

[–] PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world 4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

She’s an annoying loud black lady like Kamala (to independent white voters), so she won’t get too far which is a shame. Racism and sexism is too pervasive in this country still.

[–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 7 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Annoying and loud are not real issues with the voters you’re mentioning. It’s really just her being a black lady that upsets them.

It’s kind of like the “economic anxiety” that Trump voters claimed was their reason for why they support him. It’s really just the racism.

[–] PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world 5 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

When these voters see some AI slop video calling her a DEI and black fatigue demagogue, it won’t take much for them to not vote for her.

[–] ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 hours ago

They're already starting with unfalsifiable pro-Israel claims.

[–] ZombieMantis@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago

Nah she sucks, just a louder, more Internet drama poisoned version of the other corporate conservatives in the party. Talarico is a proper progressive, anti corporate, anti genocide candidate.

[–] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 5 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I think both candidates are alright, but I feel like too many folks forget exactly where they’re running. It’s Texas. Good ‘ole boys and church goin’ folks livin’ out in the middle of nowhere. The more we can remind them of what Jesus supposedly said and did, the better, and Talarico is the man that’s doing that. If he can fool ‘em all into voting for a democrat, that just means fewer repuglicunts in office, and more chances to move the Overton window back to the left.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 7 points 10 hours ago

Or more likely another Fetterman Dino elected who get's a chance to be the rotating villain for why the demos just couldn't codify roe v wade the next time they get a majority. Give me Crockett.

[–] s1ndr0m3@lemmy.world 14 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I'm glad she is running. I think both Dem candidates are equally matched. A competitive primary might bring out more voters in the general.

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 20 points 15 hours ago (4 children)

I don't know about Crockett. She's taken money from AIPAC.

There's a reason why the Republicans want her to be the Dem nominee.

She's been good on some subjects, but there's that nagging doubt.

If there were no better option then yes, vote for her. But there is a better option.

[–] Garbagio@lemmy.zip 18 points 14 hours ago

My biggest issue is that even what she's "good" at, she's not really. She's witty and mean to people I think deserve it, but her voting record is almost a perfect overlap with Hakeem Jeffries. "Charismatic Jeffries" doesn't mean shit to me.

[–] baronvonj@piefed.social 10 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

I don’t know about Crockett. She’s taken money from AIPAC.

I keep seeing this claim but can't find any source for it. I can find lots of links saying there is no evidence that she has. Like this

https://factually.co/fact-checks/politics/do-james-talirico-jasmine-crockett-accept-aipac-donations-fdd37f

[–] ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 hours ago

The last I looked, she doesn't take money from much of anybody, which is why she's one of the few who tell the truth.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 5 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

She has all the policy positions one would have if they're 💯 in the bag for AIPAC.

She's like Chuck Schumer level pro Israel.

[–] baronvonj@piefed.social 3 points 11 hours ago

I see that https://www.trackaipac.com/ says she's pro-Israel, but even they don't indicate she's received any money. I'm just saying if there's no proof that she's taken AIPAC money then stop using that as a talking point against her. Use her voting record and statements, things that are verifiable.

[–] daannii@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

My understanding was no direct aipac but indirect. And she went on an Israel visit a few years back. She has also made multiple pro Israel statements including a denial of genocide and says Israel will always be funded by the u.s.

[–] baronvonj@piefed.social 5 points 11 hours ago

I see that https://www.trackaipac.com/ says she's pro-Israel, but even they don't indicate she's received any money. I'm just saying if there's no proof that she's taken AIPAC money then stop using that as a talking point against her. Use her voting record and statements, things that are verifiable.

[–] daannii@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago

She also defended that woman who was taking phone call text orders from Epstein during his hearing.

[–] sturmblast@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago

Prove your claims

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 19 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Hillary did the same with trump over a decade ago, now look where we're at...

[–] theherk@lemmy.world 8 points 16 hours ago

You saying she’ll be president in a few years? Don’t threaten me with a good time!

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago

I found out the local trump agenda guy has file a lawsuit against the person running against him. The problem for him so far is that every judge has recused themselves from it. Including the special Judiciary appointed by our maga mouth piece governor. Dude is sending hate mail on her.

[–] lb_o@lemmy.world 2 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

She shall not run against Talarico in Democratic primaries, this is a huge mistake of hers

Americans need more people like her and James running against GOP and not clashing with each other at Dems primaries

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 12 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

No, you don't get it. Democrats need robust primaries, it's the only way to get robust candidates. We need to stop acting like anyone who gets elected once deserves that seat for life.

Every race should have a primary challenger!

[–] manxu@piefed.social 5 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

I agree. It's not like Crockett and Talarico are hurling mud at each other, they are very civil (so far). A primary where the candidates agree on the fundamentals and it's just about who is going to better represent that in Washington seems like a great contest,one in which all participant can come out winners.

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Talarico is letting LoneStar PAC hurl the mud at Crockett so he can play the “good Christian”. Their ads are shameful and gross.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago

It's gonna be muddy this week. I promise. We 10 days out. We're in the "smoke em if you gottem" phase if the primary.