this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2026
209 points (100.0% liked)

politics

28966 readers
2061 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
 

Republicans block resolution to take up the measure, which Democrats vow to bring up ‘again and again and again’

Senate Republicans on Wednesday blocked a measure that aimed to rein in Donald Trump’s power to wage war against Iran without congressional authorization.

The 53-47 vote against taking up the measure fell almost completely along party lines, with no movement from earlier this month when Republicans blocked Democrats’ bid to limit Trump’s war-making power in the days after the joint US-Israeli strikes, known as Operation Epic Fury, began across Iran.

The senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who has led several war-powers efforts, was the only Republican to vote in support of the measure, while the senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, who has emerged as a staunch supporter of Israel, was the only Democrat to break with his party and vote against the resolution.

top 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AlexLost@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

They are complicit in his crimes. No dodging this one when the chickens come home to roost.

[–] Reygle@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Oh good, a forever war at the behest of a mentally damaged madman, that our government refuses to do anything about.

Remind me to pick up marshmallows so we can roast them when this whole fucking place is on fire.

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 26 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Fetterman.

And true to form, Democrats are too spinless to kick him out.

[–] feddylemmy@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

How can they go about kicking him out?

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Pretty sure they could just eject him from the party. Wouldn't remove him from the Senate but it would hobble his influence.

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

The party does this by picking someone else in the primary next election. Yes, they can choose to kick him out of the party, but all that does is remove any shred of influence they have over him. He's doing this now because they already said they're going to primary him in 2028 and he's being a giant shit about it. I bet he'd vote to burn Pennsylvania to the ground if the rest of the party voted against it, just to spite them. He's a gigantic brain damaged fucking toddler.

[–] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 hours ago

They need someone to play the heel.

[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 23 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

This is dumb. There is no reason to vote on something that is already law. You're just letting them drag everything to the right.

He broke the law. If the law isn't being enforced, then we should begin actions stronger than legislation.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

It's very debatable whether he actually broke the law in this instance. Attacking Iran without congressional approval is allowed by the War Powers Resolution of 1973. The argument against that is that the powers outlined in that resolution are meant to be "emergency powers" but "emergency powers" are very easy to invoke and I'm not aware of any precedent of a president not being permitted to invoke them. And the US hasn't formally declared war since WWII, so they're invoked fairly often.

Getting more clearly restrictive laws in place would be a good thing, and getting Republicans on record as opposing them is only mostly useless (look, it's a low bar) because it does at least make it a little harder for them to pass themselves off as "antiwar."

[–] KneeTitts@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

t’s very debatable whether he actually broke the law in this instance

Ok well lets put him on trial and find out, he can be held in a prison cell till the court date is set

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

That's not how anything works.

[–] KneeTitts@lemmy.world -1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Why? Finding out if the actions of any individual are criminal is usually a job for the courts, why not this?

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 hours ago

So let me get this straight. You think that if someone, anyone really, thinks that the president might have violated a law, they should be immediately thrown in jail until it's resolved? Even the cleanest person in the world would be spending their entire term in a jail cell.

[–] dugmeup@lemmy.world 60 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Pennsylvania - Fetterman's got to be primaried please

[–] Soulphite@reddthat.com 17 points 13 hours ago
[–] MrSulu@lemmy.ml 19 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

That was close. The buffoon will now think he has limitless powers.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 8 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

He has seized more power every day and the only people with the balls to try to stop him are either dead or in jail because they tried.

[–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca -4 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

What else do you expect when all Americans can do is a clown-ass “No Kings” parade where they congratulate themselves for being non-threatening every three months?

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I expect cunts to victim blame

[–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca -2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

You aren’t victims, you’re complicit.

[–] wanderingmagus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

And what have you been doing, O great wise one? What's your praxis look like, other than criticizing others and discussing theory?

[–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 hour ago

Your country. Your problem until your inaction makes it ours. Be assured when we will show you what fighting fascists looks like- a promise you will undoubtedly roll your eyes at because projecting insincerity onto those who aren’t massive cowards eases your insecurity.

[–] aaa999@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

he stopped genocide joe thus ending the genocide

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

No Kings could be useful if it was sustained political actions instead of the once every three month protest.

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 3 points 10 hours ago
[–] santa@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 hours ago

Wonder what he’ll do next — it’s ain’t over with him. Never is.