this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
1198 points (98.8% liked)

politics

23554 readers
3270 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 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Korne127@lemmy.world 1 points 6 minutes ago

I hope she will be successful in actually overtaking the party to some degree, as most high-ranking party members would certainly see that differently

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world 2 points 29 minutes ago

So the Dems are running the campaign for JD Vance now? Wow, easiest election ever

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

I have said this elsewhere, but i will not again vote for the Democratic Party until they actually put up progressive candidates. Not pinky swear to pass progressive policy. That means the candidates has to have a provable history of struggling against the Democratic Party to pass progressive policy. There are only two i know of and that’s Bernie Sanders (who is too old for the presidency), and AOC. Else it’s third party until the democrats learn better.

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 1 points 37 minutes ago (1 children)

because nothing says America wants left wing government more clearly than electing the republicans!

[–] WraithGear@lemmy.world 2 points 28 minutes ago (1 children)

That was a calculation made by democrat leadership. They banked on further alienating progressives for their donors, and to push for the Republican values they truly want. Every compromise against progressive platforms has been a full rightward tilt. They miscalculated the severity of their abandonment of progressive voters. Arguments to “vote blue no matter who” and “don’t let perfect be the enemy of good” are obfuscating the reality that we are here because of this rightward ratchet. And all progressive promises turn out to be lies convenient during an election. Blaming disenfranchised voters is an attempt to defer blame where Is doesn't belong to maintain power, and is a losing strategy against republicans.

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 2 points 12 minutes ago

That's a lot of words to cover over your preposterous assertion that electing the neo fascists shows how America wants left wing government.

[–] mrodri89@lemmy.zip 33 points 6 hours ago (4 children)

Disagree. The Democrats dont know who they are anymore. Pelosi and the old Democrats have got to go.

AOC should just make a new party.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 34 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

No, we don't have time for that. We just have to do a tea party on the Democratic party... Which is what she's been doing

They do have to go, but we're keeping the house and the dog

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 57 minutes ago) (2 children)

That's why I never believed in the rhetoric of "it's too late to consider 3rd party!" before the elections. Here it is just 6 months later and "we don't have time for that". Is it disingenuous then to just say there will never be time for that, like it is being implied here?

edit: just saw your other comments, I hope your DNC-tea party plan works with some effect. It's harder for those who have voted for decades for a party that just isn't responsive to the citizens so we'll see I suppose.

[–] Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 33 minutes ago

That’s why I never believed in the rhetoric of “it’s too late to consider 3rd party!” before the elections. Here it is just 6 months later and “we don’t have time for that”. Is it disingenuous then to just say there will never be time for that, like it is being implied here?

It takes years to get a new party off the ground and in a meaningful position to take federal offices at any significant rate. During that time, you are mostly helping your farthest opposition of the main parties win by splitting the vote.

This is literally why the Tea Party operated by internal change of the GOP and not by starting a third party. And love them or hate them, they were effective at shifting the GOP.

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 40 minutes ago (1 children)

It would take many decades for a new party to get the recognition.

Most voters probably think Obama is still president.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ml 1 points 32 minutes ago

Would it though? I'm not convinced of that. We already know what the party should look and act like based on actual progressive parties and policies around the world (even some past actions in the states itself), we really just need a name to know it by for everyone to get behind.

It's the whole problem-solution thing, doesn't matter what the name of the website or company is, we just need something to step in and fill that gap.

[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 hours ago

You're not really disagreeing. AOC is perceived as the face of the democratic party and it's true. She's at least offering consistent resistance while the feckless leadership of the party does nothing but line their pockets and ensure 100 percent unconditional support of Israel to the determient of all else.

I don't even disagree with your conclusions necessary, if it's impossible to dislodge Pelosi and Schumer. But building a party from scratch is really fucking hard. Hijacking one might be easier.

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

Surely 3rd party will work this time!

[–] mrodri89@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 hours ago

Potentially with local elections first. Build it up from the ground up.

Not like the Green Party and Jill Stein's goofy ass.

[–] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 9 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

They're going to stay there making bank off of insider trading until they're so ancient someone accidentally walks through and disperses the dust cloud known as Pelosi, and they finally decide they have enough money to reach supply-side Jesus.

[–] fishy@lemmy.today 7 points 4 hours ago

Just insider trading? Those super pacs are the fucking Democrats and Republicans at this point. Greed itself is our new overlord, business ethics are dead and rotting.

[–] Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world 7 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

We could do so much worse!

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 11 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

We will do so much worse. AOC lost a committee seat race to a guy with terminal cancer who is dead four months after taking the position.

The people might love her, but the party hates her. AOC has no future in the modern Democratic party.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 5 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Well... Yeah, that's why we're taking it over. What do you think all the tours and rallies are for? The fight is on, actual progressives and opportunity chasers are positioning themselves for it... It's happening

It's tea party time

[–] mrcleanup@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Not that public visibility isn't important, but if we don't replace the people in the room choosing who the party gives all their money to, nothing is going to change.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 3 points 2 hours ago

Of course - they certainly have to be replaced.

That's what the struggle over the dnc vice chair position is about - someone won who wants to use funds to primary representatives "asleep at the wheel", so they're pulling out procedural reasons to redo it

There's a plan... It's not a sure thing, but it's building a lot of momentum

[–] SnarkoPolo@lemm.ee 9 points 6 hours ago

There is no more Democratic Party.

load more comments
view more: next ›