this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2025
106 points (97.3% liked)

politics

25720 readers
3275 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 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 124 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

At least one House Democrat, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), is planning to vote against the resolution, telling Axios she is "not sure what is honorable" about many of Kirk's past statements.

Asked about concerns of GOP backlash, Crockett said she lives "under their heinous threats every single day" and suggested Democrats should not be like Republicans who have "abdicated their duties out of fear."

So far, only one courageous Democrat that will stand against the farce and celebration of white supremacy and bigotry of a person shot by a fellow Republican.

[–] Skiluros@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The funny thing is that they could just speak the truth and state that the Kirk fellow was a demagogue who believed in nothing and would shill for any oligarch copytext that would benefit him. They could even make a glib remark that he would shill the idea that "a mayonnaise enema supports freedumz and shit and will allow you to fly" as an example.

I don't think Kirk was a fascist in the ideological sense and likely knew that what he was pitching was both immoral and factually wrong, but didn't care as long it materially benefited him.

This is honestly a horrible situation not just for the US, but the democratic world at large. US moving from proto-fascism to full fascism in not a good thing for the global democracy and human rights.

[–] TheHighRoad@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago

"Moskowitz added, 'We talk about bringing the temperature down, this is one way to do that.'"

This is what frustrates me the most, because all this does is further embolden the right and add fuel to the fire, IMO. Then again, blowing it off will do the same thing. Such is the consequence of tolerating intolerance and entertaining the illogical.

[–] traceur201@piefed.social 44 points 1 day ago

They've been sleepwalking into this trap for 10 years by continuing to move right however many voters it lost them. They didn't even want to win if it would require the leftist vote to do so. Now they simply reap what they sow.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 49 points 2 days ago

Its Democratic leaderships fault for reacting the way they did in sanitizing his legacy.

[–] sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Gotta toe the line, guysssss. If we don't mourn the hateful thought leader with the hateful voting block they might hate us more. Sorry hands are tied 😢

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 27 points 2 days ago

🙄 Just don’t show up for the vote.

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

But don't worry guys, our side* isn't a rotten shell, designed to keep idiots placated with meaningless virtue signaling.

They actually care about us and not their billions if dollars in investment and positions of power.

[–] RYS@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

... is not whipping the resolution ...

I chuckle every time...