politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Who said it’s a fucking Olive branch? You?
They have the ability now to nuke any legislation that comes across. Dems already have the power.
Protecting him means concessions, it means moving the Overton window back to where it should be.
It means going on the offensive.
Instead you want memes and headlines. Take the pittance and go home. Is that it? Obstructionism is their play book. We start using it and it leads to the same dumb place.
It makes it easier for them to pass their fascist bullshit. Not harder.
You bruh. That's your argument. Its what you've been arguing for this entire thread. Your argument, not mine.
That's what working with Republicans is. Its an olive branch. Its redemption for the Republicans being so clearly in the wrong in terms of strategy for the past 8 years. Like they've been governing for a long time and have actually nothing to show for it. Now you've found an ally in Mike Johnson and you are saying house Democrats should work with Mike Johnson to do "stuff" , i.e., pass laws in the House. You are silly if you think you'll get anything other than conservative legislation passed with Mike Johnson. And your argument is that House Democrats should? Bruh.
And if that isn't the case, I've asked you what laws Democrats should go for, like whats the material position here, whats the specific policy or legislation, and you've offered none. Your 'going on the offensive' is just handing R's the opportunity to turn a loss into a win. Its naive, poorly thought out, and you don't even have a single bill or law to offer that Democrats could use this strategy with. You simply aren't cynical enough to appreciate the cost of the strategy you've outlined, and its not clear you've even really though of it enough to have an answer considering you cant tell me what legislation they should go after.
Its incredibly naive and its generally kinda silly, the kind of piss-ant level "appeal to the moderates" analysis that Hillary ~~used to beat Trump~~ oh wait lose to Trump.
You clearly are lacking in reading comprehension.
Or you’re just trolling to piss me off.
No. It’s taking the best action to advance democratic policies. We won’t get any policies or influence with whoever comes next.
Welcome to a split congress. Your position would give them free rein to try and pass whatever they want in the house.
It’s not an olive branch. It’s a leash.
Sealioning. Go watch some political news. If you can’t find something worthwhile, you’re not paying attention.
And again, it is not handing them a win. They win if we do get rid of him just as much as we lose. We gain nothing by it, but we give up that leash.
Your way clears the way for the fascists to do whatever the fuck they want, with no motivation at all to come to the table. At least with Johnson on the leash, we can block most of what comes down; and maybe get something meaningful.
Which is probably better than the headlines we’ll get.