this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2024
523 points (98.3% liked)

politics

18840 readers
4041 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world 247 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

Please, for love of all the gods, let us win the presidency, keep the senate, and take back the house.

Fucking please.

[–] ChocoboRocket@lemmy.world 185 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

And with some damn wiggle room this time.

We had multiple Democrats Peel off and stymied loads of progress (Manchin, Sinema etc).

We need enough room for the wolves in sheep's clothing to not make a (D)ifference in the progress we need to shut down authoritarianism.

The supreme court being public enemy #1 means we need everything else to be operating seamlessly to be able to prevent every single goal for project 2025 line by line immediately and permanently.

Undoing regulatory capture will also be a monumental feat, as will reforming media's ability to platform lies and disinformation that are objectively false.

Huge fucking task list and we haven't even talked about running the actual country yet. We're gonna need one hell of a blue wave to drown the fascists and drain the swamp.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 54 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

We had multiple Democrats Peel off and stymied loads of progress (Manchin, Sinema etc).

This is a consistent problem with Dem "majority" coalitions dating back to the '77 Carter coalition that cracked up while trying to pass a universal health care plan and fossil fuel exit strategy. Clinton's '93 coalition also splintered due to conservative Democrat infighting. Lieberman famously killed a host of legislation in '09/'10 (although he was mostly a cat's paw for other conservatives in the House and Senate). And then Manchin/Sinema upended Biden's reforms in '17, before squandering the House majority the following year.

These failures aren't accidental. They are the direct result of Democrats saying "We need to vote candidates who are electable" and then getting a bunch of shitty corporate flaks who bought their way through the primaries.

We just watched Cori Bush and Jamal Bowman lose their House seats to AIPAC lobbyists, while Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlahib had to muscle through enormously expensive primaries funded by the same far-right donor groups that favor the Republican Party.

The supreme court being public enemy #1 means we need everything else to be operating seamlessly

The SCOTUS is a distraction, as they've got no real power to enforce their decisions. The real fight is between a liberal federal government and the assorted red state and municipal governments. We've seen this proven out with AGs like Ken Paxton and governors like DeSantis who routinely break laws in their quest to pump up the base with high profile acts of cruelty to their minority populations. They've discovered its easier to ask forgiveness than permission, and the Biden admin's response has been to just kinda shrug its way through rather than risk open confrontation.

This is the same shit guys like Pierce and Buchanan did shortly before the federal system collapsed under their feet. But if you're always trying to triangulate and get the opposition on board, its where your party and your country eventually end up when fascists at the lower levels of government realize they've got carte blanche and a partisan mandate to do evil.

[–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

The SCOTUS is a distraction, as they've got no real power to enforce their decisions.

This is something I've been thinking about more and more.

With our three branches of government, it's up to the executive to enforce the laws, and by extension, the rulings of the judiciary.

What's the failsafe mechanism for when the executive doesn't like a ruling and has no respect of law, or for the system?

What happens after the supreme court says, "Hey President! What you're doing is unconstitutional and you must stop immediately."...and the president just goes, "Actually I don't care what you say. I'm still doing it. Have a wonderful day and go fuck all nine of yourselves."

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Triasha@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

I have bad news about the Senate.

Reps are probably taking it unless Texas, Florida, or Montana comes through to glad Dems a 50/50 split.

Now if they can abolish the filibuster at least for adding states and also take the house, they could add DC and Puerto Rico and the next cycle would be friendlier.

[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Last poll I saw had Tester up 6 points here in Montana.

Even if that's based on a small sample poll you need to be giving people hope that their vote matters. Save the doomerism, pessimism, realism, or whatever else you call what you're doing until after the election.

[–] Triasha@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Senate will be tight in any realistic scenario. Tester in Montana is the most likely of the three I listed to come through and I donated to his campaign.

I will be voting against Ted Cruz and I am volunteering on weekends to help Collin Allred.

If anyone reading this is wondering if it's worth it, I think it absolutely is worth it to donate what you can, and volunteer how you can.

Voting is the bare minimum. Please do so.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Certainly is tracking that way, and gaining more and more each week.

[–] draneceusrex@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Senate is gonna be tight....

[–] UnpopularCrow@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Agreed. Without Tester winning in Montana, the only other close race is Cruz in Texas. And rest assured, Texas is doing everything they can to disenfranchise democrats.

[–] Aermis@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I am not sure they want to win. The convention as a whole anyways. Having all 3 seats of power will now set the precedent to do something and they don't want to do something, at least their donors don't.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] anarchrist@lemmy.dbzer0.com 64 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I read the article to see who was gunna get knifed, but couldn't find the source quote. I hope it's Mike Johnson, proverbially or whatever.

[–] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 39 points 2 weeks ago

Fucking bullshit clickbait about knife fighting with no actual knife fights at all!

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"Meanwhile, Will Reinert, spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said the most contentious House races are likely to require "trench warfare" in order for the GOP to keep the speaker's gavel.

Reinert told The Hill, "Because we are well-prepared, we are well-positioned to grow our majority. But it's going to be a knife fight until the very end.""

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 52 points 2 weeks ago

Everybody just vote. Also, vote in local elections. Rs dominate most local governments and they're what is allowing this disease to fester.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 48 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

"Okay boys, time to shit in our own pants, cry and blame someone else for the shit in our pants"

-Transcript from emergency, closed door gop strategy session

[–] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 40 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Drive these maga weirdos from office!

[–] cabbage@piefed.social 55 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

It's still absurd to me that this is something one would even need to say.

The sentence "don't vote for Ted Cruz" has the same vibe to it as "don't shit your pants in the supermarket". It feels like something that shouldn't need to be said.

Then again, evidently it does.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 26 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I mean... there are genuinely good odds that people will be doing that after trump inevitably gets caught shitting his pants on camera/microphone.

It is deranged that one of the stupidest and most vile people on the planet has this much of a cult around him.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] InternetUser2012 35 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

IF everyone voted, there would not be a GOP.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 33 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Radiohead wrote a song about it a long time ago.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] randon31415@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Dems almost won the house on an off year in 2022, there hasn't been a significant level of gerrymandering between then and now (just standard levels).

How could the democrats loose the house?

[–] holycrap@lemm.ee 13 points 2 weeks ago

Voter suppression

[–] Snowclone@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago

Overconfidence in voters leading to low turn out.

[–] Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

Watch NY Dems fuck it up (again). More seriously I think it’s very likely that the presidency and the house will move in the same direction. Gerrymandering and the electoral college both favor the GOP in the same way. Even in 2016 when Dems won the popular vote by a mile, the GOP still took both the house and the presidency.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago (12 children)

Its still crazy to me so many people wanted to keep Biden. He wasn't only hurting our chance at the presidency, a poor presidential candidate hurts chances for gains in House/Senate too.

Biden had too many valid issues that was hurting Dem turnout.

Lots of people couldn't hold their nose for Biden, and likely weren't going to show up to just vote down ballot.

Kamala is far from perfect, but has practically zero baggage in comparison to Biden. So running her is going to help pick up more seats elsewhere.

If she does the "now that I'm in office I'm going to start trying to find out if I can do anything" that Biden did tho. We'll get nothing accomplished with those 2 years and lose one or both in midterms.

There's no excuse to be unprepared in January, it shows voters that the candidate wasn't really serious about fixing shit, and it's almost impossible for a candidate to recover.

Considering a primary in 2028 is incredibly unlikely, we can't afford Kamala to fuck this up.

She needs to start doing shit to help Americans day 1.

[–] 24_at_the_withers@lemmy.world 63 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

Traditionally, the incumbent has a huge advantage. I don't believe that the party of any sitting president that was primaried ever won the election. There are only a few cases of a sitting president that was eligible for another term stepping aside, and those were a very long time ago.

There was very little precedent for what Biden did, and I think very few could have predicted the enthusiasm for Harris - I remember her last campaign. It wasn't inspiring.

I think Biden felt like the safest choice to many, though obviously that's been proven incorrect. Hopefully the Democratic party will take a lesson from this and be more willing to replace an incumbent in the future if there's a better option.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] simplejack@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago (16 children)

Its still crazy to me so many people wanted to keep Biden

I get it. Changing the engine out mid-flight comes with a lot of uncertainty. Would selecting a new candidate go smoothly, would a new candidate be able to get momentum, what happens if a new candidate is worse, etc.

Biden wasn’t great, but people were worried about all the unknowns.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] Hawke@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

If she does the "now that I'm in office I'm going to start trying to find out if I can do anything"

Not sure what you’re trying to say with this. Are you saying she shouldn’t try to do anything? If so what is the point of electing her? As I see it, it’s the exact opposite and she should immediately try to accomplish some goals. Why wait?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 weeks ago

Its still crazy to me so many people wanted to keep Biden.

This question has been asked and answered; to death. Trends strongly indicate it's a disaster to primary the incumbent for very obvious and often-repeated reasons.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Eiri@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

Okay off topic but I had to Google "gubernatorial". That word looks made up.

[–] Rivalarrival 22 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)
[–] nomous@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago

It's easy to remember cause that's when we elect the goobers.

[–] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago

It's a perfectly cromulent word.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 8 points 2 weeks ago

Dems were always expected to flip the House this year. The fight is much tighter for the Senate, which the Republicans are still expected to flip given a map that is very favorable to them this year.

load more comments
view more: next ›