this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2025
421 points (99.8% liked)

politics

22365 readers
4662 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
 

This district has been heavily red for the last 60 years

One of the focal points of the campaign from the dem who won was opposition to musk

top 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Norgoroth@lemmy.world 48 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Easy when Musk isn't rigging the voting machines

[–] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Exactly. State senator. The Wisconsin Supreme court where he has skin in the game will likely be another story.

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Wow in 2 years maybe you'll show trump you like him less... What a victory

[–] jeffw@lemmy.world 109 points 3 days ago (3 children)

This IS HUGE. It really shows what swing state voters are thinking. It’s great sign for dems

[–] GreatBlueHeron@lemmy.ca 33 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Fuck the Dems - I'm hoping it's a great sign for whatever party comes out of Bernie and AOC's current tour. (I know I don't really understand how things work there and I'm being optimistic talking about future elections.)

[–] Yeller_king@reddthat.com 30 points 2 days ago (4 children)

It's way more feasible for progressives to take over the existing Democratic party like MAGA took over the GOP.

If you think things are rigged inside the democratic party, it's even worse for third parties.

[–] Thrashy@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

In anything like a competitive district, a progressive Independent challenger is more likely to split the vote for a milquetoast Democratic incumbent and hand the seat to the Republican challenger. Working within the Democratic primary system has its challenges, but also clears the field so that there's one clear choice for left-leaning voters rather than two.

First past the post sucks ass, but it's what we've got to live with until we've got enough power to change it.

We need a progressive tea party

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I remember when that was the plan in 2016

That turned out great!

We meed to burn down the Duopoly, remove every boomer from power, and never look back.

[–] raynethackery@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Unfortunately, a lot of the shitty people in Congress are GenX. I'm so disgusted with my generation.

[–] GreatBlueHeron@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah, I can accept that. I guess what really meant was fuck the current Dems that are so clearly complicit in whatever the GOP is doing and maybe even more Zionist. If they can be overhauled to the point they can, and do, get big money out (repeal citizens united), repair all the gerymandered districts etc. then sure - go Dems. I know that's a huge ask, but it's what's needed.

[–] Andr3w222@lemm.ee 46 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Indeed. this was also a solid republican district. dems need to hammer Elon Musk and Trump are destroying the economy.

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, and fucking everything else

[–] Andr3w222@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago
[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It isn't though it just shows what we already know. Voters want change

[–] jeffw@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

We knew that? People seem pretty disengaged overall

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Disengaged and dissatisfied. People are currently particularly swayed by anti establishment rhetoric and elections keep swinging back and forth on a macro scale

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 38 points 3 days ago

On the one hand: Fucking A

On the other hand: We have a trump admin who is already pushing to get rid of elections and a Democrat Senate minority leader who actively refuses to fight. It is hard to care too much when we actively won't use the seats we have TO fight until it is way too late.

[–] Uniquitous@lemmy.one 27 points 3 days ago (1 children)

And now come the inevitable cries of "fraud!" and "election interference!"

[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 29 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Probably

And yet some Republicans were actually already warning about potentially losing this district before the election

Elon Musk, Scott Presler sound alarm over Republican Josh Parsons’ chances in Tuesday’s state Senate special election

[–] Ledericas@lemm.ee 4 points 3 days ago

I'm guessing all the attention and money was focusing on trump and not local election, it's been said on Reddit for years that trump is siphoning campaign money away from down ballot GOP elections to line his pockets

[–] Ledericas@lemm.ee 19 points 3 days ago

wish they can get rid of fetterman, but he wont be eligble til the next election.

[–] not_that_guy05@lemmy.world 24 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That's great but I really wish a new progressive party would come out of the ashes.

Dreams I suppose.

[–] knatschus@discuss.tchncs.de -2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I really don't get the calls for a new party in the US lately. You've seen how to get a new movement win in a two party system with the tea party. A complete new party would just split the vote.

[–] Branch_Ranch@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Ranked choice or STAR voting would potentially fix that.

[–] knatschus@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 2 days ago

Of course a different system would have different opportunities. You just won't have that before a progressive movement is in power.

[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 2 days ago

So would magic.

[–] kmaismith@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago

It was called the “tea party”, any new movement within the democratic party will need to differentiate itself in name to make significant headway, so we will probably get a “new party” just as a division in the old one expressed through the primary system (assuming our democracy makes it that far)

[–] Andr3w222@lemm.ee 21 points 3 days ago

Very good sign.

[–] Carnelian@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago

Let’s keep that ball rolling

But Trump won every swing state!

unsurprising really.