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
I don't necessarily disagree, but the other side of that coin is that every election is painted this way in America.
Not saying it isn't true for Trump, but supposing he loses in 24, you don't think the GOP will stay sufficiently shitty that in 28 they send him up again, or a younger old white guy who's still sufficiently horrible?
It's a very very calculated part of the two party system that the Other Guy is offensive enough to those on the fringes of the tent to shame, scare, or guilt them into voting for "their" guy.
Again, I don't disagree with you, especially in this case, but it's exactly how the parties are designed to work to perpetuate the illusion of choice. If the Democrats can just point to Trump to convince progressives to keep voting for their guy, when or why would they ever shift their platform in a direction to court more progressive voters?
Exactly, it's part of the democratic party strategy. Let's not forget that Hillary Clinton's team did what they could to position Trump to be the republican nominee: https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/
Democrats regularly promote fascists so that they can position themselves as heroes for "standing up to fascism", a problem which they actively contribute to. It allows them to not actually improve things while pretending they're the thin blue line separating civil society from wanton destruction.
A friend of mine is very much a Democrat, capital D.
Like...we obviously agree on most issues, but he's a fairly centrist (American style) moderate Democrat who is active in working with and for his local party organization and basically while he might not like every single thing they do, he doesn't dislike any of it enough to stop volunteering for the party, much less even think of voting anything other than party line.
This is one of the big areas where we've disagreed.
He's of the same mindset as the comments we've replied to, often repeating the same rationale of, "Look, I get it, you want more progress and want different things than the main centrist moderate portion of the party. I get that and I agree with you. But you aren't getting that with the other side, so what you need to do is vote for what we want in the center, and then once we're in positions of power, that's the only chance you have of getting what you want."
To that I've often responded that progressives have tried that route for ages, and all it's ever gotten them is a party that takes them for granted, and keeps making these far right boogymen to scare their left wing into votes. They've made it clear over and over again that they'll never, ever move left or adopt any platform positions desired by the progressives until and unless those progressives withhold their support.
The party played chicken with progressives in 2016 and underestimated not only the resolve of the progressives but also the apathy of the moderate voters (which they also take for granted...as much as they like to paint the GOP as a party who's identity is nothing more than anti whatever the Dems want, the Dems themselves have also become the party of "we deserve your vote simply because we're not them").
I'm very pleased that my district is currently represented by a progressive. She doesn't always vote the way I feel on every issue, but even with that taken into account, I feel like she's doing more to move the country in a direction I want than a centrist would have, and I'll happily support her next fall.
As a counterpoint -- the Democratic party is further left than it's been in ages. There hasn't been an administration that's taken climate change more seriously than this. Topics championed by Progressives are discussed within the mainstream party and aspects are included. The infrastructure bill, inflation reduction act, and American rescue plan are all great examples of this.
This didn't happen because progressives withheld their support. It's because progressives gave their support. Bernie ultimately has been the ideological winner. It's clear which direction the party is going. And it's noteworthy that a big reason why he works so well with Biden is that they're friends, or at least friendly colleagues. Biden was friendly to Sanders in the Senate, and that's what opened the door. It's cooperation and friendship that moves the policies we want forward.
This is just as much a lesson to moderates as well, that they need to be a lot more cooperative and conciliatory and way less antagonistic to progressives.
I continue to vote democrat straight down the ballot every time. Might as well, especially since I can mail in the ballot so it's not like it's much effort on my part, but I don't see any avenue to send the message that I'm not satisfied with most of the party's policies, which align mainly with the interests of the rich.
They claim that they'll deliver if they can get power, but when they do get that power, it's always conveniently blocked by the exact number of democrats that will magically flip to the other side in order to prevent it. Seems like if they do get a super majority, they'll claim that they must be doing something right to gain such support and will thus stay the course. There just doesn't seem to be a to voice disapproval in a way that matters. Here are Americans voicing their disapproval in a way that democrats can hear, but Biden continues to pledge overwhelming support for genocide, even though he has the power to do otherwise.