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
I guess if there was any doubt before, it's gone now. Neither party is suitable. Time to really vote progressive. We need a new party that isn't deeply entrenched with whatever made hime sign that.
I'm lost. He spoke against it, but signed it anyway. Did they give any rationalization for signing it?
If only there was some way for him to stop it from happening.... Well, Joe, at least you tried.
It's not like his own opponent did something like that in the past because he didn't like the text of the bill. Surely not...
Here is the full context of the bill for those interested: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2025
Here is LGBT Nations' take: https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/12/senate-passes-military-bill-with-provision-restricting-trans-healthcare/?
Biden isn’t the worst president ever, but he’s a piece of shit. He was entirely not up to the task of our time, and that was obvious in 2020. His presidency had more to do with fulfilling an old man’s lifelong desire to sit in the big seat, rather than meet the needs of the citizenry. It was basically a make-a-wish project for establishment Democrats who desire gentlemanly order and aggrandizement more than any meaningful policy goals. This was a group project, and all of the self-interested facilitators that covered up his senility (going back before the 2020 race), are directly culpable in the emerging feudal reign that Republicans are orchestrating, as well as the unjust murders of hundreds of thousands of innocents in Gaza. I started his administration feeling weary but cautiously hopeful that we may have averted calamity. I end his administration having lost confidence in not only our government, but of our people. I could not have more contempt for the entire American project and all the hollow sentiments that cloak the inhumanity of it. Biden is such a clown.
He's literally patting himself for doing the best job he could instead of bowing out sooner.
What a dumb take. If Harris had been in the Presidential seat, she would have lost by more.
Trump's fear mongering and lies are all that got him elected. Plain and simple. Putting ANY candidate up against a sitting president for re-election that just lies and says fascist bullshit non-stop is a sure winner.
Fuck no. Biden, Harris, and the Democratic consultancy machine did not run a presidency or a campaign that came within a million miles of supporting that claim.
In a populist age, like we are in, what beats right wing populists (fascists) is left wing populists. The Biden presidency nudged the party in that direction, but neither he nor Harris were capable of running a populist campaign.
The Biden presidency nudged the party in that direction,
Well, the Biden administration briefly entertained some left-wing populist positions, which were unceremoniously jettisoned along with any credibility Democrats once had on the subject.
As Biden just did with the now-ridiculous notion that Democrats support trans people.
Biden made serious progress for unions, consumers, and in antitrust. I'm not putting him up for sainthood, but progress is progress. He was the most progressive president of the last 50 years which, sadly, is a super low bar.
Politics is compromise. Biden is not supreme leader of the United States. He shares power with Republicans. The Republicans will get some wins, and every one of them will be ugly and outrageous. If America wanted to support trans people, they should have elected a Democratic House.
The Republicans will get some wins, and every one of them will be ugly and outrageous. If America wanted to support trans people, they should have elected a Democratic House.
Our Democratic Senate voted overwhelmingly against trans people.
The Senate doesn't rule any more than the President. The Senate must also compromise with the House. If America doesn't want Republicans to influence policy, then America has to stop voting for Republicans.
The real question is, why do Republicans choose to use their leverage on this shit? The answer is simple. It allows them to undermine Democrats by splitting the left. Your reaction is the exact reason why trans people just got screwed. You are personally more responsible than anyone in the Senate.
The Senate doesn’t rule any more than the President. The Senate must also compromise with the House.
Compromise is not enthusiastic capitulation, which is what we got. This wasn't a squeaker. Democrats overwhelmingly voted for this in the senate. The party abandoned trans people and you're defending them for it.
If America doesn’t want Republicans to influence policy, then America has to stop voting for Republicans.
Well, Democrats' last word to trans people for the foreseeable future was "we're doing what Republicans want." Democrats had an opportunity to do better here.
The real question is, why do Republicans choose to use their leverage on this shit?
Because they know that Democrats will break solidarity with any vulnerable minority and then blame anyone who is upset about it, like so:
The answer is simple. It allows them to undermine Democrats by splitting the left. Your reaction is the exact reason why trans people just got screwed. You are personally more responsible than anyone in the Senate.
This is bullshit. Centrists are responsible for their own cowardice and their own complicity. Don't blame people who are upset because you got everything you wanted.
An overwhelming vote is not the same as an enthusiastic vote. The bill got 100% of the Democratic vote in the executive branch, yet Biden was far from enthusiastic about that provision.
The Democrats had to compromise with Republicans on something, and Republicans choose which issues to compromise on, and which to hold firm to. The Republicans chose trans people, not the Democrats. It's possible that the Democrats could have offered some other group, but they don't have the power for it not to screw any vulnerable minority. That bill was never going to arrive at the Senate.
Cowardice and centrism have nothing to do with this bill. I'm the first to agree that Democrats are cowardly centrists, but not in this context. When Democrats have to compromise with Republicans to pass critical legislation, that legislation will definitionally be more "centrist" than the Democrats themselves.
Where cowardly centrism comes into play is in presenting their case to the American people. I absolutely do blame Kamala and her consultants for totally avoiding trans issues in her campaign. But, when the election is done, the country doesn't operate without compromises with elected Republicans.
I'm not sure why you would assume I got everything I wanted. The trans stuff is just the start of what I don't like about this funding bill. I also have no doubt that if the Democrats owned both branches that there would still be a lot I don't like, but I think the trans provision would be gone.
It was unfair of me to say it was your fault that Republicans chose to force the trans issue in this bill. It's not. It will be your fault when they do it next time though, because you are rewarding them for it.
He should have bowed out of the race and let a primary happen, not resigned as president. I agree, any incumbent was fucked, but Harris didn't have to run as continuation and someone else entirely could avoid the association even further. Democrats need to play to win, and that includes (selectively) throwing kind uncle Joe under the bus if it helps.
This is not, in general, true, or else everyone would be doing it. Trump is a right-wing populist who's taking advantage of people's dissatisfaction with the status quo and the Democrats' unwillingness to change it. You need both sides for this equation to make sense.
Exactly. The Ds wanted to keep things the way they were, to the point they threw Biden in last minute in 2020 for the Ds to rally around. The Ds had a supermajority with Obama and they did jack shit with it. Unless they abandon the status quo stance they have they will continue to lose, which with Pelosi pushing the old guy over AOC shows they haven't learned yet and will cling to the way things are until we boot them out with prejudice.
Yes. Neoliberalism fails wherever it is tried, and the US managed to export it across the western world. What's going on in the US isn't unique and the same dynamics apply.
Stupidity and cowardice. He’s a lame duck; he could’ve gone down swinging and let the next administration take the heat for this. But no, he had to show his true colors.
Stupidity and cowardice.
The defining characteristics of the Biden administration and the centrist wing of the Democratic party.
This will be his legacy. Opening the door wide open to the wolves and supporting the worst genocide since Rwanda. And he deserves it.
I said it before and it bears repeating: he’ll be remembered as a combination of the worst failures of Neville Chamberlain and Paul von Hindenburg.
That’s it. That’s his legacy. Every other aspect of what he did - positive or negative - pales in comparison.
I think he signed this one because the threat of what is coming is much worse. But I do agree, I wish Biden were a better man than he is.
I think he signed this one because the threat of what is coming is much worse
I think he signed it because he hates all trans people. After a whole-assed year of supplying a genocide, he gets no benefit of the doubt.
It really is a shame. His administration did a lot of good stuff and ultimately it's going to be completely overshadowed by his inaction on a few really important issues.
I don't know if he could've prevented the coming disaster, but he sure as fuck could've put us in a better position to weather the storm, and he absolutely did not.
Could he have? Even if he takes drastic action (as an official act, of course), it's not guaranteed things will turn out better.
But at least he’d have tried… history remembers that too.
What a stupid play. He doesn't benefit from this and it will now be used as a wedge issue by both Parties to rile up their base. Ignorant shortsighted policy. He's only encouraging division.