this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2026
375 points (98.7% liked)

politics

30293 readers
2891 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] qevlarr@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't think it's that different, actually. People have been dying for new policies that benefit real voters instead of corporate interests, but no luck. The democratic party establishment is in the way and has been for decades.

Also, you can't have it both ways. You can't blame people for not voting blue to stop fascism even if they don't like the blue candidate, and at the same time say the votes are proof that the blue candidate was the right pick. If wasn't and that's why they lost. Don't blame the voters there wasn't more enthusiasm, maybe try to have an actual platform next time

[–] Zos_Kia@jlai.lu 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't think it's that different, actually. People have been dying for new policies that benefit real voters instead of corporate interests, but no luck. The democratic party establishment is in the way and has been for decades

I don't disagree but was it that obvious to the average voter in 2024 after a year of full on pro-trump media blitz?

When a candidate loses by 20 points it's easy to guess what their mistake was. When they lose by 1.5% I find out a whole less obvious. It's all hypotheticals but really there was no guarantee a leftist candidate would have done better. Maybe yes, maybe no.

In France in 2022 we had a good example of a deeply unpopular status quo candidate winning over both the leftist and the fascist candidates. The fascist would have steamrolled the leftist in a heart beat if they had both gotten to the second turn.

Just because we have personal preference for leftist candidates doesn't make them win elections.

[–] qevlarr@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

The preference is for a candidate with an appealing platform. US politics often does not have that and is 100% relying on rejection of the other candidate. The American voting system sucks completely. The democratic party should hold true to their name and at the very least hold fair primaries before every election. And make the primaries fair so everyone votes at the same time, and losers can't decide where their votes go and spoil other options.

[–] Zos_Kia@jlai.lu 1 points 23 hours ago

I'm not disputing any of that. I would also prefer that. But it doesn't mean it's a dominant strategy, or that it would have worked in 2024. That's all I'm saying.