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 heard an interesting theory from a YouTube video creator who made political videos (can't recall who)
But the gist was this.
Democratic reps and congressmen take turns voting against the people's wishes. So that no single one has a long track record of going against the people. Just a handful of times.
With, of course, the majority vote being orchestrated behind the doors.
This is how so many of Trump's cabinet picks had Dems voting for them but a different Dem every time.
So no single Dem could be called out for "always voting with Republicans".
I think this woman who theorized this is on to something. Wish I could remember who it was. But yeah I think she's right. It's all orchestrated.
The Dems are intentionally losing bills and budgets that the people want.
They have been, and are currently, working with the "opposition". Because most of both sides are actually all working for Israel's goals And billionaire's goals.
Certainly Not ours.
Oh, yeah, that's an old strategy. If you've got a Dem Rep in a purple district, they can't vote for that Commie bill, or they'll lose their seat to a MAGA. There may be a few of them, so when it comes time for the vote, they let a few cross over, so they don't get slammed in the election for being too liberal.
But they should still pass their bill by a vote or two. When they are letting enough cross to sink a bill, or to vote for the other side? That's political party treason, and the party needs to explain themselves.
Same donors, same team
Might be their strategy, doesn't matter for me. Democrats who even voted no once to Bernie's stop arms sails is clearly victims of lobbying and did so to preserve their positions. So they can't be trusted no matter how many times they vote yes to arms sales. This is the level at which people should held them accountable.
I've heard this from a lot of leftist streamers and youtube creators as "rotating villain" theory. It's basically proven, as only when a majority is gained do congress people start flaking off of what should be an obvious win. Leiberman, Sinema, Cuellar, Fetterman, Manchin, etc.
"Rotating villain" is a fitting term.
Yes, those people were notoriously loyal otherwise...
Or maybe these same people all tend to come up on close votes and we don't pay attention to who voted for or against the housing reform bill that just passed because they didn't matter this time.
Either name a dem that voted against the housing reform bill or drop "rotating villain" as the always go-to theory.
It's a good thing to keep it mind, but it generally isn't applying in this political environment.
You can see for yourself who voted for what. Or you can believe an 'influencer.'
Wasn't an influencer and they had examples. It was someone who made YouTube videos about political content. Not all women making videos are "influencers".
I don't think it's far fetched to consider the corp Dems are using a playbook. They have a strategy. They don't just wing it.
Wasn't it revealed recently that booker was a guest to some Republican billionaires meeting at a hotel or something?
They are all in it together.
Yes, anyone making a video on social media is an influencer, especially if they make content meant to influence. Political influencers are influencers. Influencers you agree with are influencers. Anyway I didn't realize Booker was all Dems. Was he a guest at a Republican billionaires meeting at a hotel or something? You can't take a half-beat to confirm before accusing? This is exactly what I'm talking about; Second or third hand conjecture used to demonize an entire party that encompasses three fourths of voters rather than doing the legwork of looking at readily available information. Now think, who does this behavior benefit? And it's not just you, this is all political discourse at the moment. It's no wonder foreign state actors spend millions under the table on American influencers to control narratives.
There are absolutely Dems who need to GTFO. We can look at their actual voting records, which are generally pretty consistent, to see who's controlled and who isn't. Anything less is counterproductive at best and the reason conservatives are actively dismantling are government and civic protections as we bicker over trivialities in actuality.
I guess your definition of influencer is different than mine. I think of influencers as a face selling products and lifestyle crap. Basically advertising.
But your definition expands to include pretty much anyone making any commentary on anything. Even local news reporters.
Here is the Booker incident I am referring to. https://www.wired.com/story/leak-exposes-members-of-peter-thiels-secretive-dialog-society/
And I'm sure there are a handful of good Dems. I can think of a few. But like 80% of them are corrupt and need replaced.
If the majority were working for the people we wouldn't be in this shit show we are in now.
Almost the entire party (ok 2/3s) did vote no to some of Bernie's stop arms sales to Israel motions. So I think it is ok to demonize them when majority of the party seems to be in there for their own interests.
The Democrats
https://youtu.be/gbrbUfYSt0E?is=on2A-rI-tIgw7eUz