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
you are going to be deeply disappointed when any number of things happens. Notably when you discover that israel probably isn't just flagrantly committing genocide. When you discover other issues like climate change, and human rights abuse. Or like, nestle.
I can think of a few things that would spook you more than like 40,000 people dying. Notably the roughly 300,000 causalities in the russo-ukraine war that's still ongoing.
it most definitely can be, see: 2020 election and the jan 6 plot (a video covering the excessive extents of jan 6th, it's 3 hours long, and straight information)
there is already work being done to potentially subvert the will of the voters: see Georgia, i don't have to explain this one, the board committee thing overseeing elections is trying to usurp total control over the certification of the votes.
yes, harris is already winning that's how polling works. Unfortunately for you, polling is never perfectly accurate.
I like your root instance though. Real recognize real if you know what i mean.
I have been nothing but deeply disappointed with American politics for the entirety of my adult life.
That's nothing new. More like par for the course with American elections.
What's different this time is how many "moderate" Republicans are endorsing the Democrats.
The Democratic Party is over, they're giving up on their left wing to chase anti-trump Republicans. After this election they might as well be the Democratic-Republicans ressurrected. One big neoliberal party with no real competition from the right or left.
Polling is accurate enough, everyone who was surprised that Trump took the presidency in 2016 was just insufficiently cynical about American politics.
I don't need polling to see which way the wind is blowing, this election has been a done deal since Pelosi convinced Biden to drop out of the race. That itself being an event I predicted as the longshot that the Democrats would need all the way back in 2015 when the DNC started openly conspiring against Bernie.
fistbump
yeah, that's just politics, idk what you really expect it to do lol. It's not going to do your homework, and it isn't supposed to, it simply isn't made for that. Global geopolitics are even more complicated and the potential ramifications are even more significant so we can't even really begin to talk about those.
nothing new since 2020. And maybe 2016 with the russian interference, but that's been pretty typical and not really subversion of democracy.
Maybe the bush V gore election, but that's it really. Everything else has pretty much "worked as intended" except for that one apparent McCarthy plot but that never went anywhere.
they are moderate btw. That the reason they're supporting dems. Normally they would be swing voters, but given the nature of this election, you would expect some percent of the republican voter base to push more democratic.
i don't think the democratic party is over, i think you're just either being wildly over dramatic here, or simply wrong about how the democratic party works. There is a substantial difference in the parties, that i simply do not have time to cover in this comment. See this thread
but TL;DR is that the left wing is a lot more nebulous than the right wing, which can make it very flexible in how it functions, which is good for general party cohesion. Unlike the republican party (again, see the previously linked thread)
it also seems like, and this is adding to those previous thoughts, that the left party is generally moving away from "SJW ideals" things like CRT and social inequality, which are still important, but just not actively being pushed through in any sort of legislation or anything, as we're focusing more clearly on social aspects, things like abortion and queer rights, which are being targeted right now. But i think we will see a small shift going into the future with this as well, pushing more for "socially progressive ideals" rather than the previous "socially progressive governmental ideals" which i think are a bit iffy.
like to be clear, kamala is pushing hard for the independent moderate voter (which is at least 50% of the left party) and capturing a lot of the more moderate republican vote, which is going to be essential to the upcoming election strategy. It seems they think removing votes from republicans is probably going to be more valuable than insuring farther left voters (which are probably already voting for her anyway, since her ideals roughly align anyway) which on a few levels, makes a lot of sense. It also gives really strong social presence as well, just watch a rally that she's done.
polling is really hard normally, and it's even harder when talking about elections, because more often than not, elections are won by one or two percentage points. Polling has a margin of error of probably about < 5% which is going to make that pretty random by nature. This is also ignoring reliable data collection as well.
that's a possibility, but i feel like that probably veers into the usual conspiratorial areas of things. As far as the polling and public sentiment goes, getting rid of biden probably saved this cycle. It's certainly really stressed the republicans a lot, and will continue to do so even more in the future. I feel like bernie probably just wasn't popular enough to win, certainly a beloved candidate, but idk if people would've genuinely voted him in. Maybe if he was the primary candidate, but they obviously didn't pick him, to whatever consequence that had.
hell yeah brother!
Right? I guess I'm just a cynical old anarcho-commie but American politics has always felt like one step forward and two steps back.
They were never moderate, that's why they were Republicans in the first place. The only reason they're supporting Dems now is because the Dems have stopped pretending to be left-wing and openly embraced their status as America's non-wingnut Capitalist party.
Dramatic, sure, but I don't think it's overly so. The party no longer needs to appeal to the interests of us small folks now that business interests are starting to abandon the Republican project. Working within the system to enact meaningful change was already nigh-impossible, but now that the Democrats have an unassailable electoral position there's no reason for them not to become complacent and allow themselves to be influenced by lobbyists even more than before.
If the Democrats had put their weight behind Bernie then 2016 wouldn't even have been a contest. He was literally the single most popular politician in America at the time and Clinton was close to the opposite, but the DNC decided it was "Her Turn" and arranged the rest of the competition to drop out and endorse Clinton ahead of the Super Tuesday primaries. Between that and the superdelegates there was no way for the best candidate to win.
They also promoted Trump under the assumption that he'd be an easy opponent for her. XD
i think it's probably more like 1.1 steps forward, and 1 steps back, slow continual progress seems to be the ultimate goal of the governmental structure.
well yeah, traditionally they would be moderate/institutional republicans but history is not accurate when applied to the modern day, so right now, a modern republican is going to appreciate kamala more than trump right now.
the left historically has been broadly moderate, a somewhat significant voter populous will swing more progressive, but it's a lot less "aggressive" than on the republican side. I think the turnout at kamala rallies has been a really good example of this. I think most democrats are "socially progressive" governmentally "liberal" and economically "liberal/progressive" but that's just what i've gleaned. Very few democrats are "socialist" or "communist" and even fewer subscribe to anarchism. Even i a technically anarchist individual, doesn't even "believe" in anarchism. I think anarchism is a transitional government structure. I think it's a more of a communal structure more than anything, and that's where i find value in it.
you might be correct, but that would be a very long term game, 10-20 years. So it's hard to say right now, but you might very well be correct on that one. I think this is mostly a response to the republican base, and i think we're going to see a "new left" in the coming election cycles, hinging on more traditional values, but pushing for more progressive things. I think if we see this, the democratic party is going to be highly successful.
idk much about the 2016 election and popular opinion so i can't say much about that, but in 2020 if that were to have happened, i think that probably would've happened as well. The party institution has a very large voting influence, whoever is run as the primary, is going to get the majority of part votes, unfortunately.
I think the primary issue with the 2016 election was the common public sentiment of trump, he was the under dog, i guess nobody though people voted for republicans or something lol. Thankfully i think this was the "old left" and i'm hoping we get a "new left" starting with the current harris ticket. I think if we do have a new left, we will be very productive.
skill issue no. 1 pretty much lmao.
Yeah, well, my weirdness continues. I've got that ADHD time-blindness pretty damn hard, so future events which are inevitable might as well have already occurred in my perspective.
That's my prediction as well. Now that the Democrats are the new right-wing, the obvious competition would be a new left-wing party. It probably won't be one of the existing "left" parties though, as they are almost all thoroughly captured by either foreign interests, state security agencies, or both.
gotta love time travel, i mea-
idk that they're the "new right" like i said i expect them to use moderate language, but then push for more progressive policy. It seems like a really successful strategy. Shit like "we don't want the government involved in peoples healthcare" implies to me that it will be across the board, not only for abortion, but also shit like gender affirming healthcare. And that we will probably see similar things in schools as well.
Though im pretty sure the "far left" will probably splinter a bit more aggressively over this, i'm not sure how much that will do anything, or even matter, we'll have to see.
it's also possible that if/once trumps dies/drops out, that the republican party has to scramble to be normal again, and they either pick up a new normal (probably more moderate, otherwise they probably won't win) pushing the dems further to the left, though im hoping some of that newer rhetoric stays put, just more progressive in general.
It'll be interesting to watch.