this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2025
503 points (98.8% liked)

politics

23071 readers
3411 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Democratic National Committee vice chair David Hogg's plan to spend $20 million to primary older Democratic incumbents in Congress has sparked intense anger from some lawmakers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 40 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

Mistake for who? Not a mistake for me, not a mistake tactically considering the policy and popularity polling, not a mistake when you consider that these people have been suppressing popular and well polling progressive policies and candidates for decades and still managed to lose the presidency and both houses to a goddamn moron…

All of this shit, all of these “reasons” they list in opposition to Hogg’s initiative, they are all bullshit. Bullshit and deflections and distractions from the fact that they are concerned exclusively about the bottom line for their wealthy benefactors, and about their own as well. The irony that is not lost on anyone is that they are the assholes who did this to us in the first place, and would you look at that, Donald Trump is about to hand them a tax cut.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

They're really upset about losing their expense accounts. Sure they get a salary, but every single one of them has an expense account that dwarfs their salary.

[–] KittyCat@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Both sides, the old guard is useless but he's massively anti 2A, which is also not helpful right now.

[–] TronBronson@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Na the fascists are also going to need to get rid of the 2A soon. They don't need headlines like "ICE impersonator shot by citizen while conducting an extra judicial abduction"

[–] KittyCat@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You can't put that genie back in the bottle on any reasonable time scale, there's more guns than people in the US, and half of them are basically invisible to authorities.

[–] TronBronson@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

i know right. Where my no step snek libertarians in the face of tyranny tho?

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 1 points 11 hours ago

Begging for government contracts.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Both sides, the old guard is useless but

but here comes the excuse...

he’s massively anti 2A, which is also not helpful right now.

How convenient!

[–] KittyCat@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Only a fool would willingly disarm with fascist trying to take absolute power

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 0 points 11 hours ago

Only a fool would be relying on registered firearms with fascists trying to take absolute power.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago

Sure. It's not because he's trying to push the party to the left. It's because the party has suddenly come around to being single-issue voters who agree with republicans on yet another issue, this time guns.

Before that, it was genocide, immigration, and trans people. What will we agree with republicans on next?