this post was submitted on 06 May 2026
255 points (99.6% liked)

politics

29658 readers
2645 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
 

Saudi Arabia, a key Gulf ally, suspended the U.S. military’s ability to use its bases and airspace to carry out the operation, sources say.

Donald Trump’s abrupt reversal on his plan to help ships go through the Strait of Hormuz came after a key Gulf ally suspended the U.S. military’s ability to use its bases and airspace to carry out the operation, according to two U.S. officials.

Trump surprised Gulf allies by announcing “Project Freedom” on social media Sunday afternoon, the officials said, angering leadership in Saudi Arabia. In response, the Kingdom informed the U.S. it would not allow the U.S. military to fly aircraft from Prince Sultan Airbase southeast of Riyadh or fly through Saudi airspace to support the effort, the officials said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 40 points 1 day ago (4 children)

nobody in America seems to care enough to meaningfully change it

People keep saying this as if we've all got a lever we could pull to get him out of office and just...aren't doing it. No, there's no direct way to make it happen. There's no meaningful opposition party, and no way to remove a president from office without one. The indirect ways to do it--namely, protest and primary challenges--well, a lot of us are doing that. And those who are and aren't protesting are held back by needing to work in an economic system that ties our healthcare to our employment.

The problem can't be solved in just a few months. This is a coordinated assault against liberty that began decades ago; it'd take a few years to sort out even if the entire middle and lower class was in agreement, and a sizable undereducated, propagandized population in the lower class is going to take some time to get on board.

"Wake up" and do what? Take up arms? That's a pipe dream sold by the NRA to keep conservatives buying guns. So what are we supposed to do that we're not already doing?

[–] tabarnaski@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

The problem in the US is that no one seems to realize that 1. Political change is not instantaneous and 2. Political change needs efforts/sacrifice.

Organize, vote in every election, make your voice heard in the primaries, etc.

There's no meaningful opposition party

Indeed, the Dems suck right now, but that can change. You just need enough people speaking loud enough with a clear message.

[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Yep. And we're seeing some movement on the outside making inroads into the party itself, which is great. There are more people trying to primary their establishment dems, and a lot of them are winning. But even if every Democrat in office right now were to lose their next primary, it would still take the better part of a decade to turn the entire party over.

If we survive this thing, the democratic party that comes out of it will be stronger for having been infused with younger, more progressive voices; but the road to that future is long.

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 5 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

So what are we supposed to do that we’re not already doing?

Drive to DC with torches en masse.

(It's actually 3,500,000 square miles)

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 2 points 15 hours ago

Can you please explain the joke further? Your first explanation left a lot questions unanswered and I am still not in a state of laughing, not even snickering. I am smiling in anticipation but I'm not sure how long it's gonna last!!!

[–] Bustedknuckles@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Getting ready, I suppose. We need an actual grassroots movement with commitment and organization. General strike seems about all that's left to us

[–] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 hours ago

America has never had a general strike, and it never will.

[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

But again, a general strike is something out of reach of most Americans, who live paycheck-to-paycheck and could be fired (and thus denied healthcare) at any moment.

[–] then_three_more@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Your system is so fucked. In a parliamentary democracy the members of the legislature for his own party would have seen his approval ratings, realised what that'll mean for their own electoral chances and ousted him by now.

[–] Bustedknuckles@lemmy.world 4 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Would things be different in a parliamentary system? I'm not actually so sure. Every single member of the house of representatives is up for election in November and they don't seem worried enough about their electoral chances to restrain him in any way.

Congress is still nominally the strongest branch of US government and they're fully abdicating their responsibilities. What would a parliamentary system solve when one party is a death cult?

[–] then_three_more@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

Maybe I'm just going by how things have been working in the UK in the last few years. We've not had a Prime Minister last a full election term since Blair in the early 2000s.

[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

No argument there. But we can't even get the man out of office right now; how likely is it that we're going to change the whole system in light of that?