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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
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
The democratic party funded by AIPAC will rather see Trump for a third time than having AOC as president.
Gotta get the red Dems out.
It would be easier to start a new party at this rate looking at where that money comes from... I say knowing there is still no direct alternative despite decades of trying from other minor parties...
AOC is doing her best to keep friendly with the J-Street Israel lobby lately.
Rather than having a woman as president*
They're run 2 candidates that lost to the GOP that were women already. Where is the idea that the Dems won't run a woman coming from?
Fair point, but it feels bad to accept.
I mean there are a lot of men who don’t want that.
White women voted for Trump. Does that mean there's lots of white women who won't vote for a woman?
Yes, but I’m just pointing out people are fucking sexist here
Or something more nefarious at foot.
Well, perhaps it is concern that the Dems shouldn't run a woman, not that they haven't. The reality of the situation is that there is still plenty of closeted (some less so) misogyny among Democrats such that a woman is going to have a harder time winning than a man (all other things being equal) in the general. Add a racial minority, socdem, and 8 years of GOPedo vilification on top of that and you have an even harder path forward than Clinton or Harris, especially if the GOP nominee in 2028 is an outwardly reasonable, straight, white, male. I still think that the GOPedos stole the 2024 election, but I also think that their steal may not have been successful if a straight, white, male had replaced Biden instead of a brown woman. Not that I want any of this to be true, but I think it is where we are currently.
Ideologues that vote solely on what genitals a candidate has
Even the chuddiest chuds I know don't express anything remotely like that opinion. Racism, xenophobia, and Islamophobia are all either open topics or simmering just below the surface of political discussion, but not the sex of a politician. Nevertheless, the hand-winging centrists are sure there's a wellspring of otherwise gettable voters that are driven by that single issue. And its salience magically rises and falls depending on whether there's a popular female progressive.
This is why you lose elections
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought your original response was mocking that take. I try to assume good faith so someone writing that sincerely didn't make sense.
Why the down votes for this comment?
Cuz they already ran a woman for president, twice. So saying the dems don't want a woman president is just categorically false.
Bold to assume that’s what I was saying 😂
Men don’t want a women running this country sadly
Ok sure but the question was "why is this getting downvoted?"
Or, maybe, people who will vote for a Democrat don't want a neoliberal centrist?
Biden barely won even with COVID, and he ran to the left of both Clinton and Harris.
They don’t want to admit this country is sadly bigoted and a lot of men don’t want a woman running the country