this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2026
330 points (97.1% liked)

politics

28707 readers
2485 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
all 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 17 points 23 hours ago

This was clearly in evidence in the 2024 presidential contest. Post-election analyses showed that Vice President Kamala Harris lost the backing of a wide range of Democratic and Independent voters because she refused to make a decisive break with President Biden’s support for Israel. Instead of listening to her own instincts and being more critical of Israeli practices and more vocal in support of Palestinian rights, she listened to the establishment political consultants who cautioned against “rocking the boat” on this “sensitive issue.”

This gets the matter entirely backwards. Harris listened to her values that told her Palestinian lives aren't worth fighting for. It's not that she couldn't find the courage to do the right thing, it's that she did not care... And it's hard to reflect on your values, to realize that maybe you supported some really shitty things. She hasn't yet done that, maybe someday she will, but don't hold your breath.

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 51 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

They know, they don't care.

The current DNC is operating on two principles:

  1. It's still 1995, and Israel is America's lil' darling colonizer startup that most moderate Americans are happy with. Yay for white middle-east, go 'get 'em you wacky apocalypse-prophecy fulfillers. Go go magic old-money.

  2. They have the same donors as the GOP and serve the same masters.

[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 61 points 1 day ago (1 children)

To me, the headline was never the contents of the autopsy, but the fact they tried to bury it.

The current leadership knows how to be better and chooses not to.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I don’t believe this happened organically, though. How was this culture built via Israeli influence? That’s what I want to know.

All the fucking surveillance that finds its way back to Israel… there’s more to the story, we just don’t know the details. I don’t want to throw around allegations/conspiracy, but one thing that would make perfect sense to me is if Israel were involved with Epstein. Then it’s not a long shot to think they blackmailed people for support. The supporters then act like influencers, creating a culture.

[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 4 points 23 hours ago

Hey, there probably is some blackmail. There's certainly a ton of bribery. Some of that is probably Israel-based, but also some of it is the big corporations. The Military Industrial Complex needs wars, and they will absolutely create them as needed, because that's how they make money. Similarly, Big Corporations rely on the current anti-worker two-party system ... they are scared shitless that people might actually put a leftist into the White House. And because of that, they need wedge issues. Israel has been an effective one for a very long time.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

How was this culture built via Israeli influence? That’s what I want to know.

Because for 30 years the chairs only cared about amount raised, and AIPAC thru around a lot of money. Even if a down allot candidate didn't take AIPAC money, the party was beholden.

Another thing you're unaware of is in 2025 the DNC pivoted from that.

The focus is back on votes and not warchests, which is why the DNC is dumping their hoarded wealth on state parties allowing all the wins we've been seeing.

AIPACs money doesn't offset the votes, so today's DNC isn't gonna just do what AIPAC says.

The neoliberal strategy was get as much money as possible, and then counting on being the lesser of two evils. That's not effective so we stopped.

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

AIPACs money doesn’t offset the votes, so today’s DNC isn’t gonna just do what AIPAC says.

You are more hopeful than I am.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

AIPAC spent millions on a Democratic primary in NJ because the frontrunner said that Israeli air should have conditions.

A Bernie Sanders campaign organizer ended up winning the primary.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sure. But the statement was:

so today’s DNC isn’t gonna just do what AIPAC says.

Which is what I'm pushing back on. Schumer and Jefferies are clearly continuing to steer the party in an explicitly pro-Israel manner. My argument is that today DNC is just as pro-Israel as it was 2 years ago. Maybe tomorrows DNC will be different, but right now, the US Democratic party supports what the US and Israel are doing in Iran.

[–] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

I don't think the actions of Schumer and Jeffries necessarily invalidate what the poster said. Those are incumbents from a previous time when the DNC was decidedly more unconditionally pro-Israel. Since those are senior members of their houses, AIPAC may be influencing them directly outside of their DNC contributions. Remember that Schumer and Jeffries are members of the Democratic Party, but do not run the DNC, per se.

[–] hraegsvelmir@ani.social 8 points 1 day ago

We don't need an autopsy, just like we don't need another article telling the public, who has already long since realized this, that Israeli influence and Zionism in our politics is toxic and that we need to cut ties with it going forward. We really just need a few things to happen. Least likely of all, if Democratic leaders finally pulled their heads out of their asses and started paying attention to doing their jobs and winning over voters, rather than just focusing on their bank balances, it would potentially preclude the need for more if they had the fear of their constituents turning on them to keep them in line. Failing this, it would be great if more people got politically active and, along with taking action and organizing between elections, they showed up to the primaries and voted out assholes like Charles Schumer. Finally, it would be great if current electeds and progressive candidates who manage to primary zionists in the party actually began taking steps to initially isolate the remaining Zionists, with the aim of eventually expelling them from the party if they don't renounce Zionism and stop screwing over the civilians of Palestine (along with the other nearby countries Israel is constantly trying to steal land from), this country as a whole, and the world at large. The Israeli state, as it has existed since its founding in 1948, is a force for evil in this world, and needs to be stopped entirely. In a just world, Israel would be as isolated on the world stage as North Korea is at present.

The Democrats need to clean house already, and stop the shit with "Oh, but we're a big tent party, so we have to be open to a littlel support for colonial genocide amongst our members." Everyone alive knows this is a losing issue for them and is only getting worse by the day. The names of leading Democrats, like Jeffries, Pelosi, Harris and Schumer, are all going to be black marks in the pages of world history in the future. Quislings for a new age, but now they can claim they're multicultural, since they're not just reviled in their home land, but by anyone with a conscience and sense of morality the world over who comes to learn of their existence and actions. And I'm sure they'll still be trotting out that Schumer is hated only by antisemites, Pelosi only by misogynists, Jeffries by white supremacists, while Harris gets the distinction of being hated by racists and misogynists. It'll be just as effective at getting them back in the good graces of their constituents as it's proving to be now.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Trump is going to war fucking with Israel and we're talking about the autopsy on dems? wtf?

The republicans can fire trump at any second they want.

[–] Ferrous@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 day ago

The republicans can fire trump at any second they want.

But why would they? They have power. Is there supposed to be some sort of conclusion we can draw from this statement?

It's also true that Exxon could cease all oil drilling tomorrow. It's also true that all billionaires could give away their entire fortunes tomorrow. But they won't, because they have power.

Sure, at any given time it is true that your evil adversaries could just give up and magically change course, but is there really anything groundbreaking about underscoring that?

We should be leaning on the purported "opposition" party to actually fix things instead of waiting for evil pedophiles to magically change course.

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

They knew it a year ago...

That's why the voting members of the DNC didn't go with another AIPAC sponsored neolib as chair.