this post was submitted on 30 May 2025
1360 points (98.0% liked)

politics

23918 readers
3612 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 25 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I never felt Harris actually stood for anything. This is easily the first election where I felt all the decisions made by the DNC were hard wrong - and I already thought the DNC fucked everything up when the turned on Sanders - but this time they really chose every bad option they could. A senior citizen that was absolutely having problems (outside the debate performance) and choosing an inclusivity* candidate that really had a checkered past of making climbing the ladder a priority while having no real policy gains or stances. Even in the lead up to everything, the other candidates were all but brushed aside. No real debate over policy or where the country was going.

She said whatever middle of the road thing needed to be said to appeal to enough people while leveling mealy criticism at best for the real problems, from Israel’s shitty war to attacks worker’s right in the US. We went from a candidate that should have never run again to a candidate that hadn’t given anyone a reason to want her to run at all at the last minute. And that’s awful, especially to lose against trump.

  • I hate to even say it, but the fact is that the DNC wanted to run a black female. They banked on the (I can’t think of the word/name for it - people who want to do things for a minority community, but do so cluelessly, remove agency of the group, disregard the actual needs and culture of the group. Usually modestly wealthy white people making “programs” for minority communities) people to vote for the feel-good of voting a minority person up while not actually thinking that people would have needs and policy concerns that would influence their vote, or their willingness to vote at all. The DNC already had “protect the rich white people” as a top priority. They didn’t think people were smart enough to sense that, and everyone really had a feeling that the Democrats didn’t care about them anymore.

Edit: found it. It’s “white saviorism” or “white savior complex.”

[–] okmko@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago (5 children)

Yeah. I don't know if there's a term for it, but the Alt-Right Book describes it too: https://youtu.be/wCl33v5969M

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] burgerpocalyse@lemmy.world 17 points 6 days ago (3 children)

i hate the dnc but my perspective is mostly dont vote for the fascist

[–] psud@aussie.zone 1 points 14 hours ago

How about revising to "vote for the lesser evil".

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LordWiggle@lemmy.world 15 points 6 days ago

Yeah, but Trump does the same. Kamala had better taxes planned for the working class and the poor. Trump also has a very poor track record. You can blame Kamala for not doing it right, but imo the issue is mass disinformation and people being extremily dumb.

[–] RiceBowl@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

A few posts down in my feed is a photo of children zip tied in immigration court and it is fucking disgusting. There would be other problems in a Harris admin. But maybe we wouldn’t zip tie little kids.

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

Yeah. The DNC either don't realise, or refuse to realise, that electing Trump is not in approval of him, but expression of disapproval of the Democratic Party.

[–] CoffeeJunkie@lemmy.cafe 5 points 6 days ago

It is perfectly fine, in fact it would be incredibly refreshing & welcome, to admit...she was a shitty candidate. Fuck, she was so terribly bad. And Tim Walz was a bad pick, too.

Everything was fake. Every day it unraveled more. She was caught saying things like, "I am different than Biden, I am not Biden, do not let his presidency reflect on me." What would you do differently? "Nothing, I wouldn't change anything." Okay....so....how are you different if everything Biden did was totally great & you wouldn't do anything differently?? 🤡 Heavily paraphrased, of course, the convos were more detailed (which only made it worse).

It's fine to say Kamala Harris was a cringe candidate. Completely unwanted, unelected, unqualified. Biden bowed out & the DNC shoved her in; there is no logical reason to continue to own her as your candidate & representative. You don't bring dead babies to Passover. This is an opportunity to rebrand the Democrat Party, to refocus on issues that actually matter. That is to say....if anyone still gives a goddamn about the issues that actually matter.

[–] GoodOleAmerika@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

I blame on dnc. They should not exist. We already have republican party if we need to vote for a party that works for billionaires. Unless AOC or Bernie, this country is doomed.

load more comments
view more: next ›