this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2025
809 points (95.4% liked)

politics

24561 readers
2892 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
[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago (2 children)

During a debate, AOC would smash any Government of Putin candidate. The problem lies with the Democratic Party.

Kamala showed trump for the idiot he is. Didn't make much of a difference. I think AOC would do much better, but I don't hold out much expectations for debates to influence things. Hell, the current criminal in the white house didn't participate in the Republican primary debates and still, somehow, got a bunch of inbred hillbillies to vote for him.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 2 days ago (4 children)

People in america still believe there is going to be an actual election in 2028?

[–] Mamdani_Da_Savior@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

I have my doubts

[–] Kickforce@lemmy.wtf 3 points 2 days ago

Yeah it's weird, and if there are elections popular opposition candidates will face a fate like mr Navalny, I'm afraid. Much as I would like AOC as a US president, I think at this point, she needs to run for her life rather than for president. And believe me, I truly hate that this is the case.

She is an amazing person and a fantastic leader. However she is the kind of person the fascists fear and she is also the right shade of skin to earn a one way ticket to El Salvador.

You see the people clamoring for the deportation of mr Mamdani, and he is at this point nothing more than one party's possible candidate for mayor of one town. Imagine what would happen if ms Ocasio-Cortez were an actual presidential candidate!?

Even now I worry about her safety often. Same for that wonderful ms Crockett, mr Frost and a few others.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 29 points 2 days ago (38 children)

NGL I'll take any blue tie but we've already shown twice that Americans might actually prefer fascism over a woman in charge.

[–] theparadox@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

While those are two possible points of data, there are a number of other factors that contributed to each Democratic candidates' loss vs. Trump.

  • Both suffered from being establishment candidates in an antiestablishment era.
  • Both were only really willing to push to milquetoast progressive policies.
  • Both followed disappointing democratic presidents that promised a lot and delivered little, often due to their own party sabotaging attempts at major progressive reform.

I truly think that Democrat voters want real, progressive change (even if they find words like "socialism" scary) but most Democrat politicians aren't willing to anger their wealthy Third Way/Neoliberal/Abundance/whatever-the-fuck-they-want-to-call-themselves donors.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (37 replies)
[–] jhoff90@lemmy.world 25 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If the BIG Bill of Garbage passes, there are no more free elections.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] intheformbelow@lemmy.world 37 points 3 days ago (4 children)

God, americans are so naive. There won't be fair elections anymore. You had your chance and you blew it! It's over for your democracy.

[–] Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 3 days ago (6 children)

It's the Democrats. They still haven't realized that the game is over. Nobody's playing by the rules. Why would they start during an election?

[–] nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

So long as the donor checks keep clearing, establishment Dems are happy to play spoiler for big business and let Trump destroy the country.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] mwguy@infosec.pub 76 points 3 days ago (5 children)

She should absolutely run. I don't know if she should win the nomination, but running brings a voice to the wing of the party she represents.

Primaries are about coalition building. And to have your ideas represented by the eventual candidate you need a champion to promote them in the process.

[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 31 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I don't know if she should win the nomination,

Her winning the nomination would be Schumer and Pelosi's worst nightmare. They would 100 percent rather lose to Trump than let that happen.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Quadhammer@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

HELL YEAH THIS COUNTRY NEEDS AOC

[–] Salamence@lemmy.zip 53 points 3 days ago (6 children)

The democrat leadership did everything in their power to stop bernie in 2020 they will do the same against AOC

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Jolly_Platypus@lemmy.world 116 points 3 days ago (32 children)

I love AOC, but she will lose.

The American people have shown that they would rather have a convicted felon, rapist, fascist pedophile than a highly qualified woman.

It's stupid, but it's reality.

A woman candidate is a non starter.

[–] ShoeThrower@lemmy.zip 2 points 23 hours ago

If you see bigotry but refuse to fight against it, you a coward and no different than the bigots.

[–] teolan@lemmy.world 136 points 3 days ago (9 children)

Unlike Kamala and Clinton she actually believes in something, and not just the Dems' very rich corporate donors.

look at Zohran Mamdani in New York. He's a Muslim, foreign born, socialist. Plenty of things that by the same logic would make him loose. But he won the primary and odds are he'll Winn the mayor position.

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 63 points 3 days ago (1 children)

NYC does not extrapolate out to the US, or things would look very different these days.

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 56 points 3 days ago (17 children)

The issue is we've never actually tried to run a populist left candidate. So everyone saying, "it'll never work!" have no real bases for that statement. (the closest we've ever been was Sanders, and the DNC ensured that he was not going to be on the ballot.)

A TRUE LEFT POPULIST WILL WIN! in my opinion

[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 21 points 3 days ago

We actually did, his name was Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Sure if we hold him up to today's standards not a progressive by any means, but he campaigned on working class issues and helped steer the country out of the depression. He created virtually all our modern safety nets or their predecessors.

He was so popular a president that Congress amended the constitution to ensure no other president could have more than 2 terms. He was so popular congress was afraid it threatened the power of their branch of government.

Running on and actually accomplishing worker centric policy works.

And to fend of the inevitable yes he was not that progressive by today's measures and had a mountain of flaws. But his accomplishments were revolutionary for the country in his time.

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (30 replies)
[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 4 points 2 days ago

"After Zohran Mamdani's win, Trump reveals how scared he is to face Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez"

Yeah, because she would be running against Trump... That's a really silly take.

[–] Gork@sopuli.xyz 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

My right-wing friend finds AOC hot so he might actually vote for her if she runs.

[–] smeenz@lemmy.nz 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Right wingers love the idea of hate-sex

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 88 points 3 days ago (5 children)

you guys need ranked choice. I'd bet on most red voters not ranking multiple and just putting their evil fucker pick as #1. then you need more than one non evil candidate.

[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 46 points 3 days ago (1 children)

We tried. I watched rank choice requests fail time and time again, because people vote against it thanks to smear campaigns.

My buddy is in a city with rank choice, and after the most recent election, there was a push to get rid of it again. You can tell by who.

[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 33 points 3 days ago

yeah my bad you need guillotines first

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] peaceful_world_view@lemmy.world 20 points 3 days ago (2 children)

No way AOC is getting anywhere near the Presidency unless there is a full scale revolution. Sad, but true.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mrodri89@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago

She should definitely run but also let the people choose from a valid primary.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 32 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (6 children)

All the fucking second-order sexists here saying we can't elect a woman because two of the worst female candidates ever lost.

These are the same people who said Obama couldn't win because he was black. Not that they were racist, no they love black people, but they just want to make absolutely extra sure we don't actually try to elect one. Because they imagine their neighbor/uncle/coworker would look at everything going on and think "none of that is important, no black presidents". They're not racist, they just advocate for racism. And with this most facile of analyses they'll believe themselves to be politically savvy realists rather than reactionary children.

This is the cowardice that dooms liberalism. At every opportunity they want to worry about what their opponents will like and time after time will try to blame strategy or immutable characteristics for the failures of their do-nothing policies. Politics is about change. When people's lives suck you don't try to tell them we'll keep doing the same things. And whether the person talking change is a charismatic black man or a clown show, or even... A FEEEMALE, they'll vote for them.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] MushuChupacabra@lemmy.world 59 points 3 days ago (6 children)

As a non-American, electing AOC as president would be the way to speed run the repair of America's reputation internationally.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Cocopanda@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

She should run for the senate seat when chuck leaves office after he finally comes to his senses.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 46 points 4 days ago (21 children)

This DNC won't help any specific candidate in a primary, but they won't work against a specific candidate either.

That's all progressives and specifically AOC need, a fair primary.

We're on a huge inflection point, if we let some shirt bird neoliberals like Cuomo or Newsom win the primary, then they get to name the next DNC chair if they win the election

And we'll be right back where we were in 2020.

We can not afford to roll the dice on neoliberalism again, and AOC has the best shot right now. But a lot can change before the primary starts.

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 88 points 3 days ago (8 children)

"This DNC won't help any specific candidate in a primary"

I'll believe that when I see it.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] JDPoZ@lemmy.world 47 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 children)

...but they won’t work against a specific candidate either.

Absolutely demonstrably untrue.

They will definitely work against specific candidates.

They will change rules and ask super-delegates to ignore voters and choose their preferred candidate, the news networks most closely aligned with the DNC's goals will literally put a camera in front of an empty mic stand for 40 mins rather than show the candidate they don't want. They will compare that candidate winning states during the primary literally to Hitler saying it's like "the fall of Paris" or compare the supporters of the guy whose own extended family was murdered in the Holocaust to "brownshirts.".

They will support anti-choice Ds over progressives in primaries while claiming neutrality.

The DNC isn't representative of its constituents. They are the rich's secondary defense against "the left" (meaning anything even slightly to the left of 1990s Clinton policies).

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›