this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2025
343 points (99.4% liked)

politics

26173 readers
3293 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 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] henfredemars@lemdro.id 164 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Friendly reminder that we elected representative Adelita Grijalva and that Congress still refuses to actually swear her in after nearly a month.

Prepare to receive a poop emoji in response to your vote.

[–] Tm12@lemmy.ca 84 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Not congress. Mike Johnson. The dude who watches what his son jerks off to. Also, where are the Epstein Files?

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 11 points 4 days ago

Republicans. Every Republican supports it by keeping Johnson as their leader.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 23 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] Tm12@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 days ago

With his son’s sock that he originally owned? The Sinning Sock.

[–] sepi@piefed.social -4 points 4 days ago

I don't believe this cos I think the kid is straight. There's no way Moses Mike likes any of that.

[–] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml -1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Any federal judge can also swear her in

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Whether or not that's technically true, that's so far from how they normally do it that neither Republicans nor Neoliberal "the system is fine, actually. Just needs a few minor tweaks" Democrats and "independents" would ever accept it as legitimate or even consider going through with it in the first place.

This is a perfect example of how EXTREMELY wrong the system defenders are to ignore what the left has been warning about for several decades.

[–] wheezy@lemmy.ml 11 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

The Democrats have never had any purpose beyond defending "process". They will watch their system die; all the while saying "we followed the rules". It's exactly what the liberals role has always been. Their purpose was never to listen to the left. Their purpose has always been a place where left wing electoral politics go to die. They are continuing to serve that purpose now.

Do individual democrat politicians purposely do this? No, but they wouldn't have been allowed to be elected if they were the people that would do anything else.

Edit: I think we both agree. I just wanted to say that in addition to what you said.

[–] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 4 days ago (1 children)

A lot has changed in the 12 years since that article was published..

[–] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Nothing about federal law or the Constitution has changed that would prevent a federal judge from swearing in a member of Congress

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Except for all three branches being taken over by a fascist kakistocracy that ignores and invents laws at will and with absolute impunity, you mean? Sure.

I'd argue that it constitutes a pretty significant change, though.

Appointing anyone without the consent of Jericho Johnson might be de jure allowed and valid, but since it's against the wishes of the fascist regime, it's de facto not going to be allowed.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 77 points 4 days ago

Dems: yeah! Woo! We flipped two seats to D!

Every red state: Ok so we redrew the districts, we now have 2647277243 extra R seats.

[–] BigMacHole@sopuli.xyz 46 points 5 days ago (1 children)

NOT if there's anything WE can do About it!

-The DNC!

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 4 days ago

Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory world champions 40+ years running

[–] Arancello@aussie.zone 31 points 5 days ago

Until the election using the republican owned voting machines. Then we’ll see who will be in charge, again.

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 24 points 5 days ago (4 children)

When it comes to American elections ... I lost faith in their political leaders a long time ago .... I also lost faith in the people doing the electing ... or not doing the electing ... or just plain not doing anything to stop this train wreck of a nation.

[–] aubeynarf@lemmynsfw.com 15 points 5 days ago

Congrats. We didn’t.

[–] the_tab_key@lemmy.world 14 points 4 days ago

You need more of these: ... ... ... Looks like you ... Used all of your's.

[–] ILoveUnions@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

If you think you've already lost, you only assure that loss is guaranteed. Every step of the fight, you need to think, pretend, you have a chance. Few people are willing to join a movement that's already lost. People must never stop fighting and believing.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

Same. Except I’m surrounded and ruled by them.

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 11 points 5 days ago

Just as long as nothing else complicates the next elections! 🤭

[–] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world -2 points 4 days ago

Unless they get the opportunity to protest something happening halfway around the world again.