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 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
It’s worth watching the whole video, AOC is the type of politician that actually has a chance to have a party that represents the working class.
I hope the Democrats can figure out before the last minute that she's a really viable candidate for President.
Most D's are captured by most of the same corporations and oligarchs as the R's. They will never allow a working class movement. Only corporate-whore lite.
If so, they are in for hard wake-up call. Most corporations/oligarchs are rapidly shifting their allegiance to Trump. Those sweet donations will stop flowing to Dems.
Perhaps this is one of the reasons why the Dems are also shifting right: to capture back corporate donors, instead of listening to the wants and needs of their base.
Welcome to Democratic neoliberalism.
Yes I think that’s possible, but it’s a strategy that will surely fail. They cannot very well pass the GOP on the right, and they cannot out-Trump Trump. The 2024 election has shown that there were insufficient moderate voters. The upcoming cycle will teach the Dems that there are now also insufficient moderate donors.
Only chance to win is to go towards economic populism, and with Trumps billionaire cabinet it has never been easier.
The leadership doesn't care, they're already set.
this “not pure enough to be purely really absolutely 100% air quotes left left” talk Is what helped Trump get in office. but I suspect you know that
And the “You can’t mention the shortcomings of the Dems or else you want Trump” talk is what helped Kamala lose the office. but I suspect you know that
But why talk about the failings of one person when we can concentrate on the more achievable goal of fixing stupid for half the population? /s
Jaysus, liberals should just admit that they themselves benefit from growing wealth inequality as much as the right does. Who are the ones who keep voting down to build affordable housing in proudly blue states, especially California and New York? Why should the working class vote for a party that make empty promises and giving only breadcrumbs?
Just sit out guys! Don’t want to be associated with “liberals”!
Yup, total in denial. Liberal policies has been "we're not our opponent" instead of addressing housing crisis and job offshoring.
If the liberals goes further left than they are now, then they shouldn't complain why the Trump phenomenon exist. It says a lot more on liberal policies than on people in general.
My micropenis submarine has already banned AOC from X.com because I saved drowning underaged malaysian soccer players from the pedos in the so-called british special forces.
They know she's popular enough to win a general election one day, just as they knew Bernie was. But the moderate crowd would rather lose with one of their own than win with a progressive
I mean AOC might become president, that isn't gonna magically get progressive policies passed. You still need 218 US congressional districts to also elect progressives.
Edit: And also 50 sentors
Maybe. Republicans don't have this issue though, it sorta remains to be seen for dems.
No she's not. She is a women and Americans well not vote for a woman for president. Sorry it is the truth and they have to stop doing that.
Find me a woman who isn't a center-right politician who has ever run. People didn't vote for women because the women who ran are assholes
Hillary Clinton won the popular vote.
At this point I'm concerned for her safety. She's one of our last hopes.
If it was Russia, she would have already fell out of a window.
We're probably not far behind, considering most of our top officials are obviously Russian assets.
Can private security be crowdfunded? /s
A lot of others "losing" secret service protection is quite a clue to how the new regime expects violence and intimidation to be enacted.
Really? I mean she might be great but she is a women. America choose trump over a women. If the Dems run a women again then they deserve to loose again. They you and me might be fine with a women president but America is not.
Why the Democrat party doesn't capitalize on that is proof the billionaires control everything
“Democrat party” 👍🏻
Saying "proof" is not enough here. Can you elaborate?
You're asking for proof of billionaire political capture? How about superdelegates, or the billionaires on stage at the DNC, or the Democrats bending the knee to AIPAC by pushing out AOC?
A "young" 74 year old with throat cancer
You're asking for proof that billionaires control everything?
Oh yes, here comes the billionaire controlling what I write here:
Ni!
She's in a tough spot because she dislikes a lot of what the Democratic party is doing and also refuses to even meet with lobbyists let alone take their money. To a ton of everyday people these are very good things but to either of the parties this is an enemy to the party that doesn't have the firepower to win an election. Of course, I would absolutely love to be wrong on this but history (especially recently) is not on her side.
In the 2020 primary Bernie and Warren were regularly leading in donations. And in 2016 and 2024 Trump won despite raising less money throughout most of the campaign. Big money is not the be all and end all of politics, and when people believe in a candidate large sums can be raised.
She's is a fucking sheepdog, that's all she is. Giving disenfranchised voters the illusion that if they stick around long enough, they too can have a seat at their table. She's a snake in the grass that cannot be trusted.
With this attitude you must trust absolutely 0 politicians i guess? Where do you go from there?
I'm with you. I mean I agree with their sentiment and I think AOC is the same as the rest. She is after all a part of the machine.
That said, it's worth distinguishing the difference between trust and hope. I always hope.
Why do you say that? Everything that I've heard her say has been principled and thoughtful. I haven't read anything about her actions that I find problematic either.
So... citation needed?
Many citations needed. Or is all of that just your opinion provided without reasoning?