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
Primary Schumer, of course, but his term is up in 2028. AOC herself might be more focused on a separate race that particular year.
probably keeping her seat is more important than abandoning it.
I would absolutely vote for her, and as much as I want it to happen, I’m genuinely not sure that’s realistic.
He'll be 78 in 2028. He probably will bow out of politics by then to turn things over to a younger generation.
Wait, who am I kidding?
Dude you had me going at first lol
Headline in 2035: The corpse of Chuck Schumer is considering retirement from politics
Who would have guessed that "Weekend at Bernie's" was a documentary.
They've already done it. I forget her name, but the Democrat that was so old she was in a wheelchair and non-responsive for a long time. She passed away within the last four or five years, which finally ended her political career.
And then theres McConnell, the turtle who has had a couple strokes on live television. Keeps on chuggin.
you mean diane feinstein, she died from herpes zoster, aka shingles encephalitis, immunocompromised people are more likely to get meningitis, and encephalitis from shingles(which are typically painful rashes normally), one of the severe form of shingles. the other ones are usually also rare.
You're just saying that because an AOC win would conclusively disprove the DNC's mantra that Hillary and Kamala lost because of misogyny and not neoliberalism, so they'll be desperate to stop her from becoming the candidate.
I would love it if she did win and disproved it. I’m just cautious of assuming that it’s a slam dunk. And I am also very cognizant that she is a conservative boogeyman, and that she’s made a LOT of staunch enemies in the DNC establishment (I hope that last bit won’t matter as much in 28, but who knows)
DNC establishment candidates are proven losers IMO. Only Biden won as a DNC establishment candidate in the last 20 years. The rest of the milquetoast horseshit from the DNC has lost national elections regularly and thoroughly.
Obama won despite the DNC, not because of it, and he largely sat outside of its apparatus for his entire two terms. John Kerry was garbage. HRC was garbage. Harris would've been somewhat exciting if she'd been 2020 Harris, but instead she was a DNC robot candidate that had flipped all of her progressive positions to appease the DNC apparatus...with predictable results.
I wanna be clear: I am absolutely NOT defending DNC leadership. They are feckless in the extreme.
Agreed, neoliberalism needs to be discredited and thrown into the trash bin of history like Nazism mostly was.
In 28 the chance of fair elections is less than zero. I don’t imagine anything than every state being declared red regardless of outcome and of course nobody doing anything about it.
the amount of rigging from the last 2 election was not addressed one bit, and the MSM for obvious reasons will never report it as well.
If she is ever going to be president, she has to win a senate seat. Thats where we find out if its possible. I think it is becauae she isbwilling to put in thw work.
I hope it's as VP, though. I would love for her to run for president, but the country isn't close to mature enough for that to happen.
Waltz would be the perfect choice.
"AOC is amazing, but..."
I have never understood this rhetoric.
She is more than qualified, has enough experience where she is out there educating her colleagues & the public about governmental processes and barriers, AND she speaks in a way that resonates with the working class AND younger generations.
Her Among Us Twitch stream was a brilliant way to connect with her younger constituents and made her approachable.
She does the same thing Bernie does, going out to rural America and speaking with the working class voters that feel unheard and abandoned.
At Congress, she ain't fucking scared to speak truth to power.
And most important, she has demonstrated that she is impossible to buy.
This whole rhetoric that because she's a woman Americans won't vote for her:
No. Hilary is a crook and she still won the popular vote. If the electoral college wasn't a thing, she would have been president.
Kamala came in way too fucking late thanks to Biden. But even so, her policies were still pandering to corporations and the rich, although it is undeniable she would have been vastly superior to Trump which is why she got my vote.
Whether America is ready for a female president or not is not the issue.
America needs someone who will be strong against corporate interests and bring forth universal healthcare.
I think what's been proven is that the US will not vote overwhelmingly for a DNC robo-woman candidate.
It's still America. There are people who voted for two terms of Obama and then flipped to Trump. Hell, there are some people who voted for Biden in 2020 and then Trump in 2024.
Perhaps most voters in the country have absolutely zero fixed values or do any meaningful analysis into who they are voting for. It's vibes-based and perhaps always has been.
All that said, I don't think it's been proven or disproven that the US will not vote for a woman candidate that aligns with the country's "vibes" at the moment so to speak.
The data doesn't look very good that America will vote overwhelmingly for a woman for president based upon the limited results we have so far...but they did vote to send Harris into the east wing before she had been thoroughly unmasked as a corporate drone....so that's something positive.
It easily could be that the American electorate is just way more misogynist than it is racist. 🤷 We'll never know without running a reasonably charismatic woman candidate with non-corporate drone policies though.
It's because a large portion of America is both sexist and racist. She should be a no brainer to win, but Trump should have been a no brainer to lose.
I don't understand why people are so fucking thick to not understand this. If we're so lucky to have a fair and free election in 2028, we can't risk global stability to prove the DNC wrong by relying on a notoriously racist and misogynistic population of voters to choose a female person of color. Despite being one of the most qualified and intelligent members of congress, an AOC ticket is doomed to fail by her demonization by mainstream media and social media manipulation and propaganda.
Limiting all women because the party wants to shut out one woman. Democrats smeared Sanders for allegedly saying what you just said.
Yeah it sucks but it's the truth. I live by Chicago and a shocking amount of people I interact with drop racist or misogynistic comments without a thought around me because I'm a white guy.
Most comments I've heard about AOC are either who or that she's dumb. I've asked two people why she's dumb and they couldn't give me a solid reason.
Anyway I guess my point is anecdotally this lines up with a lot of interactions I've had in the last few years
its the same answers they gave about harris: "i dont like her, she is not smart, or discussed her policies. its pure sexism." from poc R voters
We can't pander to the worst of us.
You'd be shocked at how well people respond to someone genuine like AOC, especially because voters on all sides recognize her name and her spirit, especially because she makes healthcare access & relief her focus.
You have to be pragmatic, though. There's a time and place to push for progress, and this isn't either. You need to stop the house from burning down before you can renovate it.
If 2028 even happens, it'll be a fight to reclaim the country. That means the person with the best chance of winning needs to run. AOC is not that person this year.
You have to remember that the vast majority citizens aren't anywhere near as informed on anything related to politics as the people here are. This is by design thanks to mass media. You have to field a person that appeals to the most people, and a Hispanic woman doesn't do that.
It's really fucking stupid that things are this way, but people are really fucking stupid. Tim Waltz is a very likable old white man, and that's what will win an election.
The false pragmatism of timid complicity got us here.
It's not timid complacency to acknowledge that the country is sexist. Half the country doesn't even see them as people. I'd say the same thing if we were talking about an openly LGBTQ+ person too.
We need someone who isn't an insane fascist and has a long track record of trying to make things better. That's step one. After that, we can focus on step 2.
AOC being the VP pick will help the country shift more towards being ready for a female president, because she would be way more active than Harris was.
We did that in 2020. Turns out, step 2 is "move to the right and support genocide."
Yes but we're not talking about someone genuine like her, we're talking about her, specifically. I would love to see her win, but she's been heavily demonized by right wing media.
"We can't pander to the worst of us." is a righteous idea, but it's not tactically wise. Elections are a popularity contest, if you don't approach them as such you will likely lose. It very obviously doesn't matter how qualified a candidate is, it all boils down to pandering to enough demographics to win.