this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
1168 points (99.9% liked)

politics

21845 readers
3648 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
 

Summary

Democratic divisions intensified as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Nancy Pelosi sharply criticized Chuck Schumer for supporting a Republican-led funding bill to avoid a government shutdown.

AOC called Schumer's decision a "betrayal," urging Senate Democrats to reject the legislation backed by Trump and Elon Musk. Pelosi called the bill a "devastating assault" on working families.

Schumer defended his stance, arguing a shutdown would empower Trump and Musk further.

The controversy sparked suggestions among Democrats that AOC might challenge Schumer in a primary.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It's actually an incredibly based idea, but the public is too stupid to recognize it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean yes I would love to see it but what I’m also saying is that yes, the public is not going to support it

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

You're right about the public, but that also means there is no hope and no one should care or try.

If the people will only vote neoliberal or fascist, theres nothing to be done other than store food and water and hope you aren't noticed until complete societal collapse. There is no possible path to a decent society when both choices are fine with the poor dying to enrich their bribers.

I think after 24 years of holding my nose and voting Neoliberal, telling myself the lesser evil will somehow lead to salvation, and fighting for Sanders on 2 campaigns, I'm done participating. Harris was my last gasp of appealing to this cesspool's nonexistent sense of decency. I'm not going to endorse or signify the Neoliberals new meet in the middle low next cycle, where they call for "more humane" concentration camps as compromise. My hands are dirty enough voting for the good cop in this corpo fascist good cop/bad cop routine all this time.

George Carlin called it, the people suck so things really can't get better. We're a garbage people that largely despise the idea of an equitable society. Better collapse than perpetuating that. Not like people who only vote for which tribe to hurt deserve more.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I didn’t say don’t care or try. I’m saying third party isn’t the path.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

You're saying something to the left of what we have, a neoliberal party save a literal handful of spoilers they detest more than their fascist opposition that has proven eager to concede to fascists at every turn, and the Fascists themselves, isn't palettable to our people politically. I agreed with your point on that, It's a dark, dark reality.

If our people aren't ready for something to the left of those, and there really isn't anywhere further right to go, we're plotting military annexations and building extralegal concentration camps, where do you see this having even a slim margin to improve before collapse?

Because AOC isn't even that leftwing, she just looks like it from inside the burgeoning fourth Reich.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago

The only way this is true is if losing is more based than winning.