Huh. There's an exception to Betteridge's Law.
this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2025
130 points (81.6% liked)
politics
21931 readers
3498 users here now
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
In what sense is anyone saying Bill Clinton is politically useful?
This is the sort of thing that makes me feel more sympathy for the Democratic party. The party simply can't win with the left.
The party leadership worked against Sanders candidacy because they are convinced a liberal can't win in America. I don't agree, but recognize with Nixon and Reagan dominating over leftist candidates, Carter ekeing out a win as a centrist, Clinton winning convincingly as a centrist, and Obama winning as a rather vague candidate, recent history has given limited reason think a leftist national candidate is a safe bet.
But if voters are supporting Cuomo and the party doesn't intervene the party is the wrong for not ignoring the will of the voters and tanking his candidacy.
I mean I get it. The left wants their candidates to win, but the lack of consistency is grating. It makes the centrist seem more sensible.
2016, 2020, 2024: bernie would have steamrolled trump. But the dems can't have an outsider - even one who's better at articulating their party goals and values - so here we are.
Or look at Al Franken who got pushed out over nothing. Your examples are cherry picked. Plus, wasn't Cuomo forced out?
Yeah, it seems like there's one party actually holding greater than 60% of their bad actors accountable and another one rewarding bad behavior... But, sure, let's complain about how 60% is not enough instead of dealing with the reality we find ourselves in.
Welcome to lemmy.
Yes, Cuomo was forced out, but he is attempting a comeback by running for Mayor of NYC against Eric Adams. Aren't there any non-shitty Democrats in the city who want that job?
Non-shitty people see what happens when they go up against shitty people.
The party protects the shitty.
If someone wants to be a politician that’s a disqualifying factor to being a politician. So yes he’s a fucking shitbag. People who want to improve our lives would rather do anything than politics because that’s just theatre for self absorbed sociopaths
it's also theater some of us have to start doing. not me though. i'm far too corruptible and my soul too tainted already. i'd turn into one of the shitbags, i'm sure
Al Franken was pushed out overbeing a popular progressive who could have easily won a presidential election.
Cuomo was protected till the last possible second, to the point his brother had to resign from CNN over it if I'm not mistaken.
If you're trying to argue the party hasn't protected abusive men for the last 30 years...
Buddy, I know a guy that's got some oceanfront property out in Arizona you may be interested in
Bro, I'm an OG Clinton hater. I didn't say it didn't happen, I said they are cherry picked examples.
didn’t say it didn’t happen, I said they are cherry picked examples
You seemed to be trying to have an argument with the author, and I feel it's a reasonable assumption they won't see your comment...
But that's kind of the point, the two examples is a neoliberal who faced zero consequences while president, and a progressive who literally didn't lay a finger on anyone, and it was years before he was in office.
The point is all the abusive men they're still protecting.
Al Franken was low hanging fruit. The most powerful never get prosecuted.
Can we please stop eating our own while the goddamn house is on fire? We’re gonna need them for the bucket brigade.
- step 1 put out the fire
- step 2 eat the mfers who set the house ablaze
- step 3 eat the rich
- step 4 tend to our own dirty laundry
Exactly. We got the most prolific traitor in American history dismantling America on behalf of the worst tyrant on the planet, with the help of enthusiastic Nazis, and we're supposed to be more concerned with what our guys are doing with their wieners? If they aren't raping children like Republicans, then put it aside and start making plans to drag the miserable traitors to their well-earned punishments.
Why do you assume all Democrats are trying to put out the fire? Schumer and 10 Senate Democrats just sold out the rest of the party and handed Trump a huge victory. We need to look at every single Democrat and make sure their buckets are full of water instead of gasoline before we decide to work with them.
I agree. They lost to trump AGAIN. He's so divisive they should have been able to win at least once.
They lost to trump AGAIN
They surrendered.
Well for one, I think Schumer made a mistake here and if I lived in NY I’d be calling him up to tell him just that.
But I can see his logic as to why he went the way he did. He fears a govt shutdown is only going to let the foxes eat more of the henhouse.
I think the public would have forgave the dems and I think a shutdown would have helped raise things to the fever pitch needed to suck all of the oxygen out of the room up there. Time will tell I guess.
If you want to make sure they’re carrying water, then we gotta be the reservoir. You gotta add your drop to the bucket and I gotta add mine. That starts by calling, funding the causes you believe in, and then getting out in the streets and being real loud.
Even if what you're saying about Schumer is true, it would still be gross incompetence to achieve this goal in the manner that he did. Even if you believe his whole, "Musk wants a shutdown," argument, he allowed every single House Democrat, even those in vulnerable seats, to put themselves in a vulnerable position by refusing to fund the government, then threw them all under the bus by saying, "actually, funding the government is just too important." Why would he damage his own party like that?
Let's be real here; the stock market has been tanking all week because of the tariffs, it would have gotten even worse with a shutdown, and Schumer takes a shitload of money from Wall Street. The day before the vote, his donors started telling him how important they think funding the government is, he caves, and the stock market makes a decent comeback the next day. He sold out his party to the donors, and gave Trump a huge win in the process.
Your mistake in this is thinking the Democrats are "your own". You need to clean house before you can take on outside enemies.
This is precisely the same line of thinking that helped get the fire elected to the White House.
It’s death by a thousand cuts.
Not everyone who doesn’t align with you 100% is your enemy.
Not everyone who doesn’t align with you 100% is your enemy.
Last time centrists got a candidate they didn't align with 100%, they formed a PAC to get McCain elected. Ever since then, the giant hypocrites have been lecturing everyone to vote blue no matter who.
But someone who only aligns with you 20% is not your friend.
This is precisely the same line of thinking that helped get the fire elected to the White House.
This isn't a "line of thinking"; it's just how things are. The Democrats are not your friends, they will not defend you and you can't count on them. If that sounds like the reason Trump won, then great, because that literally is the reason Trump won and if you want to avoid a repeat of 2024 you'll have to do something other than repeat 2024. Abusive relationship logic doesn't get voters.
right? idk why people keep thinking politicians are on their side.
Lol. When you put Bill Clinton, Andrew Cuomo and every other horrendous caricature of evil in the democratic party as "our own", you've doomed yourself to losing in perpetuity.
And this is how abusive men get their protection.
Palestinian-americans, the undocumented, trans people, and now abuse victims. Who's next under the bus?
Anyone but white men for Democrats.
Boring
"Registered Democrats were given a list of 11 Democrats who either have announced they are running for New York City mayor or are seen as a possible mayoral candidate. They were asked if the Democratic primary for mayor were being held today, for whom would they vote. Andrew Cuomo receives 31 percent support; Eric Adams receives 11 percent support; Zohran Mamdani receives 8 percent support; Jumaane Williams receives 7 percent support; Scott Stringer receives 6 percent support; Brad Lander receives 5 percent support; Jessica Ramos and Adrienne Adams each receive 4 percent support; and Zellnor Myrie, Michael Blake, and Whitney Tilson each receive 1 percent support. "
I'm not a New Yorker, but of that entire list I only recognize the names of Cuomo and Adams, and for both their misconduct. So this could be a situation of simple name recognition especially since only 31% said Cuomo.
Also on election day for the Presidency in 2024 we had this news:
"Google searches for Biden’s candidacy surged on Election Day: Though Google has not released the exact number of queries, the trend spiking on Election Day highlights a disconnect for some Americans in the lead-up to the election. Many supporters were left confused, with searches peaking in Pennsylvania’s urban centers and spreading state by state as the day continued." source
The quote about Biden's candidacy and at least a portion of the Cuomo answer to me sound simply like low information voters. So I don't see the poll results showings Cuomo's lead (again at only 31%) as the electorate forgiving him for his past transgressions, but more likely they don't even know about them and perhaps just want a known alternative to Adams.
Like many people of a certain age, I feel like I owe Monica Lewinsky an apology.
Me too. I said truly awful things about her when she was so young and he was one of the world's most powerful men
Yeah. I’m not a realist by any means — if anything, I’m a constructivist and I think we can do better — but power exists. It may make me vomit in my own mouth and want to become a realist and sock someone but we can do better.
It’s like that Jesus guy said: washing hoes feet will get you to Heaven. (I don’t think he said those exact words but you know Mary Magdalene’s feet were clean and smelling fresh. Anointed with fragrances and oils and everything. Jesus loved feet.)
tarantino is Jesus confirmed
Don’t mess with the Jesus, man.
i dont think theres evidence of mary magdalene being a prostitute, i believe this misunderstanding came about due to mistranslations of 'young woman' or 'unmarried woman' or somthing.
Edit: Jesus washed her feet because they both were fantastic at cuddling and they were in a healthy platonic relationship where boundaries were clearly expressed and respected. It was sweet.
Hmmmmm... Yes
Of course they will. The Democratic Party’s only bedrock ideological stance is preserving neoliberal capitalism. All of their other supposed policy positions are merely fundraising slogans. If you feel compelled to downvote this comment because you rightfully want to mount an opposition to the fascist Republicans, please consider how ineffective Democrats have been in that effort for 40 years and start reforming the party. If you need help, it starts with actual standards and policies.