this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2024
68 points (94.7% liked)

politics

19050 readers
3755 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.
  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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Maga republicans will lose nothing if congress gets nuked.

Yeah except the election. MAGA has held the house now for two years and has jack shit to show for it. They've shown they can't govern. Lets keep it that way. Stop extending olive branches to these people acting in bad faith. I've heard and understand your points, but you're treating the house like there is time left on the clock to do anything and there simply isn't, and you haven't provided a single tangible thing to go after that both D' and R' could work on (I offered mj reform, I think that would be popular on both sides).

So you are simply wrong. Like flat out. There is only negative value for house Democrats to deepen or expand their relationship with house Republicans when they've already got the W. House Democrats don't need to get anything done in the next 4 months because they got the aid bill passed, and can point to the incompetence of Republicans as to why nothing else got done. There is 0 political gains to working or supporting Johnson. Its only political costs. Working with the Republicans any further would be like throwing the ball instead of taking a knee when you can just run out the clock.

Democrats got what they wanted. Its time to take their W and go back to their home districts and campaign. Leave R's with that shitsucking taste in their mouth.

See you have some of the cynicism necessary.. but..

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Who said it’s a fucking Olive branch? You?

They have the ability now to nuke any legislation that comes across. Dems already have the power.

Protecting him means concessions, it means moving the Overton window back to where it should be.

It means going on the offensive.

Instead you want memes and headlines. Take the pittance and go home. Is that it? Obstructionism is their play book. We start using it and it leads to the same dumb place.

It makes it easier for them to pass their fascist bullshit. Not harder.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Who said it’s a fucking Olive branch? You?

You bruh. That's your argument. Its what you've been arguing for this entire thread. Your argument, not mine.

That's what working with Republicans is. Its an olive branch. Its redemption for the Republicans being so clearly in the wrong in terms of strategy for the past 8 years. Like they've been governing for a long time and have actually nothing to show for it. Now you've found an ally in Mike Johnson and you are saying house Democrats should work with Mike Johnson to do "stuff" , i.e., pass laws in the House. You are silly if you think you'll get anything other than conservative legislation passed with Mike Johnson. And your argument is that House Democrats should? Bruh.

And if that isn't the case, I've asked you what laws Democrats should go for, like whats the material position here, whats the specific policy or legislation, and you've offered none. Your 'going on the offensive' is just handing R's the opportunity to turn a loss into a win. Its naive, poorly thought out, and you don't even have a single bill or law to offer that Democrats could use this strategy with. You simply aren't cynical enough to appreciate the cost of the strategy you've outlined, and its not clear you've even really though of it enough to have an answer considering you cant tell me what legislation they should go after.

Its incredibly naive and its generally kinda silly, the kind of piss-ant level "appeal to the moderates" analysis that Hillary ~~used to beat Trump~~ oh wait lose to Trump.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

You clearly are lacking in reading comprehension.

Or you’re just trolling to piss me off.

That's what working with Republicans is. Its an olive branch. Its redemption for the Republicans being so clearly in the wrong in terms of strategy for the past 8 years

No. It’s taking the best action to advance democratic policies. We won’t get any policies or influence with whoever comes next.

Welcome to a split congress. Your position would give them free rein to try and pass whatever they want in the house.

It’s not an olive branch. It’s a leash.

And if that isn't the case, I've asked you what laws Democrats should go for, like whats the material position here, whats the specific policy or legislation, and you've offered none. Your 'going on the offensive' is just handing R's the opportunity to turn a loss into a win

Sealioning. Go watch some political news. If you can’t find something worthwhile, you’re not paying attention.

And again, it is not handing them a win. They win if we do get rid of him just as much as we lose. We gain nothing by it, but we give up that leash.

Your way clears the way for the fascists to do whatever the fuck they want, with no motivation at all to come to the table. At least with Johnson on the leash, we can block most of what comes down; and maybe get something meaningful.

Which is probably better than the headlines we’ll get.