this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2024
288 points (99.3% liked)

politics

19240 readers
2398 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] xenomor@lemmy.world 196 points 6 days ago (4 children)

I’m glad congressional Democrats are finally taking steps to deal with their sclerotic, ineffective and increasingly out-of-touch leadership and building a future with younger—oh wait.

[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 70 points 6 days ago (3 children)

The thing that made me so pessimistic about the future of this country was when I learned that the people who advised Hillary's 2016 campaign were still advising Harris' 2024 campaign. They failed multiple times and the consequences have been catastrophic, but they held on to their positions anyway. I have no reason to think they won't be back in 2028, because the people who have a say in who gets party leadership are people selected by the old leadership. We need a borderline hostile takeover of the Democrat party, and after Trump did it to the Republicans, the existing powers in the Democrat party only entrenched themselves further.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 32 points 6 days ago (1 children)

the people who advised Hillary’s 2016 campaign were still advising Harris’ 2024 campaign.

And still running the DNC.

Biden and Kamala inherited everything from Hillary, the people behind the scenes are the same, and are still likely listening to Hillary

She's like our Dick Cheney

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I'd almost believe that Hillary ordered her people to sabotage the campaign if it wasn't the exact same "centrist" message the establishment Dems have been pushing since Carter.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago (2 children)

She wouldn't have needed too.

The party burns money at an insane rate, and only gets money thru the "victory fund" which (I'm not even exaggerating) is money laundering.

They've been doing it since 2015, it's the status quo now.

Whoever has the keys to that donation machine is the DNC, because they control the money. And because the reason the VF can take so much,his it's taking the limit for state parties they defacto control the state party. If a state doesn't join the agreement, the DNC doesn't support that state. We only have numbers for 2016, but those states average less than 0.5% of what the DNC was supposed to have paid.

We'll see what happens at the 2/2/25 DNC chair election, there's actually a decent chance we keep someone good. But if they get another money hungry neoliberal in there, we have to accept the people who run the DNC no longer represent Dem voters and they're unwilling to listen. We'll have three years before the next primary starts winding up, and it may be finally time to push a third party.

[–] nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It’s almost as if the gop pays the dems to be stoopid. That would explain a lot.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Replace "GOP" with "corporate oligarchy" and you're getting it!

[–] nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl 2 points 5 days ago

same difference amirite

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 3 points 6 days ago

But if they get another money hungry neoliberal in there, we have to accept the people who run the DNC no longer represent Dem voters and they're unwilling to listen.

You still haven't accepted it?

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 24 points 6 days ago

They failed multiple times and the consequences have been catastrophic,

They succeeded in the only thing that matters to Democratic leadership: They kept a progressive from winning the nomination.

[–] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 3 points 5 days ago

The mayor from Jaws 1 was still the mayor in Jaws 2.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 47 points 6 days ago (2 children)

The future of this country is not in the hands of the Democratic party if this is the way of things.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 52 points 6 days ago

Leadership Democrats: Fumble the ball for three downs, then throws an interception

"Well, its no longer my fault if the opposition scores."

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 16 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The democrats still think the populace is smart enough to look at the alternative and choose the less-worse option.

The country proves them wrong at every turn.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 20 points 6 days ago

The democrats still think the populace is smart enough to look at the alternative and choose the less-worse option.

The problem is this attitude and the literally brain dead take that this is in any way strategic voting.

Democrats are a "barely, sometimes maybe not, less-worse option". And they get to stay that way by constantly being presented as the "less-worse" option. But they aren't. They are the enablers of the "more-worse" option every time. They sell out their base at every turn.

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 6 days ago

Follow the money.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -1 points 6 days ago

The last guy was in his 80s....