this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2026
176 points (97.3% liked)

politics

28910 readers
1907 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
 

A party that built its message around a strong, firm, and unequivocal case to end this war now would very suddenly draw attention to the undoubtedly dozens of congressional Democrats who would not echo this line. So what we get instead is limp process critiques, demanding pointless hearings, and bizarre attacks that Trump is not doing regime change fast enough. Polls repeatedly show the most common criticism of Democrats is not that they are too far left or too anti-war, but that they are too weak, that they don’t stand for anything.

Centering criticism of a deeply unpopular war on those carrying it out for not filling out the right paperwork or producing a satisfactory slideshow — rather than making clear, normative objections to a war of aggression — feeds directly into this perception. But perhaps it’s a perception Democratic leaders, and the pro-war, pro-Israel donors who fund their political careers, would prefer over the alternative.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We call this one "Democrats can never fail, they can only be failed"

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 2 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Explain your end game.

You tell people not to vote for the Dems, then the GOP keeps getting elected.

It's almost as if you want the GOP to win.

And if you're trying to build a strong, independent Left party, it's not working either.

[–] kittykillinit@lemy.lol 6 points 14 hours ago

Anti-republicans need to nominate better candidates.

The current Democrat party is controlled opposition and everyone who supports it is part of the problem.

[–] WatDabney@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

And if you’re trying to build a strong, independent Left party, it’s not working either.

That's not on the people who criticize the Democrats, but the people who defend them.

If it weren't for people slavishly defending the Democrats no matter how grotesquely right-wing they get, they'd have no choice but to shift back towards the left. But with their dedicated "less bad is good" apologists, they can keep on shifting right just so long as they remain a little bit less fascist than the Republicans, which means they can keep on raking in the corporate soft money in exchange for fucking all of us.

And they will.

[–] SpaceCrystal@piefed.social 10 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

It's liberal morons who always defend the Democrat party. No matter what facts we give them, they'll always make excuses for them & their politicians. It's one of the reasons why they're very despised by both leftists & conservatives & why I've become an Anarchist.

[–] Bloefz@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

You're right. It's why a two party system just can't turn out right.

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social -1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

So, no end game?

No actual plan?

[–] WatDabney@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Your questions have zero useful context. Are you asking about Trump's end game? The Democrats'? Their critics'? Their apologists'? Mine?

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I apologize for overestimating your reading skills.

[–] WatDabney@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

The first step to mastering your fear is to face it.

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 1 points 56 minutes ago

Again, you display poor reading skills.

"I apologize for overestimating your reading skills."

Nothing I wrote indicates fear.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 11 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

Keep apologizing for the failure of Democrats and see how many wins you rack up with that approach.