It won't matter. MAGA will still vote for him. He could sign every one of them up for a public flogging and they would still vote for him. MAGA wants a king, they need to be led around like sheep.
this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2026
234 points (99.6% liked)
politics
28304 readers
2221 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
I am still thinking they are only suspending it until the Snowflake in Chief is replaced.
They shouldn't bother
Cowards. The whole lot of them
Trump: hold my diet Coke
Trump:
I can go lower
And that is why Shitler has told the media to stop polling him. The whiny thin-skinned bitch hates bad numbers when they're real and about him.
And yet you have people on here bitching about how Obama/Biden Clinton where so much worse because Dems bad.
Still wild to me that people continue to act shocked that Dem voters have higher standards than Republican voters...
And they still want the path forward to be "dem voters just vote for anyone" while we're actively living thru how that worked out for Republicans.
Like, wouldn't the logical path be to ensure the next candidate to make it to the general is charismatic and has policy at least as far to the left as the Dems voter base?
We could just run candidates who are more progressive, and then when they win, they'll actually try to fix shit. Then we won't just hand it back to Republicans like Biden did.
I just can't see any logic in your position
The problem with Dems is they only vote in the fucking presidential elections.
What we need is massive turnouts in school / city / state elections pushing progressive candidates.
Presidential electrons are TOO LATE to start nitpicking because Republicans run LITERAL child rapists.
In national elections is blue no matter what, and I don't want to hear bitching.
State / local, absolutely primary any corporate democrat and get progressives in there.
Within a few election cycles they will rise up and then you'll have them on the national stage as well.
The problem is retrospective rose colored lenses that dismiss the win that is our new goalposts. Obama didn't suck. He helped us expect even more by moving things forward.
Proposing running better candidates isn't the same as 'genocide joe' was objectively worse and did x/y/z things that means the D's are bad compared even to the current situation. It'd be lovely to get some younger, more progressive sorts out there, but when the alternative is what we have now and people stay home because someone doesn't pass their ideals test that's a bad trade for all of us.
Proposing running better candidates isn’t the same as ‘genocide joe’ was objectively worse and did x/y/z things that means the D’s are bad compared even to the current situation
If we ran a better candidate...
Then people wouldn't be saying that stuff about them.
Like, those people weren't the reason Biden lost. They were trying desperately to warn everyone that Biden was going to lose.
And a big part of why Kamala lost is she didn't understand that and thought people personally didn't like Biden, so she literally and repeatedly said she'd have made all the same decisions as Biden.
Like, you do get that right?
If a women says a wound is infected and without amputation the patient will die, if the patient refuses amputation and dies, it doesn't mean we burn the medicine woman as a witch for killing him.
It means next time we should listen to her when she warns us, because she was right.
All youre worried about, is burning the witch because that makes you feel like you solved the problem and are preventing it. But you're not, so you're gonna keep burning innocent's and genuinely believing your the solution and not the one ensuring people keep dying of infections.
You're just causing even more damage.
And a big part of why Kamala lost is
People don't understand how voting between two candidates works.
Like, you do get that right?
Ironic.
I’m sorry, but I don’t follow how their comment on Kamala Harris losing displays a lack of understanding on voting between two candidates.
My understanding is that in such an elections people either vote for one, the other, or abstain. They vote for one over the other because they either like the one enough or dislike the other enough. They abstain when they don’t feel strongly about either. Does that sound right to you?
My understanding of what the person you responded to said is essentially that people didn’t like Biden because of his policy and were on track to abstain because they didn’t dislike (or weren’t worried about) Trump enough. Harris wrongly thought people disliked Biden personally but did like his policy, so stayed that course. That led to people not liking her and therefore abstaining while Trump riled up his base that for some reason liked him.
What am I missing here?
In a two party system, either one wins, or the other, which means for the Democrats to win, mathematically, all they need to be is slightly better than Trump, and so, they constantly run candidates that are horrible, but not quite as bad, this maximising corporate donations while staying in office.
Now, if you're an informed voter, you'll recognise this, and demand better. But if you're the DNC, who despise their voters enough to do this in the first place, you'll conclude you only lost because the voters are too stupid to do the math.
I would be more inclined to view it as she's actively trying to dissuade people from helping the patient that everyone knows is sick.
I would be more inclined to view it as she’s actively trying to dissuade people from helping the patient that everyone knows is sick.
I think the issue is you're saying "she" meaning Hillary or Kamala...
Meaning that because I used the example of a medicine woman/witch, you seem to have assumed it represented Hillary/Kamala just because it's a woman.
Is that what happened?
No, I'm using 'she' in the context of the medicine woman in your story, or more simply, those continually suggesting non-support for the Democrat party because of their failings. The math of our system allows for two parties at most in the sense of presidential elections.
Rather than seeking to push people away from the D's it would be a far more beneficial thing to work to implement local and state level rank choice or similar system votes. Until that happens it's a choice of 2 options, and one, while dull and stagnant, is leagues ahead of the other in terms of treating the population with some level of civility and dignity.
those continually suggesting non-support for the Democrat party because of their failings.
That may be the confusion...
Because absolutely no one had said anything Bout that till now...
Rather than seeking to push people away from the D’s
No one's doing that either.
Hillary/Kamala are not the party.
Neoliberals are not the party.
None of them have any political power anymore, especially not at the DNC.
This sentiment exactly has been the primary DNC election strategy for the past 10 years. How has it worked out for America?
No. Just no. We have to demand better and actively seek out better candidates in the primaries. The age of corporate hegemony must come to an end if the country is to survive.
Not for that ride-or-die 38%, I bet.