this post was submitted on 12 May 2026
7 points (100.0% liked)

politics

30199 readers
2265 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 month ago (18 children)

Many believe Harris lost in 2024 because voters viewed her as too progressive, and that Ocasio-Cortez could face the same problem.

Who’s this “many”? Kamala lost because of her Joe Biden neolib policies, her hard heel-turn to the right, and her “nothing will change, we are the most lethal military” stance on the Middle East.

Instead of reassuring the masses who she thought were a shoe-in, she tried to appease the “I’ll never vote for a black woman” crowd, which alienated the former and would never have worked on the latter.

It was either the greatest miscalculation ever, lead by Third Way focus groups, or someone tugged the leash. Either way, with the GOP rat fucking that was almost certainly happening to some degree.

Pretty shitty of Newsweek to pretend that progressive policies are unpopular with a majority of Americans.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] areakode@riskeratspizza.com 2 points 1 month ago (5 children)

The DNC is not gonna be happy about this... 😆

[–] ALoafOfBread@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Sure they will be. They'll look at the poll results, throw them in the garbage, and run Newsom like they were already planning to

[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And then: OH noes! Democracy is in danger. Give us $10.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

And then: OH noes! Democracy is in danger. Give us $10.

And then they get $1.5b+ again and lose again or at best scrape a narrow win against either Trump, Vance, or another profoundly incompetent and obviously fundamentally corrupt candidate.

[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

ilovedemocracy.jpg

[–] tryitout@infosec.pub 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They weren't happy about Bernie and look at the fucking mess they caused.

[–] dreamkeeper@literature.cafe 1 points 1 month ago

They're gonna have a harder time painting all progressives as sexists and racists when we're going apeshit over AOC. I like her even more than Sanders.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's well past time to ride roughshod over them.

[–] mattyroses@lemmy.today 2 points 1 month ago

If I can humbly suggest another solution . . .

[–] protist@retrofed.com 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The DNC is currently up shit creek. Many other major Democratic organizations are out fundraising them by a wide margin. Many "true blue" Democrats are pissed as hell at DNC leadership and how utterly spineless and opaque they're being. I don't think we're going into this next election cycle with a DNC that's powerful enough to thumb the scales in that way

[–] Akh@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They are protecting the Epstein class

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I.E. protecting themselves.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Many believe Harris lost in 2024 because voters viewed her as too progressive

What are they talking about

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They're drinking the kool aid.

Harris lost because she never should have been nominated. Before she was nominated she was polling at 2% among Democrats. Nobody wanted her. And her campaign offered zero new ideas or new energy or new solutions, basically promising to be Biden 2.0 (just without the trust carried over from Obama's presidency). Obviously that didn't work, and (just like Hillary), 'I'm not Trump' wasn't enough to get her elected.

Her being progressive had NOTHING to do with it.

[–] iocase@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (8 children)

There's also the unfortunate consideration that she's a woman. A black woman. That's like playing on hardcore+ permadeath mode when it comes to elections...

I wish it wasn't that way but it's the reality in the US if you want a meaningful shot of winning... There is an unfortunate amount of voters who just won't vote for a woman or a POC...

Edit: it seems I triggered a lot of people intent on shooting the messenger. I should make it clear I don't believe this myself, but it seems a lot of people are unused to seeing opposing views on this backed by sources.

Speaking of which, after reading some sources, it sounds like education is a pretty strong counter to these biases, although it needs to start a long time before an election. You don't do 4 years of education in the 8 months leading up to the presidential election... It needs to start now.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com 1 points 1 month ago (15 children)

If she throws her hat into the ring I fully expect the DNC to sabotage her at every opportunity.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If you actually believe she'll win I have another bridge to sell you

Knowing the DNC, you'll end up again with Biden

[–] brownsugga@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

fuck off with that negativity

[–] berno@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Because toxic positivity has been working so well the past ten years

[–] thlibos@thelemmy.club 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What positivity is that exactly?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Doorbook@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The democratic party funded by AIPAC will rather see Trump for a third time than having AOC as president.

[–] chrischryse@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (15 children)

Rather than having a woman as president*

load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›