this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
252 points (94.1% liked)

politics

21931 readers
3648 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AidsKitty@lemmy.world 7 points 1 hour ago

She is her own person and has to live with the consequences of her choices like everybody else. It's all in the past now and just a footnote in history.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

I am wondering if the mods of news@lemmy.world and politics@lemmy.world regret censoring the people who rightfully said these things and it would cost us the election. Like there's mods in here who go "yeah that sucks, I knew it." but also just defended Biden/Harris and removed good faith users who posted citations that even their beloved Media Bias Bot said was a good source.

They did it, banned the people who said it, and then people went "where are all those critics now? i guess putin turned them off! hurr hurr haw haw!"

Genuinely wonder if they question their choices of just doing this for free with literally zero benefit to their website and the country as a whole.

[–] Lasherz12@lemmy.world 23 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

Honestly this behavior is going to keep getting highlighted from Biden because he was an absolute stubborn idiot. He had polling showing him losing to Trump with over 400 electoral votes for MONTHS before dropping out. He blamed his family for staying in as long as he did, obviously it was him or what was left of him.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 hours ago

History will not look kindly on Biden for fucking over his one job of stopping Trump. Didn't arrest him, didn't defeat him, didn't stop most of the Jan 6 protestors, didn't go after the enablers of his actions, didn't really stop anything Trump did to avoid debt and jail and we ended up with him for Round 2, Even Worse This Time.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

He blamed his family for staying in as long as he did

Real ted cruz moment, that.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 17 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

WDYM "let"? What was he gonna do? Sniff her?

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

He probably said something vague about decorum.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

If you run into Biden can you let him know I decorumed his mom last night.

[–] Hugin@lemmy.world 22 points 7 hours ago

His legacy is in the toilet so congratulations advisors.

[–] MetalMachine@feddit.nl 35 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Sounds like an excuse. She could've had a different stance but didn't. Because she's the same thing. She was asked point blank how she's any different than Biden and she couldn't answer.

[–] Doom@ttrpg.network 4 points 6 hours ago

she's setting up for 2028. assuming we have elections

[–] Hello_there@fedia.io 57 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

It's ridiculous to think that Harris couldn't have done what she wanted. Once you're named the nominee, that's it. They're not going to back out.

[–] nickhammes@lemmy.world 40 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

If she was unwilling to break from him because of his wishes, even if she was theoretically able, that speaks volumes about her as a leader.

[–] MisterOwl@lemmy.world 9 points 4 hours ago

If she runs again, we lose again.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 10 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

The problem was her campaign was largely run by Biden's people. He clearly was interfering with her campaign and she kept trying to make the most of it.

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 2 points 1 hour ago

Did she ever say that publicly? No. So she did not make the most of it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 26 points 11 hours ago

Suddenly her campaign choices make a lot more sense...

[–] Lunar_Voyager@lemmy.world 49 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

The way democrats talk: "We're turning the page and letting the daylight in!"

The way democrats act with a majority: "We couldn't get any daylight this time, but we did pass these bipartisan flashlights which are known to explode occasionally due to republicans demanding amendments be added to the batteries."

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 11 hours ago

"We've also means tested the flashlights, so those who recall the time before the great darkness get less of the flashlights, and anyone who has flashlights that explode will be required to have a daily check of their pupils to ensure they've been good at not looking at the daylight."

[–] Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 136 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

Let's blame Joe so Kamala can run again.

Not fooling me, DNC. I smell what you're cooking.

[–] Helvetica@sh.itjust.works 15 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

She's free to run again, but this time she has to win the primary. And that's unlikely. It's rare in modern times for someone to lose a Presidential election and get another shot at it, Nixon and Trump are the only two in over a hundred years.

[–] Doorbook@lemmy.world 19 points 9 hours ago

You seem to forget what they did to sanders. If they want a specific candidate they will make sure they win.

[–] keys42@literature.cafe 2 points 6 hours ago

Also Adlai Stevenson in the 50s although he lost both times.

[–] robbinhood@lemmy.world 50 points 14 hours ago (7 children)

I want to tell myself that there's no way in hell they would let this happen, let alone make it happen.

Then I remember it's the DNC.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 31 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

It’s not like they colluded to kneecap Bernie’s campaign. Wait…

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Omgboom@lemmy.zip 14 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Same reaction here, and the DNC is just dumb enough to do it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] robbinhood@lemmy.world 103 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

To be honest, this is just a signal that she probably wouldn't have been a good leader. Better than Trump, sure, but that bar is so low it's a tripping hazard.

She should have told Biden to pound sand after locking up the nomination.

But we should verify the claim before passing judgement.

[–] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 4 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

If I was kamala I would have slammed joe. For the good of the country, of course.

[–] robbinhood@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

I think the best move would have been a substantial but firm and respectful break was the way to go forward.

If Kamala pushes back too hard against Joe, the establishment will question whether she grateful for his support and the opportunity he provided.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 33 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

Honestly, her campaign already signaled that. This, if true, just reinforces it. It also reinforces that Biden was a bad leader, which he was.

Obligatory: I voted for Harris and Biden and dems down ticket every election since I've been old enough to vote.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Obligatory: I voted for Harris and Biden and dems down ticket every election since I’ve been old enough to vote.

Man I am getting sick of needing to say this ahead of time/to anyone who goes "well if you criticized our candidates of their serious and actual issues, you must be a Republican!"

Definitely. And as soon as you say something leftist you're accused of not voting or "throwing away your vote" so you can't complain. Like, I get it. "Have the day you voted for" etc, but libs are pointing fingers at the wrong people. I've said it like a million times before, but sooo many of my leftist friends reluctantly voted Kamala when they were vehemently opposed to her stance on Palestine and now feel like they sold out for nothing. Like, at least if they hadn't voted they could say they stood for something. Now they don't even have a high horse to ride into the apocalypse on. The way libs will break your spirit is wild. They have more energy to fight leftists than republicans.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] metaldream@sopuli.xyz 5 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

As far as I'm aware, Biden controlled most of the campaign money at least initially. either way it's still a pretty weak excuse for Harris.

Biden really fucked us in so many ways though, I'm happy to blame him for losing the election as well. I mean he was the one who thought gaslighting us about the economy was a winning move, he put Harris in a terrible position to begin with. Not to mention deciding to run again in the first place, appointing a Trump collaborator as AF, refusing to exercise his power, etc etc

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Honestly, I kinda don't buy the idea Biden controlled Harris. Biden could have in 2008, but not in 2024. We all saw his term. He could be great, but when he slowed and floundered, it hampered his goals.

I'm torn between:

"I don't think an adult woman would instantly bind herself to an old man, she can have bad ideas on her own."

"I don't think she had everything planned out, she took advice from those around her, and the advice was shit but it's hard to get anything from outside this POV without getting even worse feedback."

But either way, I'm kind of glad that parts of the DNC is admitting fault after royally fucking up a second time and giving us Trump again. But I was also told they learned mistakes from 2016, and clearly they didn't, and must have fired everyone who did.

I wish Harris won merely as a stop-gap who is younger and more coherent, maybe could have gotten someone better next primary. Would have been messy and I would prefer anyone else, but not as bad. But it wouldn't have stopped the fascist uprising we're having, just keeping the cyst growing until it popped. If Biden didn't get Trump arrested, I doubt Harris would have, despite her history.

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 2 points 4 hours ago

we're never going to see an end to the risk of fascism until we end capitalism, and it's as simple as that.

money is power, and if corporations and individuals can hoard wealth infinitely, it's only a matter of time until enough of that wealth is accumulated in few enough hands for those few to use their wealth to take control of the state

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 43 points 15 hours ago (9 children)

“Didn’t allow her” what does that even mean, in the context of the campaign? What the actual fuck was she doing listening to ANYTHING from Biden at that point? He was a clear looser. He stepped back from the campaign (after he was forced to, but he did nonetheless). That was an incredibly obvious opportunity for Harris to openly and cleanly split from policies she thought were wrongheaded - but nope, can’t have that. Jesus tapdancing christ.

Biden’s hubris put us here, I guess. What an unmitigated fucking tool. He sold us down the river and expects to be remembered fondly by history? Fuck that. The title of his subsection in history books will be “The President who Couldn’t Keep the Republic” (a pointed reference to Ben Franklin’s quip at the original constitutional convention).

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›