this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
219 points (94.3% liked)

politics

19338 readers
2571 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
 

Summary

Fox News’s attempt to find support for Donald Trump in Greenland backfired, as most residents expressed disinterest in his proposals.

While one Trump supporter was found, the majority of Greenlanders interviewed criticized Trump’s comments and expressed a preference for remaining under Danish rule.

Despite these setbacks, Trump continues to advocate for acquiring Greenland, citing economic security concerns.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] btaf45@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

The democrats have settled on a strategy of slowly shuffling right and being yesteryear Republicans on many fronts

No. That was their strategy 20-30 years ago. They are actually trying to make progress now, but I agree they need to become much more aggressive in doing that.

when they do get the occasional small W.

You are forgetting that these "small wins" are HUGE WINS to somebody. I had ACA health insurance for several years. Dems did that. Would I have rather had medicare for all? Of course. But I would have had NO health insurance for YEARS without Dems creating the ACA. That was huge for me. And before the ACA people on the internet were always telling me there was no chance at all that health care would ever be reformed.

[–] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Let's not forget that Obama rode into office on the huge promise of fixing healthcare and providing a public option. He got elected on swinging for the fences and big systemic change. To his credit, he did try pretty hard that first term. The second term was much more jaded, and Obama himself seemed to shift right on a number of things, chiefly LGBT rights. But I digress, what big promises have we seen since then? Where have the democrats swung for the fences? I can't remember a single equally powerful promise from HRC16. Biden had some okay ones, like student loan forgiveness, but nothing that felt equally powerful, I think. Kamala promised to codify Roe V Wade, which is something, but that was couched with expanding fracking and fixing housing by offering first time home buyer credits.

[–] btaf45@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

and fixing housing by offering first time home buyer credits.

And building low income housing.

[–] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 1 points 1 hour ago

I could go on for days about what we need to do for housing, but it's one of those things where I went into it giddy about the Harris campaign and came out of it saying "oh... Well, that's alright." It certainly didn't feel like anything incredible.