this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
498 points (97.9% liked)

politics

19118 readers
3613 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago

I feel like my brain is getting hijacked. Maybe that’s the point of articles like these.

Authoritarianism prep.

[–] Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago (6 children)

I couldnt care less for the why. If you voted Trump, a third party candidate or not at all you are responsible for the coming fascism you waste of cells

[–] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Understanding why something is broken is a crucial prerequisite for fixing it. If you don't care why it didn't work, then you don't care about making it work - you only care about being angry.

[–] Klear@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

But we kind already knew people being stupid was the reason. This doesn't seem to bring anything new to the table.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] nednobbins@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

I sincerely hope that Democrats do care.

Like it or not, MAGA can currently take that attitude. They control the SC, both chambers of Congress, and the White House. If they decide to say, "Fsck it. We'll ignore the Demorcrats," they'll still have all the process in place to enact their agenda.

MAGA doesn't need to analyze what went wrong during the election. They got everything they wanted.

For at least the next 2 years, Democrats will be able to do nothing that Republicans don't approve of. The law says that they get to set the standards.

If Democrats want any chance of checking that power or reversing it at the next election, we are the ones who need to adapt.

There's an "ancient Chinese saying", "卧 薪 尝 胆". You don't do it because it's fun or because you obliged to, you do it so you can win next time.

[–] NickwithaC@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Maybe if the democrats had given 50% of the populace something they considered worth turning up to vote for they wouldn't have stayed at home.

[–] Tyfud@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Getting out of bed, going down the street, standing in line, spending 3 minutes casting a ballot; is that a lot to ask of people to safeguard democracy?

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Let's be more specific. That's what you need to do in order to protect the oligarchy. The United States is not a democracy; it is an oligarchy. The bottom 90% of the population has zero impact on how they are governed. It has been this way for decades.

This always happens to oligarchies. It happened in Rome, and now it's happened here. The Roman Senate was intransigent, fighting for generations against the most minor of reforms to help the common man. In the end, demagogues came to power promising to help the people by fiat. Of course, most of the time these emperors served only themselves, but even the few crumbs they threw to the people were more than the old oligarchy gave them.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] eskimofry@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Ah the Highly intellectual argument that liberals use to win over voters... or is it?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›