this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2026
198 points (100.0% liked)

politics

28845 readers
1711 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
 

In a lawsuit filed Tuesday, the D.N.C. sought to compel the government to say whether it plans to deploy armed federal officers in this year’s elections.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CainTheLongshot@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Saw this posted elsewhere: https://www.salon.com/2010/02/23/democrats_34/

The tactic is called the Rotating Villain or Designated Villain, and the Democratic leadership has been using it for a VERY long time.

I've been trying to call these fuckers out anytime it happens. Not just the rotating villains, but the leadership too, when they conveniently can't whip those votes.

The people these Democrats represent need to be made fully aware, everytime there's a primary.

Edit: And from one of my previous comments with regards to one of the ICE funding votes even after the public executions in January:

"A lot of people are forgetting how a minority whip works in Congress. The term "whip" comes from a fox-hunting expression—"whipper-in"—referring to the member of the hunting team responsible for keeping the dogs from straying from the team during a chase.

That vote went down in one of two ways, either of which is the leader and the whip's direct responsibility.

1: those Democrats voted on their own, in the exact number needed to pass. In which the whip is responsible for whipping up their votes to No and failed here, and Democrats need to promote a new person and primary the congressperson responsible, along with the ones who voted in favor.

2: that Whip caved under pressure and grabbed the exact number of votes needed to pass, from Congresspersons in "safe" districts or who were already planning on retiring. In which case, Democrats need to promote a new person and primary the congressperson responsible as well as primary the ones who voted in favor.

The Senate Democratic leader is Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) The Senate Democratic Whip is Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL)

The Eight Senate Democrats/Independents who voted in favor were: Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) Sen. Angus King (I-ME) Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH) Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA)

The House did not have enough votes to defeat it, and all voted against but here are those leaders too. The House Democratic leader is Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) The House Democratic Minority Whip is Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA) "

Now just need to amend that second point from " Congresspersons in safe districts" to the " Rotating Villains".