this post was submitted on 02 May 2026
583 points (97.4% liked)

politics

29654 readers
1970 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BouteilleBrune@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

She was and still is objectively the most competent candidate, saying otherwise is exactly what enables trump. His propaganda works with you.

[–] senorseco@lemmy.today 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If she was competent she would have won the election. Just look at what she was running against. A clearly deteriorating Joe Biden was able to beat him in 2020 and buy the DNC some time to get their shit together. Why are some unable to see that the Democrats own a big chunk of where we are today?

[–] Freeposity@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Are you aware that the Biden administration, as a condition of Joe stepping aside, insisted that Kamala not deviate from the administrations policy positions at all? She was hamstrung from the beginning.

You may be unaware that when Joe stepped aside the only person who could legally replace him on the ticket was Kamala Harris.

[–] senorseco@lemmy.today 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If true, this information makes her even less competent. Only a fool would agree to be hamstrung by the policies of the prior administration.

[–] Freeposity@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It was the current administration. She wouldn't have been able to run at all without that agreement and Trump would have won by default.

It's telling that you blame Kamala for the constraints put on her rather than Biden who put them there.

Ideally, Biden should have resigned in 2024, making her president and giving her the incumbent advantage. That was a serious miscalculation.

We have a serious problem with aging politicians hanging on to their positions for far too long. We were screwed by RBG, Biden, Feinstein and now Schumer. We need progressive candidates to primary every one of these ossified centrists and zionists.

[–] senorseco@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

To be clear I don't blame her for the constraints put on her. I blame her for accepting them. Why would anyone run with those constraints? She should have told them to go lose an election. It's telling that she didn't.

[–] Freeposity@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Well, it's a good thing you know the minds of everyone involved.