politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Progressives win in deep blue areas. They will not win in purple or red areas.
More Americans agree with progressive positions than conservative or liberal ones. Why is this the belief that people have?
Were that the case, Republicans would not be controlling Congress and the White House. In blue California, Republican Hilton is leading in the polls. Most Americans probably have centrist views.
There are a lot of reasons that MAGA controls everything, but a big part of it is that Dems keep running on the same failed Republican Lite policies over and over. Maybe if they tried some new Progressive ideas, they'd do better.
From https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/18/centrist-democrats-success-00234606/
Moderate Democrats are on a tear.
Democrats are overperforming at the state level, with centrist candidates flipping one seat and coming close in another in special elections in deep red parts of Iowa. Rahm Emanuel, who once orchestrated a takeover of the House by recruiting Blue Dog Democrats, is eying a 2028 bid for president. And leading Democrats like Gavin Newsom and Chuck Schumer are rebuffing the left — the California governor siding against trans players in women’s sports and the Senate minority leader veering away from progressive demands to shut down the government.
Nobody is backing either of those old school losers, and neither of them will get the nomination.
And you actually wrote:
Chuck Schumer is one of the worst excuses for a Democrat in history. He's weak and cowardly, and his priorities are Israel and Insider Trading. He is 50% responsible for MAGA regaining the White House. When he "veered away from progressive demands to shut down the government" he betrayed his constituency. In America, government shutdowns are the equivalent of General Strikes in Europe, and his avoidance of the fall shutdown cost Americans their health insurance.
When this is over, he should be deeply investigated. I'm fairly convinced that he was a Manchurian MAGA, working for them all along. All he cares about is money, he can be bought.
People like Newsome and Schumer are exactly why Dems keep losing.
Newsome is moving right because he has presidential ambitions. He did things as governor that Republicans will use against him if he runs for President. He chased oil refineries out of California. He raised the minimum wage for fast food workers to $20/hr. This has had unintended consequences. See https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2026/03/31/california-fast-food-wages-study/89406757007/
Those are good things, and I would vote for him for those issues. But he has also shown that he will kiss the ass of the Epstein Class, and that is totally unacceptable. He may punish Trump, but like Reconstruction, it won't be enough to heal the festering wound, and it will just keep causing trouble for another century.
It's time to purge MAGA from our government and society for the National Security Threat that it is. We wouldn't let ISIS or Al Quada operate within our borders, and MAGA poses a far more direct threat.
Andy Beshear would be a better Democratic Presidential candidate. Newsome is moving right to appeal to centrist voters, but his previous leftist policies will be used by Republicans against him.
Most voters don't have the information to match their policy preferences with candidates. They choose candidates by vibes. I'm saying the POLICIES of progressives are popular, it's a case of using politics to get people to see you represent their best interests.
Based on what evidence? I'll bet they'll do pretty well in purple areas. Red areas are red.
From https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/18/centrist-democrats-success-00234606/
“Moderates are having their moment,” said Jonathan Kott, the onetime senior adviser to the former centrist Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia. “I think people are realizing that there were many reasons we lost in 2024, but an acquiescence to all of the liberal groups and fighting and dying on hills about 1 and 2 and 3 percent of the voting population seemed really dumb.”
Your evidence is the Manchin camp? How's does he figure they "aquiesced" to all the liberal groups? The Biden/Harris administration was about as center right as you could get without being Republican.
We've tried the Centrist way over and over, and all it does is pull the window more and more right. It's time to make the pendulum swing back the other way.
The Biden/Harris administration was not center right. Despite polls indicating Americans wanting better border security, Biden let migrants flood across the border. Trump made tougher border security a top issue.
The reason people were flooding across the border is because MAGA was constantly SCREAMING "Biden has open borders!" despite the fact that Biden was following the same policies as any other president, including Republicans.
It was MAGAs that were INVITING people to come to America, and causing the problem they were blaming on Biden.
No, Trump has closed the border. Biden could have done it had he wanted to.
Brother, they haven't changed any immigration policies since Trump 1, with the exception of enforcement measures. You've been lied to, and badly. I'm sorry you had to find out this way. Publicly, on the internet, where everyone can see how much of an idiot you've been till now
Why didn't Biden implement these enforcement measures?
Foul! That's moving the goalposts. Sorry, brother, but you done committed a crime most egregious. You claimed that Biden open the borders, I refuted that stating that you were lied to and that immigration policy didn't change under Biden. You either need to prove that policy DID change under Biden, otherwise your foul will be permanent. And we all know what happens to individuals with permanent fouls (hint, it rhymes with pemical pastration)
To the contrary, you said that US immigration policy never changed but enforcement measures did. So, the question, is why didn't Biden implement enforcement measures to stop the flood of illegal migrants? Trump has been able to stop them; there is no reason Biden couldn't.
Mon frer, you made the extraordinary claim. You need to supply proof. I won't count that as strike two (which is good, that one rhymes with pobotomy, and you don't need any more help in that category)
Proof of what? That Biden allowed illegal migrants to flood across the border?
Open border policy. Show when it took effect and when Trump stopped it. Fox cannot be a source
Biden didn't officially have an open border policy, but he permitted illegal migrants to flood across the border. From https://www.texastribune.org/2024/02/21/texas-migrants-busing-cost-greg-abbott/
In April 2022, Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott announced his state was going to start transporting to other states migrants who had been released from federal custody. He said he was doing it to prevent the state from shouldering “the burdens imposed by open-border advocates in other parts of the country.”
Nearly two years later, Texas has transported more than 102,000 migrants to New York, Chicago, Denver, Philadelphia, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.
Yes, that isn't proof. Congrats! You're maybe starting to see. Abbott's stunt was a stunt meant to force the "immigrants are surging" narrative, not actual needed policy changes to address an issue. Find. Proof. That. Immigrants. Surged. As. A. Result. Of. Biden's. Policies. You have one chance left (reminder, pemical pastration)
If it was just a stunt, there would be few migrants to send. Don't you remember illegal migrants flooding El Paso? See https://www.texastribune.org/2022/12/14/el-paso-migrants-border/
That's an anecdote and not proof of your claim! DHS estimated 11.4 million undocumented migrants in the US in 2022. A 100,000 in Texas could've been there FOR YEARS. You need evidence (numbers, data, studies on policy impacts, fuck even a changed policy) that what you're saying is true. This is all "action" taken "in response" but that isn't PROOF that the thing itself was happening. I could go out to my yard and burn all of the grass because "grass killed my mother". My burning of the grass isn't evidence that grass killed my mother. Do you understand the disconnect?