this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2025
887 points (98.6% liked)

politics

31147 readers
1773 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It takes steps to create the political environment to be successful. The first step was hitching her star to the most popular Senator in America, and having him officially pass the torch to her in front audiences all over America. In Progressive World, he has officially annointed her as his successor.

There are many more steps, including fighting the new DNC notion that a woman can't win. Kamala DID win, they just cheated (STOP! Yes they did, and we all know it. Of course they did, it's who they are).

The DNC is saying this because they know who the real female threat is, and they are still in their anti-progressive stage. If Kamala announced her intention to run, and had a valid (to them) campaign strategy, they'd back her in a heartbeat. A lot of them still believe that her loss was because of a lack of campaigning. I think that was a strength. She popped in near the end, a gush of fresh air in an extremely stale, funky political environment, and instantly energized the campaign. That gave her great momentum going into Election Day. Remember all those enthusiastic arena rally crowds, compared to Trump's half-filled high school gymnasiums, with the audience streaming out halfway through?

She ran a strong, credible campaign, it was just stolen in the swing states by switching millions of Kamala votes to Trump. That's why there's the fairy tale of all those voters who voted a straight Dem ticket, with Trump at the top. Funny thing, those sorts of ballots are almost all in the swing states, nowhere else. Another funny thing - has anybody ever spoken to ONE of these millions of Democratic Trump voters? I'm sure there are few, but they are as rare white squirrels. I've never met or heard from one.

An extended campaign would only reveal Kamala as just another weak-ass establishment Dem. She could never match AOC's exuberance and youthfulness.

And AOC will show up with proposals. Changes to our system that will benefit everyone, not just the wealthy donors that the old guard in BOTH parties kisses up to. Kamala's same old boring Republican-Lite strategy will just get a MAGA elected.

Eh, who am I kidding? Were never going to have a fair election again, if we ever even have an election at all.

[–] petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Okay, well, I'm waiting for those steps to be carried out then. We can't really talk about her extreme viability until they have.

I'm going to skip over the Kamala stuff because you say this later:

An extended campaign would only reveal Kamala as just another weak-ass establishment Dem.

Which I agree with. This is the reason she was not a strong candidate.

Was she the best we could have done under the circumstances? Well, we didn't get a primary, so who knows. The past is the past, I suppose.

I am worried that you are drinking the koolaid a little bit. Kamala did lose. Nobody cares about policy. AOC's proposals should be violent retribution against the leeches sucking the life out of the USA. Trump is successful, in part, because he pretends to be anti-establishment. The DNC's official position is to never criticize any prominent figure they've ever had.

I agree that AOC can energize people. What I'm asking is if she has the dominant aura necessary to crack the whip.

I ask, partly because having the will to mobilize our system into actually doing something is a prerequisite now to being successful, and partly because this ping-ponging between the Dems and the Republicans will burn the country down. We need like a new cultural revolution. It should be as offensive to be a Republican now as it was to be a Nazi in the 1940s. American individualism and apathy must be crushed under heel. Anything less than this is basically a slow death. A pyrrhic victory as we lose global significance.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 1 year ago

Kamala didn't lose, she was robbed, and more and more evidence of it coming to light. IF we ever regain power again, a deep, comprehensive investigation of our election system would be required.

Find out what these traitors did, who did it, and how. When they are identified, nothing less than the death penalty should apply for their crimes. They need to shake up any future traitors who want to try it.

But I agree that we need a big reset. Education needs to be federalized, states have proven they will not handle education responsibly. Elections need to be federalized, states have proven that they will abuse their authority. No gerrymandering, no Electoral College, Government funded elections, strict time limits on campaigns, truth in campaigning laws, end lobbying, etc.