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
It has been a uniparty for decades.
Okay, but you need to admit that one party was Violently Fascist while the other party was merely Controlled Opposition.
I definitely prefer the empty vistage of democracy to the vulgar dismemberment of it. So you need to admit Democrats are better. And then you need to say you voted for them. And donated. And campaigned. And proselytized on their behalf.
Otherwise, I'm going to call you a Russian bot
Democrats lived in denial that they could ride being "the lesser of two evils" forever but eventually as things got worse and worse people started becoming numb to it
The lobbying, corporatism and military industries are the same under both. Admit that they are in power whoever the population votes for.
No, it hasn't. Both parties are not the same, and saying as such is simply pro republican propaganda
Kamala "Do Not Come" Harris
Joe "Nothing Will Fundamentally Change" Biden
Nancy "Insider Trading is Fine, Actually" Pelosi
They both serve capital first, all the rest is rhetoric to keep you frustrated and bewildered - unable to realize it. You'll spend the rest of eternity focusing on the outrage of the week, blind to the fact that the economics of the day dictate how they steer your thought and energy. When the chips are down, none of them worry about your poor non-capital-having ass.
Yep. This is it. They are minions of money. Genocide? It's profit. That's why neither side cares.
Joe "We need a Republican party that is principled and strong" Biden
Democrats love the republican party. They protect them and keep them safe. thus trump remaining free, and all the previous "looking forward" bullshit that comes after the republicans get busted.
How else would democrats ever look good if they had to actually compete with a political party that wasn't a complete clown show?
So you want me and others to vote for a fascist just because dems are bad? It doesn't stop with voting against fascism. First you vote against it, and then you start trying the grassroots campaigns to kick out the worthless democrats, which is a lot easier when there isn't a literal fascist.
Dems give me a lot more trains and bike paths and social services than Republicans ever will.
This might just blow your mind, but there is a way to have more then two political parties to participate in elections without a spoiler effect.
One has to wonder why the self proclaimed democracy advocates in the democratic party haven't pushed for these critical electoral reforms in states they control.
Democrats most certainly understand the flaws in First Past the Post voting. Feel free to go to the comments on any news articles on third parties/candidates during the previous election season to see it on full display.
So why do Democrats howl and scream about 3rd parties, yet do nothing to replace First past the post voting?
Informative videos below.
Electoral Reform Videos
First Past The Post voting (What most states use now)
Videos on alternative electoral systems
STAR voting
Alternative vote
Ranked Choice voting
Range Voting
Single Transferable Vote
Mixed Member Proportional representation
Yes, ranked choice voting which I've repeatedly mentioned in this thread. Read mfer.
We don't have that yet. We need to fight for that, and it's harder to fight for when you're under a fascist dictatorship.
I mean a. Depends on your area. B. Because they fuckin suck. The only reason I vote for them over republicans is because, again, not fascist.
Yeah, sure, but this math is simple enough for anyone with two cents to rub together. If youre interacting with them on a web forum about politics chances are they arent the people who need to hear it.
So, stay vigilant.
I mean, both parties are objectively crap. One of them is just more objectively crap.
Yea, and the distinction matters
The distinction keeps the voters happy. The parties are only superficially different.
It does and it doesn't. One is a slow fall into fascism, one is jumping off a cliff into it.
Don't get me wrong, I'll pick the slow fall every time, but...doesn't really make a difference in the end, does it
I'm in agreement --but I believe it's a lot easier to fight the fall than fight them once they are in power. They in this case being Republican fascists. I don't advocate for stopping at just voting. I encourage people to run for election and get involved with local and national politics
Wow, turns out a militaristic country that allows gay people to vote is still better than one that doesn't! And no, they're not the same. That comparison is apt, but bombing other countries is not the only policy that exists.
If you are fine with genocide, then as long as it does not affect you personally I doubt you care who gets any rights.
I'm not fine with genocide. I am realistic about fighting it. Fascists commit genocide, fighting fascists is good at reducing them
Fighting Fascists by voting for them?
Democrats are not fascists. Flat out.
Being able to choose between slave owners or the only other option is totally a real choice...
Both parties are not the same, but it is still a uniparty. Worst of all, it is one where the other side of the country has been conditioned for the same: choose what they believe to be the depravity and downfall of their way of life, or the only other option.
This is why in other countries we have more than two parties, and why the ones that are Heritage Foundation funded influence operations want to change this.
I don't think you know what the word "uniparty" means
Technically, I can see where you are right, but in practice, you have one single party to choose from all the same, with a heavy cultural divided determining which party that is for you.
I would focus more criticism as to why there aren't more than two parties in the US government than fighting over a word definition that just absconds the real problem.
The reason I'm focusing on it in this particular discussion is being it lessons the impact of understanding that it's quite literally one not fascism, one fascism party. Pretending they're the same hurts people's understanding that they need to vote against fascism. My
The fight doesn't end with voting in a dem, after you delay facism you push forward with getting read of the worse candidates in the democrats too.
Yes and no. The two parties are different but they're both politically Right Wing. So cut from the same cloth but made into different outfits. They both believe at their core that a societal elite is best suited to rule but the Democrats believe in a bigger more inclusive elite than Republicans.
Fascism vs not fascism is not cut from the same cloth. Democrats are not from the same cloth as Republicans. They're still an issue and bad. But saying they're the same cloth? No.
Dems actually do things for the poors like me even if it just political posturing
Politics is a spectrum. The farther right you go, the narrower the ruling elite. Absolutely monarchy or dictatorship is the farthest right you can go. Fascism is a flavor of that but distinct from say a monarchy that is equally far-right.
Sure. The parties aren't identical. But, things like the Rachet Effect are real and destructive to the working class and the country.
Chuck Schumer allowed the big beautiful bil, which guts Medicare and social welfare, to pass without resistance; a resistance expected for a fucking opposition. That does not make the Democrats different, don't you think? In other countries, the opposition are actually, you know, being opposition. I am amazed that Americans are made docile to pick lesser evil that only throw breadcrumbs, instead of holding their politicians accountable more fiercely, as expected in a democracy and which other countries do. What happened to the Americans that ended the Gilded age? I'm sorry but the other person is right that Americans are being frustrated and bewildered without realising it.
This statement is so american it makes my head hurt. Two parties is the reason you don't have a democracy, and the instant "if not then you are anti my team" response shows how dead your democracy really is. Without even the ability to have a third option you don't have a democracy, you have a red vs blue dictatorship.
If someone won't vote against fascism they are against me, yes. If you think that's an American take, I'll accept the inaccurate compliment.
I mean, literally what primaries are for, but yes, our democracy is dead. Ranked choice voting is necessary. The senate flies in the face of proper representation.
You don't know what the word dictatorship means.
What if you don't recognise fascism?
See that is the issue, not having a choice other then status quo or fascism is not a real choice and you doubling down on the team bullshit is just sad. Nether of the current parties should exist and in almost every other nation these parties would have been put out to pasture long ago. If you are just voting for the not fascist then you are voting for the ruling party, its not a hard concept.
Primaries are run by the 2 parties and everyone in the world can see they are not fair and clearly fixed to some degree. We are in agreement that your democracy is dead, but I am stating that it has been dead for a long time and it's been doing damage world wide (like a really bad weekend at Bernie's).
A dictatorship is a form of government which is characterized by a leader, or a group of leaders, who hold absolute or near-absolute political power. Just because you have two groups take turns does not change the fact that the us is run by a group of leaders who hold near-absolute power (now with no checks or balances!).