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 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
So light-red is replacing deep-red… I’m not really very excited about that.
This is partially why the world is so fucked. People who care, often utterly refuse to be pragmatic, and expect change to always be sweeping, and happen in an instant.
This is what is responsible for the US getting to where it is. They repeatedly allow democrats to lose, and therefore pull the same cycle of losing, having everyone see how much worse republicans are, and then having the democrats walk back some of the damage the republicans did.
People are so naive and angsty, they feel they need to punish the democrats for not doing what they'd like, and only end up punishing themselves, over and over and over again.
The obvious, only pragmatic way to look at this, is that you need them to keep winning so that they cannot backslide, and then you need to use primaries and state and local politics to actually shift them leftward.
Literally nothing else is practical or will work, but people on this site would rather rant about issues than fix them.
Oh, I whole-heartedly agree - pink is better than red, and it is moving the dial in the correct direction. But still I can’t bring myself to be happy about corporatist victories. Only relieved that they’re gaining ground.
If the only solution is democrats never losing then it’s not a workable solution.
They will lose at some point, and we need to be prepared for that and not let it completely undo any changes they’ve managed to squeak through with only the presidency and a supermajority in both houses.
I think significant progress could be seen if they could win 4 times in a row with at least one senate super majority and house simple majority stretch near the end.
Republicans made sure we can never have another FDR
When they lose it needs to be cause they were not left enough they need to lose I. Primaries when they fail to support the leftist positions we need.
If that's not workable, then it's not going to work, and eventually it will break. I don't like it but I didn't design this system.
This idea that you can punish the DNC by having them lose, is a foot gun.
They are 100% happy with that and it absolutely would not cause them to shift even a centimeter left. If anything, it will shift them right.
The DNC wants to please their corporate donors, and only wants to win half the time.
You want to punish them? Replace them slowly using primaries, state and local politics.
Anything else is shooting yourself in the foot by misunderstanding the incentive structures.
I didn't mean "when they lose to Republicans, it needs to be because they weren't left enough" I meant "when they lose an election, it needs to be because there was a farther left candidate that won"
Conservatives need to never win an election again in my lifetime. Maybe if the Republican party moved left of the Democratic party, or if a third party gained popularity and was left if the Democrats.
But realistically, it has to happen in primaries.
Sorry to say but it’s going to break
I'm sorry but it is naive to think that misinformed voters will learn the right lesson and vote blue no matter who. It is more practical to ask for better candidates.
I never said I thought they would. I said its the closest to possible way out.
Nothing is is remotely plausible.
No it is not, because the people you are asking do not care about you.
I think many people in the lemmyverse struggle to deal with what they feel like are conflicting ideas, where they feel like they can't acknowledge that their relationship with the DNC is adversarial, while also acknowledging that the Democrats are the only party of the 2 parties in a system that only supports 2 major parties that can be leveraged to pull the country towards their objectives.
Better candidates have to be voted in over time, and just as I said, you have to slowly shift the party through primaries and local and state politics.
This requires a multifaceted approach. The DNC will not magically wake up tomorrow and hear your pleas. They will not suddenly support your sweetheart candidate.
They understand and largely like the flipping back and forth so that they can please their donors by allowing the country to continue drifting right, while appeasing to voters by offering to undo some of the harm caused by the republicans during the flip flopping.
Asking them won't work, because it fundamentally misunderstands their incentives and goals as an organization steering the Democratic party.
I guess when I say "ask" I mean we run better candidates instead of going with whatever the Democrats decide for us. Expecting people to show up and vote for what they have dished out in the past isn't working. As you said, we will need a multifaceted approach .
Yeah, deep red districts aren't the first place to look. They're too unlikely to go blue no matter how disgusting and incompetent the president.