this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2025
295 points (98.4% liked)
politics
26640 readers
1902 users here now
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
• 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
By Hodari Brown, Contributing Columnist On November 25, 2025, the National Park Service (NPS), under the direction of the U.S. Department of the Interior overseen by Donald Trump, announced its 2026 “fee-free” days. Gone from the list: Martin Luther King Jr. Day and Juneteenth. Added instead: June 14 — the birthday of Donald Trump, which […]The post COMMUNITY VOICES: Trump Removes MLK Day & Juneteenth as Free National Park Dates, Adds His Birthday appeared first on Atlanta Daily World.
Or if the senile old fuck had not tried to cling to power. Given the Dems a chance to have a real campaign with someone who knows what day of the week it is.
Or if they didn’t tank Bernie’s run because it was Hillary’s turn to be president.
Throughout Biden's whole term it was a big question if he'd run again. It being a question at all should have made the answer a clear NO. Harris never had a fair chance at a campaign because of this despite being in my opinion one of the better Democrat candidates we've had in recent history. Obviously she's not as liberal as most Democrats would like nowadays, but when the alternative is an openly corrupt billionaire con artist I'll vote for the mainstream Democrat candidate every time.
Honestly I don't think it would have made a difference. The Harris campaign made it clear she doesn't care for her voter base - it's more important not to step on the Biden administrations' toes than to properly represent the people and win. What's the best that could have happened? Harris would have gone on stage with even more Republicans?
They would have found a way to tank it either way.
The "Harris" campaign was a continuation of Biden's ongoing campaign under a new candidate. They never had a chance to set their own messaging nor policy priorities. And although I too doubt it would have ultimately stopped Trump, it certainly would have allowed them to try to target younger demographics with their policy.
I also fear that the Democratic party's takeaway from the whole ordeal may be that America is not yet ready for a woman president. But any candidate would have lost under Harris's circumstances. And Hillary was just a terrible candidate. Yet because those are the only two woman candidates we've had for President and both lost horribly, it's easy to draw the wrong conclusion here that those are related.
I don't see why the campaign being a continuation meant they couldn't set their own messaging or policy priorities. As far as I know, donations etc. can't be taken back if a campaign changes policies. Could you explain what you mean here?
I mean that planning a presidential campaign takes years, years which they didn't have. And beyond the time required to plan and refine the campaign messaging, the candidate needs time to train how to answer questions following it. They had no choice but to reuse all of Biden's preparation for these, and even then it still looked hastily done.
Sorry, but that's not an acceptable answer. If you can't pivot your campaign even though your polling research shows you that individual, divisive topics are causing you to lose, something is broken enough that you definitely shouldn't have ever been a valid candidate. How can you expect to win against a populist if it takes years to listen to your voters?!
I knew that Harris will lose the second she stepped on stage, was asked how things will change with her, and she answered that nothing will fundamentally change if she's elected. All while the other candidate keeps telling people that he understands they are hurting, and that he'll improve everything. I don't care who was responsible for that strategy - everyone involved should be banned from having influence on another campaign.