this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2026
595 points (98.5% liked)

politics

28312 readers
2449 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 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.
  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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. 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.
  4. 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 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
 

US Democratic Senator Mark Kelly has said he will "seriously consider" running for president in 2028 as he battles the Trump administration over a video in which he urged military personnel to refuse illegal orders.

The Arizona senator, who was accused of "seditious behaviour" by Donald Trump over the November clip, said he and his wife, Gabrielle Giffords, received "many" death threats after the president's comments.

"We get them on a weekly basis now," he told BBC Newsnight. "We had to get security to protect us 24 hours a day."

Asked if he was considering a White House run, the retired Navy captain said he was considering it "because we're in some seriously challenging times".

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 33 points 1 day ago (2 children)

He might have to clarify a lot of his stances to get widespread support. For examples,

he opposed the Republicans tax bill giving cuts to the rich, but he has no comments on Kamala's proposed unrealized gains tax for the rich

he has a 100% scorecard from reproductive freedom advocates, but exactly how far he supports bodily autonomy and by extension trans rights is unknown

Sadly one thing he has been clear and consistent on is when the war in gaza began several years ago, he supported aiding Israel and moving a carrier group to threaten Iran and Houthis into deescelating. He still as recent as January promises to continue "aiding" Israel despite acknowledging the carnage.

Honestly, I don't like the idea. But he's a little better than Newsom and he's 10,000x better than Trump.

[–] BenderRodriguez@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago (13 children)

Yeah, he's not perfect, let's just elect Trump for the third time.

[–] NoSpotOfGround@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)
[–] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Primaries are picking. If you think your opinion matters more than tens of millions of people it's a you problem.

Bender is poking fun at how we threw the 2024 election when millions of people who voted for Biden in 2020 did not show up for Harris, which is relevant because of how I nitpicked Kelly's stances.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (10 children)

Kamala lost because she abandoned her voters. She told her own base to pound sand while fruitlessly trying to appease Republicans. The voters didn't "not show up." She simply made herself not their candidate anymore. It's a fools' errand to blame voters, as they're not an individual you can actually hold accountable. Blaming voters for not voting for your terrible candidate is like blaming consumers for not buying shitty overpriced items at a store. You can whine, "well you have to buy something somewhere anyway!" But that's just unproductive whining.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] thespcicifcocean@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

So basically, just another dem. I'll vote for whoever wins the primary, but he probably wouldn't be my first choice.

[–] boaratio@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Man doors 2028 seen so far away.

[–] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 30 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I will vote for anyone that promises to hurt Republicans

[–] JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Is there an American equivalent to Lord Buckethead?

Sheriff 10 Gallon Hat perhaps?

[–] TwistedTree@piefed.social 9 points 1 day ago

Vermin Supreme! Why not elect a real loon!

[–] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago (2 children)

He would be 65 in 2029 when he actually took office. Can we get someone who is about 20 years younger?

[–] theherk@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Agreed but he’d still be a spring chicken in modern terms. I’d rather see max age 50 than min age 35.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] daannii@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Maybe he could be AOCs VP, maybe.

Id have to look into his voting history first and his donors.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mavu@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 day ago

interesting.. that would be change that redefines what "whiplash" means.

[–] suitmangray@lemmy.world -5 points 21 hours ago

Another fossilized dipshit. Can't wait for more money wasted on space shuttle 2.0 the new scam and fear of the internet bill 3.0.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›