this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2025
395 points (96.7% liked)

politics

25875 readers
3059 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 16 points 5 hours ago

They aren’t moderate they are where the far right was in 2000

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 7 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

There are only two parties in that stupid place, what the hell would they think being diet right would do?

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

Make them money

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 12 points 6 hours ago

I don't view Democrat leadership as moderate at all. "Centrist", just means Republican policies that boil the frog.

[–] dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net 34 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Bill Clinton tried triangulation (read: being more right wing) and the republicans tried to impeach him. Obama was right of Reagan and the republicans…tried to impeach him. If the GOP is going to fuck with democrats no matter what, let’s just elect some truly revolutionary people. I mean people who make Bernie Sanders look like Mitt Romney. People who make Cornel West look like Paul Ryan. We should be running people who start at “if your net worth is over $100 million you get to line up against the wall” and need to be negotiated down from there.

[–] aceshigh@lemmy.world 14 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Exactly. The next president should be very progressive - free health care for all, expand public services, get the 800 billionaires, millionaires and corporations to start paying taxes, increase teachers salary and minimum wage, make associate degrees free, no more bailing out industries/companies, get rid of monopolies, make paid pto mandatory of minimal 3 weeks. Call it project 2029 and create the manual for it now so that it’s actualized on day 1. I can dream can’t I? Maybe in 40 years this will be possible….

[–] JTskulk@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

Amen! I want Democrats to do all the things that Republicans accuse them of doing. I want them to do this because being reasonable is not winning brownie points with these people. The next president should tell America to get ready for a new national flag; we're adding 3 more stars for Puerto Rico, Guam, and Washington DC!

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 97 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

No fucking shit, everyone knows this, even the democrats know this, most of them are just bought and paid for

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 72 points 12 hours ago (7 children)

US Democrats are very conservative under their thin coat of identity politics. They would be considered way to the right of most European conservative parties.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 32 points 11 hours ago

They're even shedding that after loosing in 2024. Slowly was doing it during the election but then once lost immediately threw trans people and minorities under the bus for the dems incompetence

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] prime_number_314159@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago

The "leadership" of the Democrat party sits to the right of several disparate further left factions. Because they don't embrace any specific leftward direction, they are juggling half baked compromises instead of leading anywhere. Bold policies that would be approved of by one further left group are opposed by others, so they can't go left without losing support somewhere. Staying where they are makes them moderately disagreeable for every one of the factions that can support and vote for them, so they are unpopular across the board. They are all but trapped not far enough to the right to contend for Republican votes, and not far enough left to propose anything truly different.

I see the candidacy of further left individuals (mostly at the local level for now, but this will move fast if the "leadership" collapses further) as the first serious mechanism to break this stalemate. Popular figures from city or state government aim for national positions frequently, so expect anyone standing out with how well they run things at the local level to make that pivot.

A similar thing is at play on the right. Christian fundamentalists, war hawk neoconservatives, the alt right, the would-be fascists, select business interests, nationalists, libertarians, and others are constantly battling over policy. At this moment about 70% of them are trying to ride Trump's popularity and apparent effectiveness at making changes to get whatever is most important to them done before it's too late. If the Republicans gain seats in 2026, that surface level unity will become even more significant, but once Trump is out of the picture, infighting is all but certain to resume on the right, and we'll see weaker, "keep everyone happy" politicians take center stage again.

If both those processes play out with the right timing, we may get a true leftist running against a Jeb tier Republican in 2028 or 2032.

[–] ClassStruggle@lemmy.ml 38 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Moderates? Maybe 30 years ago. As they shift the Overton window they stay in lockstep with Republicans as they shift to the right, filling the void left by Republicans. Policy wise they sit somewhere between GW Bush and first term Trump

[–] thelivefive@startrek.website 6 points 8 hours ago

Well things change, I guess supporting genocide is moderate these days.

[–] dissentiate@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

"Modest"?

No, we have better language to use

Useless

Disingenuous

Paid actors

Servants to the ruling class

Inside traders

Purposefully weak

Blatantly dishonest

And the list could go on and on...

[–] ramble81@lemmy.zip 12 points 10 hours ago

Controlled opposition.

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 15 points 11 hours ago

Democrats and Republicans are two halves of the one party state in America

[–] Microtonal_Banana@lemmy.zip 17 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 18 points 11 hours ago

Tell that to the NYT.

"Clever people say that once you become exactly like your opponent you will win elections!"

And even that wouldn't work because this opponent would likely just move further right. Not sure there's anywhere to go anymore, but they'd try.

load more comments
view more: next ›