this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2026
256 points (99.2% liked)

politics

30667 readers
2501 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 5 points 41 minutes ago (2 children)

Abdul got 15899 votes in Dearborn in this primary election.

Kamala Harris got 15189 votes in Dearborn during the general presidential election.

I think that is a meaningful statistic.

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 2 points 24 minutes ago (1 children)

Hard to tell much of anything considering this is a primary vs a full blow presidential election but who knows.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 5 points 13 minutes ago

That's entirely the point. Primaries, especially in non-presidential election years, are notorious for extremely low voter turnout.

The candidate in this senate primary pulled more votes than the nominee in a presidential general election.

[–] mirshafie@europe.pub 2 points 36 minutes ago

Abdul for president?

[–] nkat2112@sh.itjust.works 29 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

It wasn't a blowout if you forget to look at how much money AIPAC spent.

[–] Kayday@lemmy.world 7 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

$70 million, if I remember correctly

[–] kurwa@lemmy.world 4 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I believe they spent $35 million on Haley Stevens, and her campaign spend $70 million total

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 2 points 44 minutes ago

And it's a primary.

[–] Eat_Your_Paisley@lemmy.world 35 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Michigan Dems will vote blue no matter who, we had a primary we know outlr canidates and now we unite going forward.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 19 points 3 hours ago (38 children)

One can only hope; centrists tend to be pretty flaky.

[–] santa@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 hours ago

Exactly. Centrist may choose not to vote.

load more comments (37 replies)
[–] notsure@fedia.io 16 points 4 hours ago

This man has policy ideas that are good. Policy over party, yet cool he's gonna caucus with the less crappy party.

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 23 points 5 hours ago (14 children)

Yeah, blue no matter who right you bunch of worthless, hypocritical assholes?

I'm stuck having to vote for Katie Hobbs who's supposedly running with a god damn Republican so you assholes better man the fuck up too.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 15 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

I mean some of us who said that actually meant it. Despite all of the wailing, tactical voting remains the correct way to participate in first past the post elections, even for leftists.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] cogitase@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

El-Sayed specifically said that he is not a socialist, so I don't see why he'd fail to see full support for the general election. People confuse opposition to a specific label (a label with a great deal of negative baggage) with opposition to a specific set of policies.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 4 points 3 hours ago

People confuse opposition to a specific label (a label with a great deal of negative baggage) with opposition to a specific set of policies.

No offense but that's exactly what you did. The party establishment uses the socialism rhetoric to its advantage, but ultimately what they don't want is for the rich to pay for their fair share.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›