this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2024
121 points (73.5% liked)

politics

19144 readers
3414 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sanctus 37 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

She's taken AIPAC money, she's drank the koolaid. She can't go back now. Most of them have, we saw what happened to most of those who didn't. Our politicians are all bought and paid for, dont ever forget that and let's get rid of FPTP so we the people can end this corruption. And if that doesnt work, well, you'll find me ravenous outside of Citizens United.

Edit: go ahead and downvote but at least look with your fucken eyeballs. AIPAC didn't blow hundreds of millions on our elections because they dont matter. Theres a purpose there.

[–] return2ozma 29 points 2 months ago

Adding context...

'Very Bad Sign for Democracy': AIPAC Has Spent Over $100 Million on 2024 Elections

AIPAC's billionaire-funded super PAC has helped defeat two of the most vocal opponents of Israel's assault on the Gaza Strip.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/aipac-100-million

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Its also that as Vice President she's a member of the United States Cabinet and United States National Security Council. Who do you think has been making the policy in Bidens administration?

Anyone that convinced themselves she would 180 on her own national security decisions has been delusional.

[–] Sanctus 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

She was never going to flip. This isn't about her flipping. Its about the fact nearly all of our leadership will support Gaza being flattened, and the Palestinians being eradicated.

[–] Ensign_Crab 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

She was never going to flip.

Yeah, genocide support is a bedrock principle, unlike things she has flipped on, like M4A and banning fracking.

[–] Sanctus 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Thats the shit I really hate. Its got me questioning what we're really getting here and once a-fucking-gain I feel like I dont truly have a choice.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Write to and call your representative. That's how politicians know you're upset.

Has anyone here done either of those things?

[–] Ensign_Crab 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

My rep is a maga chud, thanks to the party pulling funding from her opponent because they would rather have a maga chud than a progressive in any given seat.

[–] MonkRome 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So your answer is no then? Representatives don't get as much contact as you think. Apply pressure wherever and whenever you can, even if that legislator does nothing in the years to come, every person applying pressure moves the needle. Doing nothing does nothing. Legislators like to keep their jobs and will suddenly have a change of heart if they feel their job is threatened. That takes hundreds of people in each district making their dissatisfaction known. Be the change you wish to see.

Parties pull funding when it's clear there is no path to victory, so they can ensure victory elsewhere. That's not them "rather have a maga chud" that's strategic. You would be just as angry if they wasted money on a loss. I've seen your views all over lemmy, whatever narrative says the party did wrong, that's the narrative you'll take. Volunteer for the next candidate that runs, prove to the party that they have support and maybe funding will actually stick around. You're an open book, no action, all anger.

[–] Ensign_Crab 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So your answer is no then?

You want me to waste my time telling a MAGA chud to stop supporting genocide?

Well, it's about as likely as convincing a lemmy centrist to stop supporting genocide, and I already try to do that. Gonna call today.

Parties pull funding when it’s clear there is no path to victory, so they can ensure victory elsewhere. That’s not them “rather have a maga chud” that’s strategic.

That would be convincing if they hadn't spent money buying ads for maga candidates during that same election cycle.

[–] MonkRome 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That would be convincing if they hadn't spent money buying ads for maga candidates during that same election cycle.

I agree, that was an awful strategy. Even if it helps in the short term, it boosts fascism in the long term. It did mostly gain us seats though... https://www.npr.org/2022/11/11/1135878576/the-democrats-strategy-of-boosting-far-right-candidates-seems-to-have-worked

[–] Ensign_Crab 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I agree, that was an awful strategy.

The party considered the money better spent on maga candidates than on progressives.

[–] MonkRome 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Politics is a zero sum game, they saw the money better spent on winning. Your framing of it is dishonest. Again, I don't agree with doing that, but it's pretty easy to understand why they did it, it worked.

[–] Ensign_Crab 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I don’t agree with doing that, but it’s pretty easy to understand why they did it,

Yeah. They had to spend the money somewhere, and it wasn't going to be on a progressive.

[–] MonkRome 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I tried... I've both worked and volunteered in the party for thousands of hours. Most of the people working in the party want progressive policy, but we don't live in a country that gets enough votes from progressives, so politicians predictably play it safe. You can't wave a magic wand and poof, you have all the votes you need for progressive policy. Politicians are paid to represent their constituents. If even 5 percent of Dems won in a conservative district, or a district where only conservatives show up, then those districts wants and needs will not pass the most progressive policy. So people in the party work to pass what they can pass, that makes them practical, not anti-progressive. People with brains do what they can with what they have.

The more Dems we can get into office the more opportunities we have to move the needle left. You don't move the needle left with constant infighting within the left. You move the needle left, by the left wing uniting and gaining a clear mandate. We haven't had a real left wing mandate in my lifetime and people act like Dems should magically pass progressive policy without the votes, then they whine and stay home because the party without enough power to accomplish anything, predictably didn't accomplish anything. It's and endless self fulfilling prophecy and it's incredibly moronic. I'm just so tired of seeing your endless doomsaying all overy lemmy, fucking do something instead of bringing everyone down with your lies and toxicity.

[–] Ensign_Crab 1 points 2 months ago

Centrists do everything they can to hamstring progressives, and then gleefully announce that progressives can't win.

Centrists do everything they can to hamstring progressives, and then demand perfect and permanent unity no matter what they do.

You've internalized this. This thread is about how the Democratic candidate for President won't commit to stop enabling genocide. Won't even pull back at all from the current system that rewards Netanyahu for committing genocide and broadening it into a regional war. And you're expecting everyone to be all sunshine and rainbows about the system that got us here.

Just go along with our superfund-toxic positivity about genocide, or you want Trump to win!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I can't provide the millions in campaign dollars that CUFI and AIPAC give to my reps. Money controls politics and most of the money is pro-genocide

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So, no you haven't done anything. Thumbs up.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Have you let your reps know that you are angry about the genocide of Gaza?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Good. I hope they listen to us instead of the rich donors that they call every day to beg for money but I wouldn't count on it

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Who is "us"?
They don't even know what you want.

Edit. Some people seem to be confused by this comment. It's pretty simple.

If you don't tell anyone in power that you dislike a policy then no one will know you don't like it. Most of you don't want to tell anyone in power how you feel, so it's just text in the wind.

You only have yourselves to blame.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

The US is an Oligarchy in everything but name, so of course...