this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2025
122 points (89.6% liked)

politics

19650 readers
3837 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
 

the Democratic National Committee will begin a multi-round election to choose its new chair. Former President Joe Biden’s appointee, Jamie Harrison, is on his way out, and an array of party insiders and outsiders are competing to replace him.

The DNC’s 448 voting members include hundreds of Democrats elected and selected through state parties, along with smaller numbers of appointees, elected officials, and representatives from party groups like the Young Democrats of America. They will cast ballots for a new chair at a time when the Democratic Party itself is adrift, with no clear leader and no strategy for fighting the Trump agenda or regaining power. As one DNC member told me, “The DNC is not really talking about what went wrong and what we did wrong.”

In writing this piece, I reached out to 427 of the DNC’s 448 voting members and interviewed 19 of them. Those who spoke with me came from ideologically, geographically, and racially diverse backgrounds. They included Democrats from rural and urban communities, grassroots party members, elected officials, and party insiders and critics alike. Most agreed to speak on the condition their names wouldn’t be used.

What emerged from these conversations is a picture of a DNC that is built to be an undemocratic, top-down institution, unable to truly leverage the wisdom and guidance of the DNC members who hail from local and state networks across the country. This is especially true when those local and state members disagree with the DNC’s posture or strategic choices

Members said their meetings don’t feel like a place for participation or governance. They described these gatherings as a combination of party presentations and social time, as opposed to real debates or discussions. During Covid, for instance, one member said that meetings were held via web conference, with the chat function turned off. And while the potential for real decision-making can occur at the DNC committee level, “committees are completely rigged, with the chair appointing whoever they want,” one DNC member told me.

In some ways, the race for DNC chair has itself become a microcosm of this tension between money, transparency, and winning elections. Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party Chair Ken Martin and Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wikler are considered the front-runners based on their declared, though likely inflated, DNC vote counts. But neither has disclosed how much money they have raised for their campaigns, who their donors are, or how much they have spent.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 22 points 20 hours ago (5 children)

Every election is an opportunity to use your tiny amount of voting influence to try to make the world a better more survivable place. Protests and direct action are the most important thing you can do, but please don't let apathy allow candidates to power who hinder our ability to speak freely and perform direct action. Until we have ranked choice voting everywhere, the democrats give us the version of fascism with the most survivors to build a newer, better, fairer society.

To be clear. They still SUCK. They're still fuckin' fascists. But that's the electoral system we have, and our fellow Americans are THOROUGHLY propagandized against real and workable solutions to all this. If you refuse to vote strategically, you will be refusing to leverage one of the tools in your arsenal for making the world better. I ask you to go around in physical meatspace and talk to the marginalized people around you because this attitude is one I only really encounter in online spaces. All the marginalized people I talk to out in the real world are organizing resistance through the ethics of care but they ALSO vote democrat because that gives us the best chance at a regime that will even allow us to march in the streets and object to their shit.

[–] chakan2 -4 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

No...no more...fuck that. I went with the party for Harris as a last gasp attempt to keep the great experiment alive. It failed. From here on out, if you still support the Ds, you are part of the problem.

It's time for a new opposition party. It's time to stop voting soft Rs to prevent hard Rs.

[–] homesweethomeMrL 3 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Great! . . . Which one is it?

[–] chakan2 2 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

Whoever the satanic temple runs. I really don't care, but it's clear the Ds are not a viable alternative. They've had 40 years since Regan to fix his shit, and they haven't.

[–] homesweethomeMrL 1 points 6 minutes ago

okay then.

Good luck with the whole satan temple thing. I'm sure the Democrats will be surprised at how easy it turns out to be.

load more comments (1 replies)