this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2023
740 points (96.6% liked)

politics

19155 readers
3355 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
[–] [email protected] 78 points 1 year ago (6 children)

It honestly worries me how many people roll their eyes when you say this. When it's blatantly fucking obvious. Where are all the patriots to scream " THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE IS THERE FOR A FUCKIN REASON"

[–] asteriskeverything 32 points 1 year ago (3 children)

They truly unironically believe that America is a Christian nation and intended to be one by the founding fathers. I don't know how they believe something with such a massive contradiction as if that's the case why is separation of church and state something the founding fathers included. Doesn't have to make sense to people living in reality.

[–] BeautifulMind 21 points 1 year ago

That's just the thing- they've got church-funded groups churning out historical revisionism in which the Framers were really trying to found a Biblical version of Sparta but the wicked usurpers got power and ruined it with their War of Northern Aggression

Reality? LOL they're trying to replace reality with their version, which tells you to bend your contemporary knee to them

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They also act like the founders are gods whose supposed wishes need to be followed unquestioningly forever.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The red scare propaganda really didn't help by putting, "In God we trust," on the dollar bill and the, "[one nation,] under God," part in the pledge allegiance.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Daft_ish 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Because MAGAs deny they've aligned themselves with religious extremists because Gregg who goes to church every Sunday likes football and guns so he's probably not a fascist.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] EatYouWell 51 points 1 year ago (4 children)

People actually think hamas is a threat to the USA?

[–] FuglyDuck 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think the risk is more in the way of Hamas getting recruits in the US and inciting terrorist acts here.

That said it’s a vague possibility compared to the certainty that christofascists will absolutely incite terrorist and insurrectist acts.

[–] TropicalDingdong 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

christofascists

Have, done, continue to do terrorist attacks.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tacosplease 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

My mom gave me a couple boxes of bullets because she's worried about Hamas.

Hamas is not the threat I'm worried about, but I'm happy to have more ammo all the same.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If only we could get more people, especially young adults, to care about politics. Those asshats would get eradicated in the primaries.

[–] orclev 64 points 1 year ago (4 children)

A big part of the problem is that the damn DNC doesn't have anybody worth anything. They're all a bunch of geriatrics whose platforms are so uninspiring that the only reason people vote for them is because of how vile their GOP opponents are.

If there were no possible way that anybody in the GOP could win and two DNC candidates were running against each other, I'm not sure I could even be bothered to vote, they're all equally bland and useless. They're practically the embodiment of "business as usual".

On one side you have a party whose entire platform is essentially "we're going to burn everything down and in the ashes rebuild all the worst parts of the 20th century, from robber barons to slave plantations with a little neo-nazi spice for flavor". Then on the other side you've got "we'll slightly improve things, but not too much because we don't want to step on the toes of the ones signing our paychecks, and we'll actively oppose anyone who makes too big a wave".

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)

As a lifelong democrat, I have to agree. The DNC is running scared, just like the RNC, but for different reasons. And yes I could be called a geriatric.

But I believe the problem is that we need to stop worrying about stepping on toes, maintaining a status quo that has never really worked, and has always favored the rich. I think we need a real, true blue, dyed in the fur ass-kicking braying Donkey to shake things up and say, "to hell with pleasing the moderates, we're gonna lead this nation into the 21st century whether it likes it or not." We need someone willing to be extremely far left enough to shake up people and wake them up and get truly progressive on their asses.

[–] givesomefucks 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But I believe the problem is that we need to stop worrying about stepping on toes, maintaining a status quo that has never really worked, and has always favored the rich

That's not a voter problem, that's an elected representative problem...

But it's almost impossible for an incumbent to lose a primary. It was only like a decade ago that the DNC was openly threatening to black ball any organization/business that worked on a primary campaign against a Dem incumbent.

While they no longer (at least openly) make those threats, they still say they're a private party and can pick sides. They can also use PAC donations meant for the general and instead use it to keep Dems like Manchin safe from more progressive primary challengers.

We need a fundamental change to our political system, because an insane amount of control is in the hands of private organizations beholden to absolutely no one with zero oversight.

To circle back to the status quo comment, the richest people at the top of the status quo keep giving a shit ton of money to those private organizations. It's an uphill fight, because "winning" isn't just Dems controlling the government. It's also replacing the vast majority of them, not just in office, but the ones behind the scenes running the party too.

I think they get that, and that's why they fight progressives in primaries harder than Republicans in generals.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Do you think a new party further left would gain serious traction, particularly with the youth? I'd love to see it happen but I have my doubts.

[–] orclev 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, but it's not possible with first past the post. We desperately need proportional voting, it's the only way we'll break the stranglehold that the DNC and GOP have on US politics.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

The lack of Ranked Choice has likely caused untold damage. It has to happen before any other real change can occur.

[–] Sweetpeaches69 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Happened with Bernie. There are just too many middle aged folks who preferred Biden.

[–] orclev 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That and the DNC just barely tolerates Bernie. They like him because he attracts actual progressives to the DNC, but if they think he might actually get any kind of control they throw everything they have at crushing him. Look at how many dirty tricks they pulled when he was running against Hillary. I strongly suspect they would kick him out of the party before they actually let him win a primary.

[–] Daft_ish 6 points 1 year ago

Right. We need a democratic party who would elevate a Bernie Sanders type and not isolate him.

[–] givesomefucks 9 points 1 year ago

A third party will never work.

That's why Bernie spent like half a century telling people that and motivating younger generations to get involved in the entire political process on a grass roots level. Then slowly replacing the people who are currently running the party.

If that works, then maybe someday that new party would have the votes to fundementally overhaul our political system and get rid of the bullshit private parties.

But until that happens, both the major parties will always care about donations more than anything else.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FuglyDuck 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Blaming young people is a great way to convince them to vote for you.

In case you didn’t know… Boomers held the largest voting block for all but the last election or two. So if your gojng to play the generational blame game, why don’t you blame people who’ve been creating policy for the last 60 years or so.

[–] AFKBRBChocolate 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I didn't see anyone blaming, I read that comment as saying that younger people significantly disagree with the Christian right, so if we could get more of them voting we'd be able to trounce the generally older folks who vote GOP.

It's a little oversimplified though. If you look at the demographics of the last presidential election, there were lots of older people voting for Biden and younger people voting for Trump. Not the majority, but the difference isn't as stark as a lot of people think.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

This. I wasn’t blaming anyone.

I really am talking about primaries. There is a huge gap between who votes in primaries and general elections.

I think that even Republican primaries would be different if they had to cater toward a younger group.

And all the people that have responded are right. Boomers are a huge chunk of the voting bloc. But they don’t care about us and they won’t live long enough to see the repercussions. Overwhelming them in the primaries would help us more in the short term. I’m not sure we can make it another twenty plus years.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] FuglyDuck 4 points 1 year ago

Of course it’s far more complicated.

The reality is “young people don’t vote” has been a dog whistle for blaming “kids” (gen z haven’t been kids for a while now.) for the way things are.

Lamentation about young kids not voting is just another way boomers have passed the buck on issues that have been a problem since before my parents were alive, and in any case, millennials and gen z have been voting at unprecedentedly high levels when we were “the kids” compared to prior generations when they were.

The reality is that boomers have dominated politics relative to other generations and a lot of the disengagement perceived comes from being outright ignored- nevermind being told that one is ignorant and should just shut up and vote the way they tell me to.

You want young people engaged, then engage them and expend effort on advancing their interests. Corpo dems always act like Bernie was a fluke. It wasn’t. He’s one of the few voices we have in the senate that doesn’t look at us as a means to collecting more bribes from corporations.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NatakuNox 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hamas has no airforce, no navy, no modern army. They shouldn't even make our top 100 issues list

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Hamas has no airforce

Tbh neither did Al-Qaida, until they hijacked a couple of planes. That's the sort of threat being talked about, not like Red Dawn shit

[–] mlg 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah but Al-Qaeda was ranting about attacking the USA for years and had actually already done terror acts by 9/11

Hamas basically doesn't exist outside Israel. Technically, they're Hezbollah's little brother according to the US. They really only care about whatever happens in Gaza. Kind of like the Taliban in Afghanistan

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah I don't think Hamas is any threat to us in any serious way. But I do think so called "Christian" and Maga ethics of banning books, hurting others, limiting people's healthcare rights, and taking away social programs is doing more damage to our country than any third-world outside terrorists could ever dream of being capable of doing. Like most countries, America has failed, and is crumbling away from within. Ignorance is the real threat to our continued existence.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You don't need to be nuanced about it. MAGA extremists have actually killed people on American (and Canadian) soil, planned bombings, and attempted to overthrow the government.

[–] aDuckk 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And particularly chilling: they have the police on their side. When the maggots all show up at your neighborhood or place of work to vandalize and harass and assault, the cops will arrive late and they will be turned to face against you

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago

Y'all Quaeda.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well yeah, since when is Hamas a threat to America?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CharlesDarwin 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The title is 100% correct. The FBI rated homegrown terrorism from radicalized right wing a bigger threat way back under the Bush regime, even. And of course the cons got all butthurt about this simple fact.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mdurell 7 points 1 year ago

“Has the White House considered the possibility that a terrorist could be in the country right now after crossing the southern border?”

What a bullshit question. The core question is valid, “Has the White House considered the possibility that a terrorist could be in the country right now."

But the rest is a bullshit political talking point, “...after crossing the southern border?”

As if we only have one method for a terrorist to get in. Nevermind the northern border, the shores, air flights, and then the truly scary threat that the terrorists were born here and are citizens. But, screw all that, WhAt AbOUt tHe MeXiCaNs!?

This framing shows that the asker has more interest in building support for a Republican talking point into the coming elections than giving a shit about terrorist threats within our borders (all of them).

[–] blazeknave 7 points 1 year ago

This article was barely about the headline. It was far worse and I'm actually afraid of 2024

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How? It's comparing one terrorist group against another.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Hamas, over in Palestine, focused on Israel occupation of Palestine vs American conservative Christians on American soil. Comparing how big of a threat they're to the US seems weird. It's a comparison that I wouldn't have thought about

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] killeronthecorner 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Ah alright. In the context it makes more sense, it just hadn't occurred me to make such comparison

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] YoBuckStopsHere 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

MAGA is the last breath of the religious right.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We hope it's the last breath of the religious right. If they succeed in imposing minority rule by invalidating any election they lose, then we could be dealing with them for a long time.

[–] EatYouWell 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yup, we're only a bad election or two away from being a fascist theocracy.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Canopyflyer 12 points 1 year ago

No it is not, not by a long shot.

They currently control the lower house in the legislature and the Speaker of the House, 2nd in line for the presidency, is a lunatic that is one of the the worst.

They also control the Supreme Court. The fact that all it took for one geriatric woman to die is all it took for them to overturn over 50 years of reproductive rights for women in the U.S.

To paraphrase Tom Clancy: These fucking lunatics are a clear and present danger to everyone in the United States. They will not go away any time soon.

load more comments
view more: next ›