politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
"Let them" ? Excuse me?
Mother fucker in a real democracy YOU don't have any say in the matter. What you're seeing happen is the will of the people. Yes, you will "let us" vote for the candidates that we want to vote for.
Try to take that away, it's about all we (barely) have left. See what happens.
American political parties aren't public institutions, their inner workings are beholden to nobody but their paymasters. It's a rotten problem so old everyone's stopped noticing the smell
They aren't, but popularity is their lifeblood. If their current candidates can't win popular votes vs. these people running to to their left, they have to choose between becoming politically diminished in power and relevance or moving to the left.
It seems that they are scrambling now to find a way to avoid the consequences of their diminishing popularity without doing anything popular. They spent ages trying to get their "help the little guy" image polished up, but it has been so long since the little guy had a win that fewer and fewer people are buying it. It seems that when leftists are presented a choice between a liberal wearing a badge that says "leftist" and a leftist, they usually choose the leftist. In typical American fashion, rather than trying to beat their opponents, they're trying to prevent opponents from existing.
The most charitable reading would be "Their positions are winning votes. Are we going to stick to our conservative positions and let them drive us out the party or are we going to adopt their progressive positions in order to retain power?"
I'm not too optimistic though. They might sacrifice principles, but I'm not sure their pride could stomach accepting that their stubborn attempt to win over the right was fundamentally flawed. Nor could their donors stomach it.
Considering all the times they’ve literally worked to attack more progressive members of their own party, even when it would lead to clear loss, I’m not giving the DNC any charity.
Centrists have lost all generosity and instead dessrve only animosity. Worthless conservatives pretending that they aren’t.
Oh I agree with you.
Starting from charity is just my method of analysing statements, before proceeding to argue against it. That doesn't mean I consider it likely. In fact, I generally find it easier to spot the flawed premises (such as humility to admit mistake and integrity to put what's right over what's profitable) required to support that assumption.
If I start from the negative position, I find it hard to reason my way out of cynicism (probably because cynicism comes naturally to me) and reach a nuanced position. I also found that a "negative by default" stance is bad for my mental health.