this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2025
858 points (99.4% liked)

politics

31167 readers
1989 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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
 

Seems Johnson knows this. Both him and Trump will keep this shutdown going to stop the forced release of these files it seems. Don't know what kind of plan they're cooking up though.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 24 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I hope that when the dam breaks it washes away the entire GOP

If you look at the Labour Party in the UK, they walked in with comically oversized majorities last year. Then they proceeded to govern exactly like their Conservative predecessors - with no few MPs gleaned from the ranks of fleeing conservatives - such that Reform UK is now ready to pick up the Prime Ministership in the next election cycle.

The problem with the modern American conservative movement is that its not confined to the GOP. It is a consequence of the donor base. And the donors continue to be enthusiastically bipartisan.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I respect the grizzled cynicism of this take while at the same time hoping that this will be different.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

We've definitely got cause for hope after this last election cycle.

But given the stubbornness of the Cuomo-crats, we continue to have some cause for alarm.

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Mamdani has entered the chat...

No billionaires funding him...yet.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

He's an edge case. And - don't get me wrong - if this is a self-reproducing model for future campaigns, awesome!

But Mamdani himself is exceptionally charismatic with good politics to back him up. I wouldn't even say guys like him don't exist, they just tend to prefer climbing the escalator of retail politics to the greased pole of democratic socialism.

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 6 points 10 months ago

One of the funny things about New York politics is that Mamdani's predecessors called for similar things [Billionaire Bloomberg supported congestion pricing and tried to bring fresh produce to food deserts]

Hell, NYC's most popular Mayor ran on a "Fusion Ticket" with the Communists. Socialists, and the Republicans.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

He’s had offers . . .