this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2024
108 points (90.9% liked)

politics

19248 readers
2765 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
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (20 children)

Look I get it, the Dems didn't do enough to win over their base and instead went to the center.

But these Dearborn folks in the article get what they deserve and should really shut the fuck up. They voted for a man who said he would extend his Muslim country travel ban to gaza and still thought somehow he was on their side.

You are a complete a total dumbass if you thought he was on your side. He has years and years of lying out of his ass and you believed him and it's the Democrats fault? No I reject that. He literally stated in 2023 that he would extend his travel ban to Gaza. I feel like I need to take crazy pills or something, these people are insufferable.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The article states that some of them just wanted a candidate to acknowledge them, which trump did. Regardless of how he's actually going to implement policies, he did a bare minimum for them, which reflects in the results.

No other real editorializing needed, unfortunately.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago

What do they have to worry about? Their guy won!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

Hard to muster a lot of sympathy for this mindset. SMH.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago

Maybe the Democrats shouldn't have pretended Biden was still functioning for 3+ years instead of waiting until he died on the debate stage. Kamala running a dogshit 3 month campaign where she ran to the right of Biden didn't help.

Materially maybe they shouldn't have kicked 14+ million people off Medicaid by 'ending' COVID. That's 3x their margin of loss and things like losing health coverage piss people off.

She lost by more than the margin of every third party vote combined.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›