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
It's not that the public forgot, but that leadership failed to offer an alternative other than "not Trump". When the Democrats do offer an alternative like Mamdani, people show up. And 80% of those that showed up voted for him, not against the other candidate. Not even Obama accomplished that.
It’s wasn’t “not Trump”. It was NOT FASCISM. That people STILL don’t understand this, while further entrenching themselves within faulty logic bodes poorly for the future.
America will be remembered as a cautionary tale on not leaning from history…
What will the Democratic leadership learn from Mamdani's win?
They've only taken away "charismatic" candidate
A win doesn’t mean shit unless it’s backed up by the promises made, and progress is the result. All winning doesn’t is start the clock.
He’s going to need to prove himself. And if he does. And the democrats don’t notice- we will deal with that then. Right now is not time time to suffer illusions.
As long as we're paying attention to those who can imagine a different future, then we're at the same table.
The difference is being able to tell from one’s imagination, and one’s capability. It’s the same as how people have come to assume ‘potential’ and ‘actual’ mean the same thing. They’re not, and believing that they are is how we ended up here. Because at a the end of this path, lies the mindset that good is the enemy of perfect.
My point is that we haven't had good candidates as evidence by their losing. When we actually do have a good candidate that wins we are suddenly the idealists that aren't practical, as if winning power (in spite of both political establishments) is something other than an act of pragmatism.
And my point is- we don’t know if he’s good. So far he’s said a lot of good things. That’s it. Hopefully he can make it happen, but a big part of the problem we’re having here is there’s an entire group of disillusioned people that think any untested wet-behind-the-ears candidate is our only hope. This is where idealism is being faulted. Because the question to ask is:
At what point is “not Trump” worse than “not a democrat”?
Both are based on an absence of what we dislike, yet neither are based on any amount of things we do.
Those that voted against the fascist did the right thing. They took the best of the worst situation and ran with it without looking back, where if they did- all they’d see is a bunch of disillusioned idealist’s middle finger.
It is silly to think we can't learn lessons on how Mamdani won because he hasn't exercised the office yet. This isn't about how you did that right thing and voted against fascism that one time. This is about winning power, and if that is too idealist for you then I don't know what else to say other than I'll see you on the campaign trail.
Know who else thinks it’s all about being elected? MAGA.
And in the bigger picture, it’s wrong. Being elected only gets you out on the field. It doesn’t keep you in the game. And it certainly doesn’t win them for you.
What if he ends up being ineffective and a pushover, what would we have learned from his winning then?
How to deceive people?
He needs to walk the walk now. The talk is over. He campaigned well enough to get elected. Hopefully he can create the change he sees for everyone, and inspires others to follow suit.
But you people are going all-in on someone you have no idea whether or not he can follow through- only because he’s a “not democrat”.
And again, how is this better than a “not trump”? And this is ignoring the fact that we all voted for the “not fascist”.
If a third party candidate worth their word in action stepped up to the plate, I’m sure we’d have voted for them. But unfortunately- all that was offered was a bunch of untested no-experience-in-the-field nobodies that have since disappeared into obscurity. Disagree?
What’s Jill Stein been up to lately? Or what about Cornell West?
They flew in at the eleventh hour to promise the earth, sun, and moon- then disappeared without a trace when they lost- just as they did in 2020, and in 2016. This proves they can’t commit to their own bullshit. And yet, too many people held our democracy hostage over these clowns.
Where are they now?!
Was it worth it? Giving them your votes? They abandoned you. And I’ll be willing to bet anything that they aren’t feeling one degree of the hell that Trump has brought down on us.
So, yeah. You’re accused of being idealists because your behavior illustrates it. It’s easy to buy into shit people tell you. Especially if you ever expect them to follow through. This is why it’s so easy to be an idealist. You never have to be accountable if all you do is blame everyone else for not listening to you.
The rest of us have to do the work in holding them accountable, while shouldering the blame when you all don’t get your way.
I’m done discussing this.
It's funny because I have the same tired feeling of dragging unimaginative people to a better future. But the good news is if you aren't against us then you are for us. There's room at the table for you.
No thanks. I’d rather sit at the adults table.
He's a politician let's see if he actually does anything. You must be young with your blind faith in politicians.
Eventually the rest of the world will build a wall around US.
It was not just "not Trump", it was "not insane", and not threatening to tear down democracy and destroy healthcare and the economy. It was business as usual over sociopathy.
The choice should have been clear. But too many Americans are sociopaths, and chose to really stick it to the minorities until they die. Americans voted for Trump not despite he is a sociopath, but because of it. Americans want revenge for their lousy lives more than they want to improve things for everybody.
The Dems won other places than New York.
It was "not Trump, status quo." Nobody but the rich liked the status quo, but anybody who's not an idiot knew it was MUCH, MUCH BETTER than...well, what we have now.
Don't be mistaken, Mandani's win is not America's win, it's NY win. America as a whole is way more stupid and way more evil than that. Hell, even broad democratic voters are worse than that, Bernie lost popular vote on primaries twice afterall.
I'd like to rephrase that to make a point: When progressive voters show up and vote in the primaries for the more progressive candidate, there's more likely to be a more progressive Democratic candidate on the ballot in the general and people will show up for them.
Point is the Democratic Party powers that be did not willingly "offer an alternative like Mamdani". They hated that he was the candidate and tried to get Cuomo elected instead. Mamdani was only "offered" thanks to the voters who showed up and voted for him in the primary.
I think that downplays how good of a candidate Mamdani was and how differently he ran his campaign. It also blinds us to new lessons.
I don't see how it downplays at all how good a candidate he was, if anything it shows how good he must have been to overcome his own party's elite trying to stop him. My point is that they might have stopped him, if it weren't for the people who turned out in the primary. Just think what quality candidates we could get if people would support them in the primaries, instead of waiting until the general and seeing who other people chose in the primary and then being disappointed. My point is we need to turn out for the primaries. When potential candidates see voters supporting progressive candidates more will decide to run because they'll know they have a chance.
You're telling me people have to get off their ass and not just bitch online? Cmon now... /s
And that is the real problem progressive voters are not reliable as a block. So nobody caters to them.
And in general they continue to bitch regardless even if they get what they want. They'll turn on their own politicians in an instant and dislike it even when they get what they were asking for- ie. Hochul or whomever to endorse.
Just shows how dumb Americans really are. And comparing a presidential election to a material one. And the most votes cast is also BS they're going by numbers and I assume in 2025 the population is higher then in 1989. But 34% voter turnout is good for a municipal election but not the barn burner your describing. And still a lot of people not voting. And the progressives seem to only care to vote when Trump is in power. The second election after Trump they won't show up again as they don't care.