this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2025
296 points (93.0% liked)

politics

26381 readers
2982 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
 

Younger men threw their support behind Donald Trump in 2024 after favoring Biden in 2020

The United States is still not ready for a female president after more than a century of unsuccessful campaigns for the White House, according to former First Lady Michelle Obama.

“As we saw in this past election, sadly, we ain’t ready,” Obama said earlier this month in a live conversation with actor Tracee Ellis Ross that was published Friday.

“That’s why I’m like, don’t even look at me about running, because you all are lying,” she said. “You’re not ready for a woman. You are not. So don’t waste my time.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3abas@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

This is a stupid take. Give the people a viable candidate that doesn't thank Dick Satan Chaney for his service and cheerfully announces the desire for the "most lethal military" when the voting base is expressing discontent with the governments support for an active genocide, and she'll win.

People didn't reject KH because she was a woman, they rejected her "centrist" campaign that was to the right of GWB's on several key issues. People didn't reject Hilary because she was a woman, they rejected her being forced on them instead of Bernie.

And both of them had the same attitude, that voters owe them their votes, simply because they're not Trump. People didn't reject women, then rejected the DNC.

[–] MourningDove@lemmy.zip 0 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

You people really need to make up your mind and pick a lane. Either she didn’t win because you all protested her centrist views, or your lack of support didn’t make a difference.

But watching you flip flop the outcome based on the discussion is getting sad.

[–] MourningDove@lemmy.zip 0 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

You people really need to make up your mind and pick a lane. Either she didn’t win because you all protested her centrist views, or it didn’t matter because she would have lost anyway.

But watching you flip flop the outcome based on the discussion is getting sad.

[–] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 1 points 11 hours ago

You're absolutely right, but 2 things can be true at once. She was kinda forced into being the candidate, while also being a bad candidate.

But ffs! 1/3 of this country voted FOR "I got concepts of a plan"! Being funded by Peter Thiel who openly said he is hostile to the state. Republicans are literally anti American. Sorry for the rant, I'm just incredibly disappointed in my country.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world -1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Give the people a viable candidate

Both female candidates who lost were INSANELY more qualified than felon, rapist, pedophile Donald Trump.

Still lost.

Stop ignoring the reality of what America is.

Don't gamble with what's left of our democracy.

[–] abbotsbury@lemmy.world 5 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Both female candidates who lost were INSANELY more qualified than felon, rapist, pedophile Donald Trump.

Qualifications aren't how presidential elections in our country are won. You can stop talking about it, because it’s a moot point.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world -2 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

You realize that no matter what you say, running a female for president is a gamble.

You are openly admitting you are willing to gamble what's left of our democracy at a critical juncture in American history.

Not very bright.

[–] abbotsbury@lemmy.world 4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

You realize that no matter what you say, running a female for president is a gamble.

Running anyone is a gamble, there are no guaranteed wins.

You are openly admitting you are willing to gamble what’s left of our democracy at a critical juncture in American history.

I said no such thing, you don't even know my opinion. Arguing with someone in your head is certainly very bright though, no notes.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world -1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

Running anyone is a gamble

The fact that you believe any candidate is an equal gamble indicates you are not taking this conversation seriously.

I can't take someone seriously that tries to equalize all things. That is not reality and you are not living in it.

It is less of a gamble to run a white male and you fucking know it. I could care less for your contrarianism.

Any unnecessary gamble while literal fascists are trying to end our democracy is a fucking disgrace and anyone engaging in such a gamble is a fool.

[–] abbotsbury@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago

The fact that you believe any candidate is an equal gamble

Stopped reading, didn't say that. Have a good day, or don't, whatever.

[–] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

The person you're responding to isn't American (at least not US American).They aren't gambling anything.

[–] abbotsbury@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)
[–] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 1 points 10 hours ago

Oh, my bad!

When you said "your country" made me think you were outside of here.