this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2025
36 points (73.7% liked)

politics

24692 readers
3003 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
top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] doc@fedia.io 40 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Yet another misleading headline.

The article goes on about Yang's dislike of the two party system, that he made his own party to break from the system, and is supporting others who want to do the same.

Nothing in there said Yang agrees with or supports Musk's political objective beyond challenging the two major parties.

[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

I can't imagine Yang supporting Musk on much of anything. The headline is just intended to force people to read by making a blatantly incorrect claim.

[–] swelter_spark@reddthat.com 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

I've never heard of the Forward Party before, but it sounds a lot like the No Labels party (which I thought was linked to Mitch McConnell, but apparently there was a fake website put up around the time of the election that tried to discredit them by making them look Republican-aligned, so maybe that's where I read that?)

[–] Almonds@mander.xyz 39 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why are we meeting him again? Didn't he run for president in 2020?

[–] TheFogan@programming.dev 23 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Yeah... in short he was in the primaries, actually had a pretty strong following, mainly because he proposed UBI. Then after losing he started a "forward" party... which as far as I can see was meant to be kind of a centrist party, but effectively didn't have any stances besides work towards ranked choice voting.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

a centrist party

The idea of such a party always amuses me, since it's always stated that there is some gigantic "center" in this country. Which of course is halfway between the utterly unhinged far right extremists in the qon movement and Republican Party, as contrasted with the right-of-center Democratic Party?

Not only is it never really stated what the positions of this so-called party would actually be, nor who they'd really be popular with, but do we need THREE right-leaning parties?

WTAF.

[–] h4x0r@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 day ago

had a pretty strong following, mainly because he proposed UBI

His entire UBI scheme was based on a techno feudal dystopia, trying to attach himself to Elon's teat is right on brand.

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 day ago

If there was any further confirmation required, that this man has no soul...let this be it.

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

We're about to experience atomic levels of dumb shit

We already are.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

LOL, this guy again.

[–] BlackVenom@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Yang gang takes note from worm brain.

[–] ramenshaman@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Andrew don't get involved, I'm pretty sure you know better.

But maybe you don't.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 3 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Every Sociopathic Oligarchs wants to buy his own political party.

[–] blargle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

Ooh, maybe now it can siphon off all those "Abundance Agenda" fucknuggets from the dregs of the Democratic Party. Take Bloomberg too, while you're at it.