this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2025

215 points (99.1% liked)

politics

24746 readers

2250 users here now

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

• 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

outrageousmatter@lemmy.world

aidan@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

Theonetheycall1845@lemmy.world

JuBe@lemmy.world

Lasherz12@lemmy.world

215

Mamdani appoints top DNC and Obama adviser in bid to secure Democratic Party establishment support (www.wsws.org)

submitted 1 day ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

42 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 44 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 60 points 1 day ago

Lerner is in bed with a bunch of law firms that I would rather he not be. He does have connections for the kind of campaign Mamdani needs to run to get the DNC suckups to get on board though, so I'm skeptical, but hopefully this is a good.

Khan is a smart fucking move.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Hey, if Obama's team could get a black man elected twice then this should work perfectly.

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The only way be will get that support is if he pivots to the right. Obama talked like a progressive when he ran, but ruled conservative as a president. So no I don't see this as a good sign.

[+] finitebanjo@lemmy.world -34 points 1 day ago (4 children)

lmao

Yeah the fucking Obamacare guy was a conservative, OK BUDDY

You must have been the Harris campaign advisor.

[–] oakey66@lemmy.world 44 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Obamacare was romneycare. Wtf are you talking about?

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 34 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

He bailed out the banks instead of the people , passed the Republican healthcare bill only aftet he removed the public option. HE damn sure was a progressive. He was supposed to be the Hope and Change president, instead he deported more people than Trump and Biden combined and bomb the fuck out of Afghanistan and other countries. Also appointing Hillary Clinton to Security of of State wasn't best move eithet. He wasn't a conservative like you think of them today but he still moved to the right once he was elected. Some may say he did more good then bad, but he should shoulder some of blame of the track we are on now he help create.

[+] finitebanjo@lemmy.world -15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

After the 2008 financial crisis much of the world was left in economic turmoil and what Obama did worked. I'm sorry if that hurts your feelies.

Fun fact, the Republicans Filibustered the version of the bill that passed, but the 58 DNC convinced Bernie Sanders and the other Independent holdout to pass it via supermajority. If Republicans had their way there would never have been any Medicaid expansion, tens of millions of people would have suffered without healthcare to this very day.

[–] polysexualstick@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Conservative =/= Republican. Some of the perceptions in the US are skewed so far to the right that you don't even realise how conservative the Democratic Party is. In a lot of other countries in the world, there are like 3-4 major parties left of where Obama stood, but only like 1, maybe 2, right of him.

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

Hell Bernie Sanders is to the right to most European countries. They just don't know what conservative means.

[–] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 day ago

Without the public option, Obamacare pretty much just cemented insurance corporations into our society. Any other little things that came along with it have since been gutted by Republicans over the years. The only part that survived was the heritage foundation plan (the people who wrote the fascist project 2025 takeover handbook)

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Since when did he enact single-payer healthcare? I must have missed that news.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Public Option, similar to Germany healthcare, was the plan until Independent Joe Lieberman held out keeping the DNC from the required 60 votes to bypass Republican Filibuster.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Let me guess, just like the last DNC fucktard I asked you about, Joe Lieberman was Totally Definitely Completely Unrelated and Absolutely Independent. Everything is different now right? The DNC is completely reformed and progressive now right?

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 22 hours ago

In that user's own words if we had voted in more dems they totally wouldn't end up with enough dissent to kill the public option.

Also ignores how much they could have done by killing the filibuster or simply forcing the person filibustering to actually be there the entire time not just say they would

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 1 points 1 day ago

You joke but he has been underperforming with blacks

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 26 points 1 day ago

Okay everyone, get your pitchforks ready because if he does veer off to the center and doesn't get significant backlash from the left y'all are doomed, no two ways about it.

[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I think this is a miscalculation. 62% of Democrats want the leadership gone, the establishment Dems are splitting their vote between Adams and Cuomo, and nothing short of full-throated support of Israel will satisfy them anyway. There's no point in appeasing an enemy that is weak, fractured, and belligerent. They pose no threat to him and he has little to gain from winning them over.

[–] defaultusername@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 day ago

Oof

[+] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca -15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You appeal to the base to get the nom, after to get the nom, you move to the center to win the general. Politics 101.

Leftists are to the Democratic party as the MAGA were to the GOP. Tendency to be single issue voters that have no understanding of how government works, weird ideas about some radical changes will improve their lives (which won't) and no understanding of the actual changes needed that would improve things. Buying into populists that promise to fix everything in a day.

The problem is the MAGA took over the GOP and are now trying to do the weirdo policies that were promised to the base. It would be the same if leftists took over government, just a different group of people being harmed by policies based around slogans and ignorance.

But I doubt leftists have the dedication the MAGAs have, so likely they'll go back to being "uncommitted" before they can capture the Democratic party. They also engage with the American tradition of blaming the Democrats for everything (even when they aren't in power) while the MAGA types (Tea party, pro-life, states rights, christian nationalists, etc) were willing to vote GOP in every election while working to take over the party. I doubt slacktivists will have that dedication.

But the good news is that MAGAs might also go back to being non-voters because of the Epstein thing. So maybe some day the US can be run by serious people instead of populist clowns. If it doesn't collapse before that because of the current populist clown in chief.

[–] TheCleric@lemmy.org 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That is a massive oversimplification and seemingly a blatant misunderstanding.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca -2 points 1 day ago

You don't seem to have a counter for the comparison between leftists and MAGAs other than the left-right social construct. These groups aren't significantly different, I've had conversations with both leftists and MAGAs and the conversations and they are the same conversation on all but a few topics.

Every day the two groups become more similar to each other and now we're at a point that it's only if someone inserts a slogan or mentions a specific ethnic group they dislike that I can tell the difference between a MAGA and a leftist. And that's not always a reliable indicator sometimes since both MAGA and leftists sometimes hate the same ethnic groups.