this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2025
236 points (98.4% liked)

politics

26282 readers
3489 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 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] besselj@lemmy.ca 122 points 23 hours ago (4 children)

MAGA voters seem pretty unlikely to vote for women.

[–] TheFogan@programming.dev 55 points 23 hours ago (4 children)

I mean it's a trippple doom for her. She's a woman, she's half way shedding maga siding with dem's on the epstein files, and on protecting healthcare, and she has a history of being outright crazy in multiple directions.

In short, I don't think her recent forays into sanity are going to erase the stain the R party has on it now, nor erase her claims of weather controlling machines and space lasers to earn any support from the left.

Then to court maga... obviously they'd need to be less sexist, and she'd need to seem more... on trumps side.

I think AOC's comment is probably right, she got snubbed for senate seat by trump... and now she's pissed and wanting to break that glass ceiling.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 13 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Newsom/Greene 2028, lmao (please let this be a joke!)

[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

DNC: "THATS A FUCKING BRILLIANT IDEA"

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 11 points 21 hours ago

if this turns out to be true, I will hate you.

in the mean time, this got a chuckle.

[–] Archer@lemmy.world 8 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

If there’s any organization that we can count on to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory it’s the DNC

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 5 points 21 hours ago

She is crazy enough, however, to make a big stink if Trump doesn't step aside and let her have a crack at the Presidency.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world 10 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

I think you're underestimating the potential power of "vote for a woman to own the libs and show them we're not sexist. They're stupid!"

[–] besselj@lemmy.ca 10 points 22 hours ago

They'd be faster to transvestigate her first

[–] Tikiporch@lemmy.world 8 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Sadly, I think the only way we get a female president is if all candidates are female. AOC vs. MTG would be a good history maker.

[–] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 6 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

Disagree. For one, it'd be an underwhelming point as a historic marker if it's the only option. And two, we haven't gotten a female president yet cuz the women we keep running are shit candidates. Sexism is absolutely a factor, but I don't think it compares to the absolute fuckton of baggage (actual or perceived - doesn't matter) that comes with Hillary, or Harris's last minute embrace of Israel's genocide.

We haven't actually tried running a woman who's also a decent human being. AOC would wipe the floor with her opponent's face, regardless of that opponent's gender.

[–] ech@lemmy.ca 3 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Eh, it doesn't have to be the most stupendous, amazing victory for women to be important and good. Two female candidates would still be a huge deal, assuming proper primaries were conducted. That said, I would be astounded if the Republican nominee is a woman any time soon.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 2 points 22 hours ago

The one flaw in an otherwise brilliant plan.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 40 points 1 day ago (1 children)

She'll 100% run...

The question is if it's just a grift and she plans to drop and endorse early, or if she'll actually try to win

[–] SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world 17 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

That seemed to have been Trump's original plan and now here we are.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 6 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

Because his favorite wedding guest controlled the opposing party, so she thought the best use of her time was hyping trump up since he'd be an "easy" candidate for her to beat.

At least for this cycle, we don't have a DNC corrupt and/or crazy enough to try and campaign for the craziest republican

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 25 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I'd like to laugh, but I did that with Trump and he got elected twice. Never know who fools will elect to lead.

[–] fonix232@fedia.io 6 points 16 hours ago

Trailer Grease has none of the pull the orange turd has, though. Most of MAGA considers her nuttier than squirrel shit and would NOT vote for her.

[–] you_are_dust@lemmy.world 18 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

I hope so. MAGA Republicans aren't going to vote for a woman for president. I have a feeling it would be a humiliating experience for her.

[–] krooklochurm@lemmy.ca 7 points 17 hours ago

MTG vs. AOC.

I'd tune in to watch that.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 16 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I would love MTG to be the Republican nominee. That would guarantee AOC in a head to head match up.

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 19 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

You over estimate Americans. People said this shit about the orange goblin. This concept of let their dumbest most pathetic candidate rise to the top so we can crush them no longer works.

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago

I literally and unironically laughed out loud the first time I heard that Donald Trump was running for president. I didn't think it could possibly be genuine, but here we are.

[–] KindnessIsPunk@lemmy.ca 4 points 19 hours ago

Republican education cuts working their magic

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] arcterus@piefed.blahaj.zone 15 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Explains why she's said a few somewhat reasonable things lately as opposed to before when all she said was batshit crazy garbage.

[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 6 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Except MAGA doesn't like 'reasonable'.

[–] arcterus@piefed.blahaj.zone 9 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Article mentions she's seemingly trying to court anti-Trump people by going on stuff like CNN. Guessing the "real MAGA" thing means trying to "improve" America instead of just being part of a cult (even if her understanding of what would improve the country is radically different from mine).

Anyway by reasonable I meant she wasn't talking about the Biden admin controlling the weather with space lasers to destroy Republican communities and was instead going against most Republicans for stuff like the Epstein files and so on.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] glorkon@lemmy.world 12 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Just another vile demagogue. And people will be dumb enough to vote for her.

[–] toy_boat_toy_boat@lemmy.world 15 points 13 hours ago

NO NO NO!

she's a great candidate! let's boost her so that she beats all the other Rs so that the Ds win!

oh, we tried that? and what happened? oh, wow. maybe we shouldn't do that this time.

[–] TommySoda@lemmy.world 11 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I mean, she is a better representation of what republicans and MAGA actually say they are. When you really dig in to what they believe they would never vote for Trump if they weren't indoctrinated into a cult that he created. He's literally against everything they stand for when you go past the surface but they are so blinded by owning the libs that they don't see it anymore. Remember before the election last year and every republican, including voters, said that Trump was poison and that they would never support him again? They know this deep down even if they won't admit it. They just either don't care, want something out of it, or are genuinely blind to him fucking everyone over. MTG used to be one of the hardcore believers and I genuinely think was brainwashed and is slowly starting to realize it.

But to be clear, I still think she is a garbage human. I just believe that deep down this is the candidate they'd actually want if they weren't so deep in the propaganda from their Dear Leader. She would actually do republican things and not just use it as a guise to become a dictator.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tonytins@pawb.social 9 points 23 hours ago

Trump put soo much of his identity into MAGA that I doubt it'll end well for her.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 9 points 22 hours ago

This sounds ridiculous of course.

But so did a Trump run, it used to be a joke when he put his hat in.

No one is laughing now.

[–] drspawndisaster@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 hours ago

If a new "real maga" comes out of the current maga and allows the movement to reset its image of economic failure and child sexual abuse I'm gonna be fucking pissed.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 7 points 19 hours ago

Fellow people of Lemmy, the first women President of America. I do hope this comment ages like milk.

[–] Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world 6 points 15 hours ago

How do they know? Trying to understand this woman is worse than trying to understand lassie, when she runs to tell people that Timmy fell down the well. Shes the human equivalent of smashing your face into the keyboard and crossing your fingers you get a coherent sentence out of it.

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 6 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

So does this mean she wants the VP slot under Vance? Or is this some sort of fundraising grift?

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 8 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

No, it looks like Erika Kirk is the one under JD Vance lately....

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago

Yeah, that tracks with her recent walking back of her Qanon shit posting.

I am also unsurprised that The View has helped her along with this effort. 😒

[–] switcheroo@lemmy.world 5 points 22 hours ago

Gross. Also, lol. Racist mysogynistic inbred morons aren't going to vote for a woman, Marge. Get it thru your dumb head.

[–] kmartburrito@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Can't wait to see that debate

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 2 points 19 hours ago

I'm not expecting the next presidential debate to be much more than grunting and screaming.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Soapbox@lemmy.zip 4 points 6 hours ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FenderStratocaster@lemmy.world 4 points 21 hours ago

This is a good thing.

[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago

Please do!!

[–] gndagreborn@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

If she becomes the first female president, I'm probably going to off myself. High likelihood. Nonzero.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›