this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2025
132 points (99.3% liked)

politics

26691 readers
2754 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
 

So basically less for the most affected. On point for the human suffering party.

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 41 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Imagine if all the suffering and death that will happen from this was preventable.

[–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 28 points 2 days ago

On the other hand, the GOP, along with some Democrats, just approved a huge military budget, $900 billion IIRC, and what have they been doing with that? Blowing up fishing boats, hijacking oil tankers, and basically gearing up for some sort of larger military action in South America, perhaps. More suffering and death.

The GOP knows that causing suffering and death is in their best interests. They need "others". They need victims. And they need hate. If people were able to calm down and rationally vote in their own best interests, instead of billionaires' best interests, the GOP would be gone within a few years. And after that, the Democratic party would have to change quite a bit if they wanted to stick around, as well.

[–] RustyShackleford@piefed.social 41 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Roughly 40-45% of the people using ACA are Republican.

collapsed inline media

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

It probably will work well for Republicans, because those same 40-45% of people have been conditioned by their media to repeatedly vote against their interests. This won't change their vote at all.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 33 points 2 days ago

Conservatives ruin everything.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 22 points 2 days ago

Even with two failed votes in the Senate, and the real risk of disastrous midterm elections, House Republicans remain deeply divided on the issue of the subsidies. Because of that division — and opposition to the subsidies from Republican leaders themselves — GOP leaders opted against including a subsidy extension in their health care bill.

But after moderates rebelled by trying to force votes on subsidy extension plans through discharge petitions, leadership began negotiations. Now, House GOP leadership aides said they will allow a vote on an amendment to extend the ACA subsidies in some form.

Any such amendment vote would give moderate Republicans political cover, but would have little chance of becoming law. Even if it passes the House, it will need 60 votes in the Senate.