this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2023
103 points (91.9% liked)

politics

20426 readers
3173 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
 

The Pennsylvania Democrat recalled his time serving as a Hillary Clinton surrogate in 2016, even after he supported Bernie Sanders in the primary.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BeautifulMind@lemmy.world 49 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

In the primaries, I supported progressive candidates like Sanders and Warren because I think their policy prescriptions would make for a better America. In the general, I voted for Biden. That was a harm-reduction vote.

What I don't like to hear, in the primary, is the 'you have to vote for the candidate who can win' line of argument, which begs the question it pretends to answer- if everyone who says "I'd vote for x but x can't possibly win" just voted for x, x would actually win. This gives whoever tells you that "x can't possibly win" the power to get you to give up on voting for what you want, which seems to wag the dog.

In the general, between dem and gop control, it's not a close contest for me; it's between a party afraid to do progressive things the voters want and a party that will do whatever the fuck it wants no matter that nobody wants that.

Yes, our electoral system of first-past-the-post demands that we hedge our bets and compromise in order to avoid the calamity of electing a fascist in this election cycle, but it's hard to support with evidence the idea that what makes a progressive candidate "risky" isn't just a self-fulfilling misperception that causes the party to spend (or not-spend) money to prevent progressives from becoming party nominees. After all, research consistently shows that politicians of both parties routinely overestimate the conservatism of the voters.

I'm glad to see the Biden admin embracing the progressive changes it has been able to get to, but I'm also sooo tired of being told 'we can't nominate a progressive, they'll be called a communist' when no matter who we nominate they'll be called a communist and decades of voting a harm-reduction ticket has rolled back much of the New Deal

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 24 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I don't like Joe Biden, but this isn't a presidential approval poll, it's an election, and he's clearly better than any of the alternatives. And when it comes down to it, he's been better than I expected. We could have just had an exclusively centrist presidency, and while there's been plenty of centrism, he has been persuadable to progressive action.

And frankly even if you can't bring yourself to express support Biden for some reason, it should be pretty easy to want anyone who willingly associates with Republicans to lose and lose badly, because they're way beyond stealth-mode fascism now. Even the most jaded "they're all neolibs" voter from earlier elections can't possibly ignore that the Republicans are just fash now. There's a real danger if they win that cities end up with federally tasked jackboots kidnapping protesters like Portland.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When the vote is between someone (and a party) who says "climate change is more worrying than nuclear war" and "climate change is a hoax" the choice should be clear for any reasonable person. All the treason stuff aside (though very important, everyone should already be decided on that), climate change is the biggest issue for everyone I know. Probably for any average person under 50 if I had to guess.

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I've seen people saying Hexbear users have been brigading politics communities of other instances. Not sure if it's true, but it would explain the massive influx of idiotic far right morons with a 6th grade writing level making bad faith arguments.

[–] thoro@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hexbear is leftist and lemmy.world defederated from the instance so you're speaking of phantoms

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think he's suggesting hexbear users are making accounts on non-defederated instances to troll

[–] thoro@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

So baseless conspiracy without a shred of evidence.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

They are prioritizing principles over practicality. Which is a great way to hand power to the greater evil.

[–] maporita@unilem.org 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The key to getting progression policies passed is voting for Congress. Having a democratic President, whether it's Biden or someone else, doesn't matter if we only have a razor-thin majority. We just get held hostage by people like Manchin. We need solid majorities in both House and Senate to achieve anything.

[–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

the key to getting progressive policies passed is direct pressure. widespread strikes and organizing.

[–] farngis_mcgiles@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

dems had a majority when obama was elected and did nothing with it

[–] maporita@unilem.org 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

They only had a majority in both houses for 2 years and still managed to get the ACA passed which was pretty significant. Even Trump couldn't undo it. Also in fairness to Obama he was focused on staving off financial collapse for a good part of his first term.

[–] thoro@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

The ACA was a Heritage Foundation health care plan that acts as a de facto subsidy for private health insurance. The best we ever get is still conservative.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

They only had a filibuster proof majority for a few months actually.

im not impressed with them passing a conservative healthcare plan from the 90s that is basically just free money for healthcare companies and still leaves millions of americans without healthcare. the dems didnt even stave off financial collapse they bailed out huge banks and other corporations while doing absolutely nothing for the american people

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because the Democrstic Party did just about everything it could to try and have it be Senator Conor Lamb. Or by effect, a Senator Oz.

For me Biden represents much of that faction of the Democratic Party. Hence I have trouble assuring Biden my vote even before the primary.

[–] SankaraStone@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

It's about getting 50%+1 in a democracy, right (or at least it should be)? So at some point the choices should come down to a binary to guarantee a 50%+1 outcome. However, the right candidate in a representative democracy and building of that 50%+1 should be done either with rank choiced voting or 2 round elections (either with a primary as we do it now or with multiple parties in the first round, that winnows everything down to 2 candidates). And an important role of the primaries is to get the resulting candidate to negotiate and build a coalition unifying the the 50%+1 coalition. So that deal that Biden and Sanders struck after Biden won the primary was huge. In the case of the left, the primary helps move the winning candidate left of where they might otherwise be. It's why I was ecstatic to have Bernie run in 2016 and 2020 (It puled Hilary Clinton and Joe Biden to the left). And I think it's bullshit that the Democratic party puts its thumb on the scale.

So if you have a left-right linear spectrum constituting 100% of the electorate, there are obviously different 50%+1 coalitions that can be made. Joe Manchin or Conor Lamb wants to be at the center of that 50%+1 coalition. Progressives obviously have an anathema to that and want that 50%+1 coalition to include everyone from the left end of the spectrum to the right of that up to 50%+1. Unfortunately, with institutions like the Senate and electoral college and whatnot, getting that 50%+1 coalition requires building it with Joe Manchin or Conor Lamb. Otherwise, there is no majority.

So while we fixate on Biden and whatnot, Biden and us need to focus on local elections, local referendums, and creating a Manchin-Sinema-Conor Lamb (or his equivalent) proof majority in the House and Senate. It's obvious to me with several of Biden's moves, he's highly responsive to popular will and the votes available, regardless of what his own or his donors' proclivities are. So if we want paid family leave and assistance with early child care and a pathway to medicare for all and expanded child tax credit, we need to be focused on winning all of these more local elections. Yes, having a popular candidate at the top of the ballot would help, but if you look at Biden's polling, it's the left end of the spectrum that's keeping him from being closer to 50% popularity. Instead of getting angry that we didn't get all this stuff when Manchin scuttled everything, we should be focused on building majorities that don't need him.

If John Fetterman hadn't had the stroke and the resulting depression, I'd be ecstatic about having him run for the presidency. Hopefully, he'll recover by and be in good shape by 2028. We need a blue collar - union friendly presidential candidate to unify and build that 50%+1 coalition. I was hoping it was Sherrod Brown in Ohio in 2016 and 2020, but he voted against the Rail Worker strike and I think it's taking its toll on his Senate election chances in Ohio.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] jhulten@infosec.pub 4 points 1 year ago

Primaries are for ideas and ideals. General elections are for harm reduction.

[–] jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I see Reddit's r/Politics hard liberal cast has migrated wholesale and now drowns out lemmy's leftists.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

ITT: people who defend Manchin every single time he votes against his party expecting perfect lockstep from those he keeps betraying.

Edit: I summoned one.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] blazera@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh, because i support progressive people, not union busters

[–] rz2000@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

This president made an empty promise about continuing to work for paid sick leave after preventing a strike by railworkers at the end of 2022. Except, that it actually worked. Almost every union did get paid sick leave for its members within six months aided by continued pressure from the White House.

He's a pretty lousy union buster.

Those paid sick days still count against the attendance records of the railroad employees via the actually insane "points" system, a system that the rail unions were fighting against. It's strange how all of the neoliberal papers that are sucking Biden off over this "win" neglect to mention that.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

"You can't strike, but I will try to talk to your boss to get you some of what you desire" is still union busting. The union doesn't have the power anymore.

[–] Zorque@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Telling workers they can't fight for their own rights, and have to wait for politicians to do it for them us not progressive, and its not pro-labor. It's on a long list of swiftly festering bandages that only stave off death for a little while. If we don't empower our workers, we stifle them. Even if we bribe them candy when they demand steak.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] h3mlocke@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago
load more comments
view more: next ›