this post was submitted on 02 May 2025
75 points (96.3% liked)

politics

23305 readers
3050 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ClassStruggle@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (3 children)

She will run, and the DNC will sheepdog her like they did Bernie, keeping everyone herded up in the party until they realized they got fucked over, again.

[–] mercano@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Bernie’s being doing some rallies with her recently. If I were to guess, Bernie’s not going to run for POTUS again, he’s going to endorse her.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Personally, I prefer Bernie as the main - we need as many years of progressive presidencies as possible. Having 8 of them with him as the lead, and another 8 of AOC, would be a good start to reforming America. Odds are, though, we will simply have AOC replace Bernie during one of his terms. VPs are meant to be backups for when a president isn't able to hold office anymore.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I would prefer Bernie as the main too, but given his age and heart condition, that's not viable. :(

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 2 points 11 hours ago

I have the impression the thing that determines an election, isn't age nor ability, but the possession of a lively personality. I would say that Bernie has enough personality to bury Krasnov.

[–] GrumpyDuckling@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If we could stop floating ancient and/or billionaires, that would be greeeaat.

[–] neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Bernie is the one exception though. The only exception.

[–] TexasDrunk@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I love Bernie and I would vote for him if he were on the ballot, but he has no business being president at this age. I think he recognizes that and that's why he's actively helping the new generation.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

he has no business being president at this age

Things we can say now that biden is no longer running.

[–] TexasDrunk@lemmy.world 0 points 18 hours ago

You ain't wrong, but I said the same thing about him. Almost exactly. The biggest difference is I wouldn't have to hold my nose to vote for Bernie, I genuinely like the dude and my policy quibbles come down to quibbles.

Rant incoming.

Hell, the DNC may run Bernie now that he's old enough. Or they'll pick a cop to lead the ticket where their side doesn't like or trust the police. Anything as long as they don't win. Their last big winners were Obama and Clinton, both of which were in their 40s. Can't make that fucking mistake again I guess. Even on the R side it's been middle aged people rather than geriatric motherfuckers since Reagan until Trump. When the fuck did someone decide that you can't be president unless you were a billion years old? I want someone who represents the future and wants to take us there, not someone whose slogan is "I've seen the future, and it's a better past....which I also saw because I lived through all of human history".

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And both she and liberals will still keep defending the party after it.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, she's never questioned the party leadership or directions. :rolls eyes:

She'd be better in party leadership and not pursue the Presidency (yet).

[–] Ferrous@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2025/04/24/mpeq-a24.html

It is from this standpoint that the World Socialist Web Site has exposed the fraudulent “Fighting Oligarchy” campaign mounted by Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The large turnouts at their rallies, as well as the huge participation in the April 5 and April 19 protests against the Trump administration, express the social anger among millions of working people and their desire to fight back. But Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez never indict capitalism as a system or call for a struggle against it. And they supported and hailed the Biden administration even as it was presiding over the greatest-ever accumulation of wealth on the part of the financial aristocracy.

For all their fulminations against the oligarchy, they carefully avoid advancing any demand that would deprive the billionaires of their ill-gotten riches. They pretend that society can be changed without a drastic redistribution of wealth, which requires the expropriation of the billionaires.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I am so fucking sick of people demanding perfection. In this case, perfection is very much the enemy of good. AOC and Sanders are some of the absolute best people currently a part of our political class. Insisting on perfection - especially when your definition of “perfection” would likely alienate a meaningful amount of people who currently support them - is counterproductive to the degree that I question whether people who say that shit are even arguing in good faith.

[–] HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth 2 points 1 day ago

I question whether people who say that shit are even arguing in good faith.

They never do. Anyone devaluing the best politicians we have on our side, is really only carrying water for fascists.

The person you replied to quoted World Socialist Website, which is run by a bunch of boomer edgelords who mentally never grew up and still thinks we're still in the 1960s. The only socialist publisher worth reading is Jacobin, even though I may not agree everything with them.

[–] Ferrous@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You say "perfection". What I think you meant to say was "principled anti capitalism".

I'm not asking for perfection. I'm asking for literally any semblance of solidarity or anticapitalism.

Regardless, until a truly anti capitalist party gains power, the devolution into fascism will continue.

In 30 years, when the choice is between a dem who wants 15 genocides and a Republican who wants 16, yall will still be bleating this tired ass "perfection as an enemy of good" motto. Think of a new one, please. Or even try to start defining what your idea of "perfection" actually is.

[–] HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

15 genocides vs 16 genocides

A false dichotomy, but even so, the math is simple. 15 is less than 16. Bad things WILL happen. Let's try to stop at least SOME of them shall we?

[–] Ferrous@lemmy.ml 3 points 19 hours ago

"American genocide is a forgone conclusion, so I will give full support to the genocidal regime whether the color is red or blue"

This is why people call you blue maga. There is no red line. There is no amount of evil that would make you all start to consider the legitimacy of the US empire. You all will sacrifice however many Palestinian kids it takes to bide time till the next election cycle. All under the guise of pragmatic utilitarianism.

[–] derry@midwest.social 0 points 1 day ago (3 children)

So if not her then who will it be?

[–] eestileib@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago

Shapiro from Pennsylvania. Pro-genocide, loves billionaires, condescending. Ticks all the boxes.

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

Another neoliberal.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

newsom. It's already newsom.