politics
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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Progressive policies are popular. But progressives have done a shit job of turning that enthusiasm into political capital. Waiting every four years for a nationally appealing, ideologically perfect candidate to magically fall in our lap seems to be a winning strategy—for republicans. Too many would be progressives give up if they can't have the whole cake handed to them instead of rolling up some sleeves and learning how to work from scratch.
Say you have no idea about money in politics without saying the words citizens united
Progressives have been dropping the ball since before 2010? Why yes I agree.
That's because there is another type of capital...fucking money...involved.
Progressive policies may be popular, but the candidates that espouse them are immediately rolled by the corporate / industrial machine that runs the entirety of the media apparatus.
That's how a Democratic vice presidential candidate can be viewed by people in the country as disqualified from the race for drinking a milkshake with a straw, while the Republican presidential candidate can attempt to overthrow the government, be found to be a rapist in court, be convicted of felonies, poop his way through a case of depends at every rally, free associate about locking up his political opponents, discuss shooting protestors, be the oldest candidate ever picked by a major political party for president and still never be viewed as disqualified for the position.
Trump (an incredibly dull, almost comically idiotic person) realized this himself years ago, which is why he said he could shoot someone and not lose any votes.
Way too many people in this country believe that it just so happens that every individual progressive candidate just doesn't have the "gift" to turn their political positions (that are unpopular with business / industry / media / moneyed interests) into popularity at the polls when it's obvious that every progressive candidate is immediately met by a wave of media discontent the moment they seem close to getting any real power.
EDIT: FDR was considered to be a centrist until he got in there. There is another way things could work which is that someone could run as a progressive sleeper candidate and pivot to the middle in order to get support for the campaign and then govern more from the left after they win.
This is exactly what I've been trying to convey.
Ah, so you were. Ngl wasn't following usernames and somebody's 'y tu Bernie' had me rage posting
Enraging people is all they seem to be able to do.
Have a great day.