this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
584 points (98.2% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2132 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

On Wednesday, the US Senate will hold a vote on whether to approve the Pentagon’s request to send another $20bn in armaments to Israel, after a year in which the Biden administration has supplied billions of dollars of arms used in Israel's devastating war on Gaza.

Among the weapons to be approved are 120mm tank rounds, high explosive mortar rounds, F-15IA fighter aircraft, and joint direct attack munitions, known as JDAMs, which are precision systems for otherwise indiscriminate or "dumb" bombs.

Separate resolutions are being brought forward for each weapon type, including its cost to US taxpayers. However, together, the initiative is known as the Joint Resolutions of Disapproval (JRDs).

As a result of intensive lobbying from pro-Israel groups like Aipac and the Democratic Majority For Israel, no arms transfer to Israel has been blocked.

The resolutions likely to gain the highest levels of support are expected to involve the tank rounds, which have been responsible for killing hundreds of civilians in northern Gaza in particular, and the JDAMs, which caused the death of well-known figures such as Reuters journalist Issam Abdallah in southern Lebanon, and six-year-old Hind Rajab in Gaza City.

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

We need to get the neo liberals out of leadership positions at the DNC

And how do you suggest we do that?

[–] psvrh@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The same way the Tea Party primaried out moderate Republicans.

Show up and vote.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

Show up and vote

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

The same way the Tea Party primaried out moderate Republicans.

Democrats protect centrist incumbents and ONLY centrist incumbents. When they have primaries at all.

Show up and vote.

For who you're ordered to and didn't have a say in.

[–] psvrh@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The RNC saw moderates kicked out by voters in primaries, and candidates made sure to run.

Why can't the DNC and progressive voters do the same?

[–] Krono@lemmy.today 7 points 1 week ago

Why can't the DNC and progressive voters do the same?

Because the DNC is structured explicitly to prevent progressive challengers.

There are many examples, but one big one is the DNC vendor banlist. The DNC says that any vendors who work with progressive primary challengers will be banned from any future work with the party.

This means that progressive challengers often cannot find vendors to do basic things like print flyers and signs, and finding experienced staff to hire is nearly impossible. And of course, "centrist" candidates have not been bothered by this.

And then at the top of the DNC you have hundreds of superdelegates and party officials who are overwhelmingly center right or rightwing. These people cannot be voted out directly.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Because the moderates running the DNC would rather keep control of the party with a republican president than let a progressive into the general.

If a progressive wins the general, they get to nominate DNC leadership, and if the DNC fights it, that's four years for the Dem president to start a new party in retaliation.

08 Obama was a wake up call for the DNC. Unfortunately what they learned wasn't how to win an election, it was what they need to do to keep their position as leaders for the only other viable option besides fascism.

And unfortunately for everyone living in America, for them to hold party control, it means every four years a fascist gets elected, and when a moderate Dem does win, they don't actually fix anything.

But when the DNC lets foreign governments, billionaires, and corporations throw millions into primary campaigns supporting both a D and R to guarantee they always win regardless of general results...

Why the fuck are you still blaming voters?

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Why the fuck are you still blaming voters?

Because that's who chooses the leaders.

I vote in primaries; a lot of you online progressives aren't there voting with me. I voted for Katie Porter for senator in California, but the managerial class that actually shows up to vote wanted Schiff and so they got him.

EDIT: I find it hilarious that people advocating against showing up to vote in every other case always show up to downvote my comments.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Because that’s who chooses the leaders.

LMAO

Good one bub.

Until we get dirty money out of at least the primaries and an actually non biased DNC, it's not voters deciding.

It's donors who flood primaries to ensure they don't need to worry about who wins a general.

For fucks sake, NH didn't even get a presidential primary this year, because they keep voting more progressive than the DNC wants.

How the actual fuck is trump their fault?

My state votes so late that the DNC calls the primary months before we vote... How am I supposed to have an effect?

If you want to blame primary voters, blame the handful the DNC allows to vote first (or at all) before they call it over.

But it would make a hell of a lot more sense to blame the DNC for all the rat fuckering they do.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Until we get dirty money out of at least the primaries and an actually non biased DNC, it’s not voters deciding.

You aren't getting "dirty money" out of politics from your couch or by making a post about it on Lemmy.

I show up to vote progressive during party primaries and you and yours leave me lonely at the polls. In some states, such as my state of California, we have jungle primaries. The "DNC" certainly didn't force the general contest for CA senator to be Schiff versus a Republican...the voters did.

Everyone talks a big game online about how popular leftism is, but I have yet to see it where it actually counts: at the fucking polls.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Oh...

This is one of those things where you're replying to a lot of my comments at once wanting to have the same argument in multiple places at the same time...

Most people will just ignore you or block you once they realize what's happening.

Sometimes you just have to wait for someone to reply.

Hope that helps you in the future.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago

What are you even talking about?

Enjoy trying to get money out of politics through magic.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

AOC and the squad got in there. Some of them got voted out during primaries because progressives were no shows. If progressives can't show up to vote during primaries, I don't know how we're expected to take a general election.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

We need to build an actual movement.

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I mean I’m not happy about it but Trump might purge a good chunk of them

[–] TacoSocks@infosec.pub 6 points 1 week ago

I don't think they'll get filled with progressives if Trump does that.