494
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] ImminentOrbit@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

That's my guy!

[-] Malica@lemmy.zip 23 points 11 hours ago

I hope everyone else is as willing to fight this as I am. Contact your reps every day to demand they vote differently. This wave is only possible because of socialists.

[-] return2ozma@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago

EVERYBODY needs to look up their representatives and call or email

[-] yakko@feddit.uk 6 points 7 hours ago

I did this week, I can handle doing it again next week

[-] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 31 points 13 hours ago

Fucking shit up already, I'm going to like this guy.

[-] Malica@lemmy.zip 15 points 11 hours ago

I really like him, I think he has a bright future in politics and I hope he becomes the first Muslim president.

[-] some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 14 points 11 hours ago

But we already had Obama /s

[-] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 8 hours ago

How to get republicans claiming Michigan was actually part of Canada all along

[-] Zephorah@discuss.online 53 points 19 hours ago

Great. Now we need someone spearheading an anti-Jeffries campaign.

[-] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 10 points 10 hours ago

Jeffries has never been Speaker of the House. Schumer has a long record as the Democratic leader in the Senate, and it's not a good one. If he's allowed to continue in that job then that seriously kneecaps any ability that the Democrats have to convince Americans that they can bring change. If they want to increase their gains in the Senate and establish a buffer against the inevitable Republican resurgence in the 2030s then it's critical that they show Schumer the door.

I wouldn't object to ousting Jeffries, too, but if he's given a couple of years during a lame-duck Congress to fail properly it wouldn't be a catastrophe. The focus needs to be on Schumer.

[-] Zephorah@discuss.online 3 points 43 minutes ago

We don’t have time for any bullshit, which is exactly what the Jeffries campaign is.

It sounds like the DNC is focused on leaving Trump where he is, likely because they somehow think Vance being in office will make him more appealing in the upcoming 2028 election. Hence this first Jeffries statement that feels like he’s talking sideways at the American people while communicating support for something else entirely.

Even so. We need someone non-establishment DNC. We The People don’t have time for any more shit. Life is barely possible as is.

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 5 points 5 hours ago

I wouldn't object to ousting Jeffries, too, but if he's given a couple of years during a lame-duck Congress to fail properly it wouldn't be a catastrophe.

It absolutely would be. This is going to be a lame duck Congress, but there are things the Democrats can do and they absolutely need to be doing them if they want to maintain even a fraction of this momentum come 2028. Jeffries would slow down whatever progress can be made (particularly on the accountability front) and tank Congress's credibility with the electorate.

[-] Zephorah@discuss.online 1 points 41 minutes ago

Exactly. Jeffries loses us all 2028 to whatever shit the GOP dreams up next. In other words, same old shit, different year, this vote essentially means nothing.

[-] SayJess@lemmy.blahaj.zone 64 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

I really hope that the establishment at least gets knocked out of leadership. We don’t want reforms; we want fundamental change. I feel honored about who I was able to vote for, and the fact that they ALL won their races. No more strongly worded letters! 😡

load more comments (16 replies)
[-] 13igtyme@startrek.website 78 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)
[-] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 16 points 13 hours ago

Yeah, Van Hollen is awesome.

[-] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 7 points 13 hours ago

Indeed, hybrids with Indonesian and Dutch parents. They were treated horribly in the Netherlands and immigrated to the USA, the rest is history.

[-] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 5 points 7 hours ago

lol I know what you mean but it's impolite to use “hybrid” when referring to people, even if it’s typically a compliment from a botanical perspective

[-] Obviouslywrong@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

Like saying mixed is any better

[-] bedwyr@piefed.ca 2 points 11 hours ago

Non extremist dutch are the exception in the US unfortunately.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2026
494 points (99.6% liked)

politics

31775 readers
3592 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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 3 years ago
MODERATORS