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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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. 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.
- 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
What would you have liked the Democrats to have done, keeping in mind that Republicans have a majority in the house? Can't amend the Constitution.
Republicans keep being given the power to delay and deny anything the Democrats want done, and then people complain about Democrats not doing enough, so they don't vote, which allows Republicans to keep doing it.
It's frustrating how successful the strategy is working for them.
Exactly. The first priority is removing the GOP roadblocks. I'm a progressive. I desperately want progressive policy enacted. There is no viable path to make that happen without electing more Democrats in general elections. I recognize that the Democratic party is not a progressive party, but that's our job to change via primaries.
My biggest complaint about my fellow progressives is a lot of them seem to refuse to think strategically and cling to the idea that your vote is somehow a moral choice. It's not. It's a strategic choice to further your interests. Helping elect Republicans during the general election does nothing but put us even further away. Biden is not our champion, he's a tool. We use Biden to promote our interests where we can and ditch him the moment he's no longer needed. Right now, he's absolutely needed.
For starters, Biden should have picked a better AG, that would have gone a long way. Secondly, Democrats should have impeached Trump THE DAY OF THE INSURRECTION, while Republican support was wavering in the uncertainty. Instead they waited months.
We could have removed the filibuster to ease legislation.
Mind you, all of this was stuff progressives were screaming at the time but moderates ignored.
At the time, picking Garland as AG was a giant fuck you to republicans to get revenge on them denying Obama the supreme court nomination in 2016, a way of saying "ha, ha, you denied him a seat and now we gave him one that's almost as good."
Unfortunately, in hindsight it turns out that when you put a very moderate, nonpartisan, old-school Republican in the cabinet, they will run their department like a moderate, nonpartisan, old-school Republican, and that resulted in the DOJ focusing on the mooks more than the masterminds out of fear of being seen as a political hatchet man.
But I, alongside many other progressives, explicitly said Garland was going to be exactly like this.
As is sadly often the case, progressives are right in the moment, and then history has to look back on them as being correct in the moment. It wasn't hindsight that told us this.
I mean you look at history and almost always whether it be the civil rights movement or the gay rights movement or workers rights progressives are always 100% of the time on the right side of history, but they are never given the credit.
You seem to have mistaken my post as defending or supporting Garland's appointment. Please rest assured that is not the case.