this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
227 points (97.1% liked)

politics

19222 readers
2378 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
 

Summary

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) lost her bid to lead Democrats on the House Oversight Committee, defeated 131-84 by Rep. Gerry Connolly in a secret caucus vote.

Reports suggest former Speaker Nancy Pelosi actively lobbied against AOC, backing Connolly by making calls and using political capital to sway votes.

Connolly, 74, cited his experience and record as decisive factors in his victory, despite progressive disappointment over AOC’s loss.

Supporters viewed AOC’s bid as a chance to revitalize Democratic strategy, calling the outcome a missed opportunity for the party.

all 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lucidlethargy 19 points 2 hours ago

74? Man, I'm so tired of these old fucks... Except Bernie. That guy actually represents his constituents.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Surely at this point AOC is going to be in the conversation to run for president in four years. She might not be the frontrunner, but she's a notable Democrat with a great record.

The best thing to do would be to have them on-side, and working towards a common goal. By alienating her, that battle for her to get the nomination is going to just be more painful. Her platform will be more progressive, because she'll be stuck in her convictions through being isolated by her party. Her attitude to the old guard will be less about protecting them for their service, and more to do with getting dead wood out.

IMO, anyone that values a progressive platform should back AOC for president right now. Set the wheels in motion, push for stuff you'd think you'd never get, like disarming America, huge tax increases on those earning $1m+, and providing free healthcare.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

IMO, anyone that values a progressive platform should back AOC for president right now.

So less than 10% of the senate.

[–] Einstein 57 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Man, the DNC really hates young people. :( smh.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

DNC just hates leftists, age doesn't really matter.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

No, they have a thing about not giving power to young people. Everyone has to wait their turn which means not getting leadership positions until you're at least 70.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I didn't know Bernie was young.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 hours ago

He also runs as independent, specifically because the Democratic party pulls this shit

[–] [email protected] 70 points 5 hours ago (3 children)

It's great to see the Democrats have learned absolutely nothing and continue to refuse to evolve.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Why would they? American 2 party system just means they have infinite job security, funding and no reason to adapt. So you can either choose flawed Democrats or literal idiots. What will you do?

I genuinely confused how people expect things to be different here. I'm not an American so maybe I'm missing something, but this genuinely seems a system design flaw rather than anything else.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Oh there are many of us across the political spectrum that are aware of how our two party system fails us. For the record, I don't expect things to be different but in light of how bad things are it's hard not to get my hopes up especially when there's a good chance at meaningful change.

Many of us are becoming further and further disillusioned with our political system. However, things are changing slowly. Municipalities are introducing ranked choice voting systems and there are efforts to expand that to the state level. Maybe someday we'll put this mess behind us.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 hours ago

A bunch of (5 states) ranked choice voting ballot measures were just rejected directly by citizens, and another went so far as to ban it, and many red states have already done that. Team money won by convincing the public to vote against their own interests. Sorry to bear bad news, maybe there's something else to be hopeful about still but I'm not seeing it. The only good news I've heard in American politics since the election was within the last few weeks, and it gets you banned on most of the Internet for saying so.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 hours ago

I don’t think they’re ignorant, they’d just rather support the fascists than the progressives.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

It's not their fault they keep loosing, it's the voters who are too dumb to understand that Democrats are marginally better than fascists. /s

[–] [email protected] 79 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Isn't Pelosi supposed to be in an ER with a fractured ego or some shit?

[–] [email protected] 33 points 6 hours ago

I'm just sitting here hoping her recovery is as pleasant as she is.

[–] [email protected] 60 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Nancy wants to burn 🔥 the USA down as long as she and her friends stay wealthy

[–] [email protected] 43 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

The oligarchs want fascism. What more could a sociopath capitalist want than a fusion of their corporations and the state; a state sanctioned too-big-to-fail monopoly that is protected and enforced by the military, with socialized losses, yet privatized profits?

Competition is for chumps, and nothing more than a self serving virtue signal they will abandon for higher profits; like all the other virtues they never possessed.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 hours ago

god dammit that broken hip didn't do its fucking job

[–] ArbitraryValue -4 points 6 hours ago

They're seriously using the word "schemes"? This is like one of those “I am Firm; You are Obstinate; He is a Pig-headed Fool" jokes.