this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2025
417 points (96.9% liked)

politics

19341 readers
1517 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
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 201 points 1 week ago (2 children)

“Republicans want to sanction the ICC simply because they don’t want the rules to apply to everyone,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Massachusetts) on the House floor on Thursday.

McGovern highlighted that Republicans are moving to erode human rights while ignoring urgent issues within the U.S.

“We have a natural disaster unfolding in California right this second…. We have a gun violence epidemic, as we see massacres in our schools nearly every single day. And families are unable to make ends meet because they’re being ripped off by billionaire corporations,” said McGovern. “All those challenges, and this is what the out of touch elitist billionaire Republican party wants to waste time on. Sanctioning the ICC.”

I liked Jim McGovern already, but I like him more, now.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, he fucking nailed it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 126 points 1 week ago (1 children)

45 democrats need to get fucking primaried.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 week ago (10 children)

AIPAC is ready to fund them

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Then we lose while making AIPAC spend money that would otherwise have been put towards further entrenching foreign influence.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It's government backed, you can't outspend an industrial nation on volunteer donations across every candidate.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago

If their candidates are going to win either way, I would rather them have to spend money keeping them in office than use that money for genocide.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 95 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

The list copied by hand from https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2024242

Sorry for any errors

  • Boyle (PA)
  • Caraveo (CO)
  • Cartwright (PA)
  • Craig (MN)
  • Cuellar (TX)
  • Davis (NC)
  • Frankel (FL)
  • Gallego (AZ)
  • Golden (ME)
  • Goldman (NY)
  • Gonzalez (TX)
  • Gottheimer (NJ)
  • Horsford (NV)
  • Landsman (OH)
  • Lee (NV)
  • Levin (CA)
  • Manning (NC)
  • McBath(GA)
  • Meng(NY)
  • Moskowitz(FL)
  • Nickel (NC)
  • Norcross(NJ)
  • Pallone(NJ)
  • Panetta(CA)
  • Pappas (NH)
  • Peltola(AK)
  • Perez(WA)
  • Peters (CA)
  • Phillips (MN)
  • Ryan (NY)
  • Schneider (IL)
  • Schrier (WA)
  • Scott (GA)
  • Slotkin (MI)
  • Soto (FL)
  • Stanton (AZ)
  • Suozzi (NY)
  • Thanedar (MI)
  • Torres(NY)
  • Vargas (CA)
  • Veasey (TX)
  • Wasserman Schultz (FL)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

Not surprised that Dean Phillips (MN) voted for this, but I am mildly surprised Angie Craig (MN) did. Her district is purple tho. Still shitty

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

Cuellar (TX)

Votes like this are why the party worked so hard to quash the Cisneros campaign.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 week ago

Fucking evil rats, all of them. Reichstag rodents.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 71 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (10 children)

75% of Democrats voted against it and 100% of Republicans supported it. The problem in this country is Democrats, because a portion of them side with Republicans sometimes.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (2 children)

If fewer Republicans voted for it, more Democrats would have.

[–] mindbleach 2 points 6 days ago

Arguments are easy when you can just make shit up.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 days ago

I'd like to see a breakdown of this idea. Some people say Democrats seem to perfectly shore up votes to push through conservative shit, but the idea is the same color as "it's them vs us."

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 55 points 1 week ago (5 children)

I can’t be an American. There’s no way my politics are this divorced from the average person and I’m still an American.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You're not a 1%er, the only people our government represents. Culture wars are a distraction

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 days ago

If that were the case then people wouldn’t be continually voting the way they do. This is what we collectively want. It’s not like it’s a dictatorship.

[–] [email protected] 53 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

(https://act.represent.us/sign/problempoll-fba/)[The bottom 90% of income earners have a statistically zero level of influence on policy.]

It's not you who isn't American, it's the current governing body.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›