this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
940 points (99.0% liked)

Progressive Politics

2176 readers
297 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Absolutely useless

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 day ago

You have meek fuckers in leadership because that's who the corporate/wealthy donors want there. If you want to get rid of them you're going to have to get rid of the money and influence that put them there.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They're not meek, they profit from the status quo.

These people have no business in governing modern day people, these dinosaurs need to be let go.

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

they benefit and profit by not being the blame of the GOP whom they are also grifting form.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago

He’s not meek he’s corrupt

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago (2 children)

If you’re old enough to draw Social Security, you shouldn’t hold office. Period.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

Dems agree to set Social Security age to 105

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

I know what you mean and mostly agree with upper age limits on office holders but children can receive social security survivors benefits. It is not just (although mainly) old age pensioners.

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

Absolutely. I've been calling my Senators since Thursday telling them that if they don't publicly call for Schumer to step down, then they are culpable for his decisions. Supporting fascist enablers is supporting fascism.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Chuck the cuck

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

you can try, it's unlikely to happen.

Unfortunately we seem to have zero good public speakers in out government, the one thing that actually seems to matter politically, just doesn't exist anymore, apparently.

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

a good speaker is what changes minds, money only changes the opinions of the weak.

Getting rid of citizens united would certainly be nice though.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Here's the actual story, Schumer relented one day after GOP and DNC megadonors threaten to pull funding away from 10 Democrats.

[–] HellsBelle 9 points 1 day ago

So the super rich really do control everyone and everything.

Who knew?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

They're not meek. They're pusillanimous. Or pusies for short. Intentionally misspelled.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Time to take out the trash

[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Only if you’re ready for a decades long campaign to flip towns, cities, districts, and state level legislatures like it took the republicans from 1972 to just a month ago.

That’s what we’re up against.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The US needs to break the two-party system so minor parties and independents actually have a chance at representation.

Of course there's no incentive for the establishment to do that. Is there any way for new candidates to run with the major parties, but on a platform to introduce preferential voting when they have the numbers? I don't know much about factions within US parties, but they certainly exist in my country, and can transform parties quickly if they think they have election-winning appeal.

It would have to happen bottom-up, as you say, so people can get comfortable with such a big change. Also, people are much more likely to elect independents at a local level.

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

I’d throw my vote behind the naarp

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 days ago (4 children)

We're not going to give Donald Trump what he wants, so we're going to pass this spending bill that gives him everything he wants! That'll how 'im!

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Anyone else get the feeling he’s been compromised?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

He's very dependent on donations from the banking industry, it's all there on OpenSecrets. Both NY senators voted to end cloture because that's where wall street is. Gillibrand seems to be avoiding criticism for some reason but it's the same exact story for her. Wall street was already suffering from the Trump tariff decline and couldn't take any more from a shutdown.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

Well he's a zionist. And the zionists bought both parties but preferred trump in power. So yeah.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Schumer has been in Congress since 1981 and politics since 1975, so maybe stop fooling yourselves that he’s going anywhere

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 days ago

It's long past time for Schumer and most of the timid OLD dems, to step aside. We've had enough of failing. We need to elect people that are capable of fighting back.

load more comments
view more: next ›