this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2025
272 points (100.0% liked)

politics

22503 readers
3695 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
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
272
‘There has to be a turn around’: Sanders on Democrats’ next steps amid Trump blitzkrieg (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 5 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
12 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Summary

Bernie Sanders condemned Trump’s attempts to dissolve federal agencies and defy court orders, calling it a constitutional crisis pushing the U.S. toward authoritarianism.

On his “Fight Oligarchy” tour, Sanders criticized Democrats for lacking grassroots support and caving to GOP policies, urging more militancy in Congress.

He blamed the party’s decline on reliance on wealthy donors and neglect of working-class issues.

Despite record-low approval for Democrats, Sanders noted rising interest in his populist agenda and praised progressive leaders like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

all 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 59 points 5 days ago (1 children)

In his view, the party’s descent traces the rise of money in politics, which over time made Democrats reliant on wealthy donors and inside-the-Beltway consultants. While he credited the party with ushering in progress on social issues such as civil rights, women’s rights and LGBTQ+ rights, the senator said Democrats have for too long failed to champion an economic agenda that would meaningfully address the concerns of working class people – an assessment many leaders roundly rejected.

That's 100% the problem, and a textbook definition of neoliberalism.

They want to use bare minimum on social issues and not address anything fiscal.

And that's how fascists keep getting elected.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

The corporate plutocracy couldn't have come as far as they have with Trump if the manufactured opposition in the D party weren't actively running counter intelligence on progressives like Bernie et al.

Americans should remember that, and hold ALL criminally corrupt con artists, betraying their people and country for personal financial gain across all branches of government, accountable.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

The corporate plutocracy couldn’t have come as far as they have with Trump if the manufactured opposition in the D party

The Clinton's talked trump into running...

He's the "controlled opposition" because they needed the worst person possible to make people willing to vote for uncharismatic neoliberals like Hillary, Biden, and Harris.

The problem is for 30 years neoliberals ran the dnc

That changed about a month ago.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 days ago (1 children)

That changed about a month ago.

I'll believe it when I see something change.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago

You've seen something change. They aren't even pretending to be liberals anymore, neo or otherwise.

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

They needed people competent at what they do in power every now and then to pave the way to the bank and then a bunch of morons in power to open the vault doors for them.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 days ago (2 children)

All in time for the democrats to run another empty (pant)suit in 2028. Rinse. Repeat.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

I can't wait for Kamala-Schumer 2028, if there is an election /s

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

Maybe they'll just run the Cheneys. Or Pelosi/Bush 2028. They need Bush to appeal to centrists (dubya is a centrist now technically), and if you don't vote Pelosi you are a Nazi who hates women.

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

I think it’ll actually be Butti / Slotkin, but yeah, not exciting prospects in the least.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 days ago

Absolutely, the democrats still don't sound like they've learned anything. Find who your local progressives, who plan on running for anything, are and support them. Put people who give a damn in charge. If the same crappy democrats get back in power after Trump, we'll just be back here again in another 8 years

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

Unfortunately everybody in the party has their own agenda.