this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2025
546 points (96.7% liked)

politics

26740 readers
2941 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
 

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez holds a slight lead over Vice President JD Vance in a hypothetical 2028 presidential matchup, according to a new poll.

The New York Democratic congresswoman, known as AOC, edges the likely Republican nominee 51% to 49%, in The Argument/Verasight survey released on Tuesday. However, the result was within the poll's 2.7 percentage point margin of error, making the two candidates statistically tied. The poll asked voters who they would vote for if the election was between the two of them.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 day ago (4 children)

This argument is frequently made on Lemmy. I’d like it to be true. But I just don’t know.

Makes sense in places like California or New York. But I don’t know about places in the Midwest e.g.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"We've never tried the inspiring candidate, but without evidence, I must insist that they're unelectable."

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean, we did run the inspiring candidate. Obama. It was a huge success.

Did he turn out to be everything that everyone hoped and dreamed? No. But he energized the hell out of the base and at least the best president of the past few decades.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Exactly. And people were also saying then that we needed to go with the more electable candidate with more experience. That was the exact argument Hillary supporters made during the 2008 primary.

[–] nednobbins@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 day ago

I hear you, but we've tried the strategies of the mainstream Democrats and they've failed hard.

Hopefully the recent ACA votes taught the Democrats that voting to end the shutdown was a terrible idea and that they should never again compromise with Republicans for mere promises of future consideration.

The Democrats should rally behind AOC and primary all corrupt bastards that enable the Republicans.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

If Britain and Mexico can both elect a woman to lead their country, why can't the US?

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because half of the people who voted in the last election voted for Trump?

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

why can’t the US?

Because this is a trashcan nation that votes for felon rapist insurrectionist pedophiles....twice.

[–] Zink@programming.dev 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Most supporters voted for him thrice. Just another old white dude got in the way that one time.

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago

More like a worldwide pandemic got in the way. Biden couldn't have won without covid.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

You're just doing the left version of American exceptionalism.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because a solid percentage of the country quite literally wants women barefoot and pregnant, with another solid percentage following along with them because something something taxes something something jerbs.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is just the woke version of American exceptionalism. Conservatives exist in all countries. Hell, Mexico is famous for its machismo culture.

[–] Zink@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago

I think you guys can both be correct here. Just because shitty people are all over the Earth, that does not negate the problems people point out with the US.

I did not see them say or even imply that the US is the only place with sexist conservatives, or that we are the worst in the world about it. It was answering a question about the US too.

I think we all know that there are places in the world that have been far worse for far longer in just about any bad way you can think of. But it's still pretty noteworthy when the world's superpower that once saw itself as a diverse melting pot and land of opportunity and democracy goes and elects somebody who literally said on TV that they would be a dictator. And this after that same person already did a horrible bad faith job for all the world to see.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Makes sense in places like California or New York.

California and New York are absolutely fountaining with conservative voters. These states only go blue because conservatives like Diane Feinstein and Gavin Newsom have found it easier to voice conservative policies from a liberal party than to voice liberal policies from a conservative one.

On the flip side, Bush Jr won Texas against Anne Richards by running to her Left and pandering to Hispanics and black voters while she pounded the old Dixiecrat drum on crime and drugs. Shortly thereafter, long time Democrat Rick Perry changed parties, because he decided it was easier to get oil money as a liberal Republican than a conservative Democrat.

Politics in this country is way more complex than people like to give it credit. So much is simply driven by the party with the most money or the most gerrymandered districts. What's winnable can boil down to whether or not your brother is the governor, not your race or your gender or even your voting record.

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Meanwhile a democratic socialist won the mayorship of New York City.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago

Against a former Dem governor who was backed by a Republican president no less

[–] Zink@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago

That complexity sure sounds like corruption!

But realistically, corruption does add to the complexity, lol.