this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2026
475 points (99.6% liked)

politics

27087 readers
2974 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) 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TemplaerDude@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 days ago

Spineless cowards

[–] jtj4135@lemmy.zip 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

Many of their rich donors rely on the exploitation of undocumented workers to make crap ton of money. So of course they don't want to actually clamp down on ICE or provide better pathways to citizenship...

Undocumented workers are cheap labor and are usually obedient out of fear. There have been plenty of reported cases of farmers and/or companies calling ICE on their workers to weasel out of paying them (wage theft). Even documented workers aren't safe, given that their green cards and/or work visas are tied to their job. So if they report poor working conditions or wage theft to authorities, they'll likely be forced to leave the U.S.

I mean of course they didn't because they're worthless democrats.

[–] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] SGGeorwell@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

The worst tacticians in the history of decision making.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 11 points 2 days ago

“We’ll figure out the accountability mechanisms at the appropriate time," Jeffries told reporters.

when u got raffi radicalised enough to call for regime change yet the leader of the dems can't say anything....

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Almost like there's one party…

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›