this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
358 points (93.9% liked)

politics

21977 readers
3905 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 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] WatDabney@fedia.io 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I'm calling bullshit on this.

There's no possible way that Biden or any of his people could let or not let Harris do anything. They had no actual control over her campaign.

The only outsiders who had any control over her campaign were the DNC and the party establishment - the same pieces of shit who torpedoed Sanders in 2016 and 2020,.

I'm 100% certain that this narrative is coming from them, trying to dodge the blame they so richly deserve by pinning it on the senile guy.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 22 points 1 day ago

This is hilarious, because of Biden's "I'd have won if I was the candidate" bullshit. More like "Harris might have won if I wasn't hamstringing her", but okay, sure, Joe. Let's get you to bed, now.

[–] Absaroka@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

Just another example of how the Democratic party is only slightly less fucked than the Republicans.

[–] BertramDitore@lemm.ee 13 points 1 day ago

Harris was the candidate, not Biden. Being his VP should have been a boon to her, but instead she turned it into her own biggest obstacle. It was ultimately her decision to follow Biden’s directions on this.

It’s not like the sitting president can order a party’s candidate to take certain policy positions, even if that candidate is the sitting VP. Biden deserves a ton of the blame for our current situation, but Harris was the candidate and she decided to follow Biden’s terrible advice. He’s just the stubborn geriatric who cared more about his legacy than the peoples’ future.

[–] verdantbanana@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

horseshit

she had multiple chances like at the DNC convention

[–] thann@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 day ago

"they puppeted me poorly"

[–] halfempty@fedia.io 11 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Her position regarding Palestine and Israel cost her the election. Many Dems could not vote for her, so they didn't vote.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 11 points 1 day ago

The woman who refused to against what a Man said would have made a STRONG Leader!

[–] Rooskie91@discuss.online 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

As usual the democratic party fails because it's trying to be both progressive AND cater to wealthy donors. Those two things just don't go together. Either abandon the upper class, or resign yourself to diametrically opposed rhetoric that will NEVER win an election for the Dems.

[–] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 day ago

It's not remotely trying to be progressive. It's cosplaying as caring while raking in them donor dollars.

[–] alkbch@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago

I don’t buy that. Harris has made her choice.

[–] meangreenbeans@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Could’ve, should’ve, would’ve

[–] dudinax@programming.dev 6 points 1 day ago

Huh? He couldn't have stopped her. This is nonsense.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›