this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2025
451 points (95.0% liked)

politics

24728 readers
2926 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
 

Welp...

(page 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

Finally, we got a third party.

[–] ThePyroPython@lemmy.world 188 points 1 week ago (4 children)

"America Party"

Americans really are the ultimate parody of themselves. Have fun with your civil war.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 119 points 1 week ago

The "America Party", started by a Nazi African. What a wild thing.

[–] Hubi@feddit.org 29 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Not just the USA or even just North America. It's apparently a party for South America as well!

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 20 points 1 week ago

Tbf assuming South America is just kinda ours to mess with or else just forgetting about it is a pretty common thing for the US to do, it tracks

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Zerlyna@lemmy.world 113 points 1 week ago (13 children)

I’m not sure if I want this to fail or succeed.

[–] nokturne213@sopuli.xyz 153 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Hopefully it has success at breaking us from our failed two party system, while at the same time the party itself fails (and costs him lot of money in the process).

[–] ExFed@programming.dev 84 points 1 week ago (4 children)

We'll need ranked choice (or some other voting scheme other than First Past The Post). Otherwise it'll just end up the same as it always has.

[–] fishos@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Yes, and without it, any third party struggles to take hold. This new party could make ranked choice voting a bipartisan(tripartisan?) issue since they would need it to survive unless they really think they can just yank all of the R votes their way.

[–] tburkhol@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago

Need new rules in House and Senate, too. The majority party gets majority in all the committees, gets to pick all the committee chairs, etc. All of the current non-D/non-R members 'caucus' with one of the major parties, making them de facto members of that party. A third party with enough representation to block the other two from gaining majority would almost certainly end up in an alliance with one, leaving us back with functional two-party politics.

[–] meeeeetch@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (5 children)

I'll gladly accept a reactionary centrist spoiler party into the mix. Especially if it coincides with the Clinton wing of the DNC losing its ability to maintain its grip on power.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 30 points 1 week ago

Breaking the US from the failed 2-party system would require replacing first-past-the-post voting with at least ranked choice, if not a proportional system like Hare-Clarke, and probably scrapping the Electoral College altogether. Which may require constitutional amendments, or at least a partisan Supreme Court sympathetic to more democracy that would Chewbacca-defence it through regardless of legality.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] tunetardis@lemmy.ca 59 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Best case scenario is it will split the right wing vote. In Canada, we're used to it going the other way with conservatives taking advantage of a split left.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Washington Post columnists said it would probably just capture the "Never Trumper" moderate Republican voters who currently begrudgingly vote Democratic because they understand that the Republican Party is nominating only yes-men and fascists.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 42 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Washington Post isn't exactly a beacon of truth and justice.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Especially not their opinion column but I'm just posting here because it's interesting to see what the neoliberals think about it and it's a good discussion point

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

Republican never Trumper that doesn't vote GOP is likely vanishingly small. They all fall in line.

It might siphon off the GOP voters that begrudingly fell in line because they bought the Communist Kamala or something, or the ones that needed to see Trump disaster a second time.

[–] makyo@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

The Dems leaned hard on the never Trumpers for votes last year and you can see where that got them. Elon can have them.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 10 points 1 week ago

And why would Bezos say otherwise?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dalekcaan@feddit.nl 25 points 1 week ago

I want him to split the GOP vote. Basically just a Jill Stein that believes his own swill.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yeah...

At best, it splits the MAGAt vote, making Dems a clear winner.

At worst, it takes some GenZ dipshit votes away from Dems and causes chaos.

[–] HuskerNation@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Gen z men are already voting republican

[–] ordnance_qf_17_pounder@reddthat.com 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Dumb little bastards, voting against their own interests

load more comments (2 replies)

I think your beef should be with all men then. As Trump voters increased in men by age. So you could factually say Gen Z men were the least likely to vote for Trump as well

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] nuko147@lemmy.world 75 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The America Party run by a South African.

Popcorn is not enough for this country.

[–] sprite0@sh.itjust.works 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

of all the things to shit on him for this isn't it. being multi cultural is the only culture we have and almost all of us are immigrants.

[–] nuko147@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

I shit him for the name of the Party, not being South African.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

White rich South African are devoid of culture just like every other rich profligate. They have no nation, creed, or ideals just an insatiable avarice.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 42 points 1 week ago (4 children)

What kind of shitty click bait is this?

The richest man in the world officially announced on Saturday that he has officially formed a new political party to challenge Republicans and Democrats alike.

He fucking tweeted that it was created, literally nothing official.

[–] TommySoda@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (3 children)

And when the president tweets it's for some reason official and should be followed... We live in a really stupid age where the government and politics in the US is governed by social media.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 30 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I'm surprised he didn't try to meme it up and call it the Lemon Party.

America party?

really?

I'm disappointed on the uncreative name.

was hoping for something stupid.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 22 points 1 week ago (9 children)

While on one hand I hope that people realize this is literally their government being purchased by a single rich guy and push back... I know they're far too stupid for that.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] huppakee@feddit.nl 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I'm really happy about this, always thought 1 flavour of fascism wasn't enough for me /s

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

I love them having to pick between techbro douchey edgelord and failed game show host douchey edgelord.

Let's split that vote. Let them battle it out to get the deplorable vote and let normal Americans run this place again, FFS.

[–] Zier@fedia.io 18 points 1 week ago

Hey you guyz, now there is another billionaire you can donate your money to and he will do nothing for you. Cool!

[–] Sho@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

....but the nazi party already existed.

[–] SayJess@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 week ago

Split the ring wing vote. Let them fight it out. Hopefully this could mean getting them out of the White House.

[–] BlueZen@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (4 children)

knowing musk ox, the party name will spell something juvenile

C onservatives U nited as N ationalist T rolls

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] MCasq_qsaCJ_234@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 week ago

You support Elon Musk's party because the Republicans ripped you off.

I support Elon Musk's party because it will dilute the voters.

We are not equal.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›