politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
DEMOCRATS ARE CONTROLLED OPPOSITION
The Washington Generals.
Meanwhile, the Greens dine at Putin's table.
So do the Republicans
This is simply a conspiracy theory that falls apart if you think for even a second. Do you think corporations would spend billions to influence elections if the results didn't matter?
You know the adage about a frog not jumping out of the cook pot if the temperature increases slowly? Imagine the wealthy as the chef. Republicans are the heat. Democrats hold the temperature steady.
Whenever the heat gets too high, we vote for Democrats instead of jumping at the chef. The chef has made sure the Democrats don't have an ice bucket or anything like that, instead they have a bucket of water just slightly cooler than the current temperature.
Every time, a vote for Dems is just a sign the temperature is going up too fast so the chef backs off a bit and rages about how the slightly cooler water will ruin dinner while salivating about how tenderly we are cooking ourselves.
IMO, the DSA is a bucket of ice. I'm not sure ice is better than the boiling water for our longevity, but they represent a rapid temperature shift in the right direction. Once things get cooled off, we can figure out how far we want to go. That's all on a younger generation because just that is probably going to take the rest of my natural life to achieve.
They do spend billions on both parties. It's called corporate wealthfare, they get the money back in the end afterall
It makes no sense to spend on both parties. They would get more corporate welfare if they spent for Republicans every time.
And why would Democrats participate in such a conspiracy willingly? You really believe that none of them would spill the beans? It's just not realistic.
What a silly take. It's a two party system. They buy both parties. It's bleedingly obvious that they do this, it's literally what PACs are
What do you mean spill the beans, it's all public on who receives pac funding and which ones. There is no beans to spill you can just look it up on opensecrets.org.
Democrats like Jeffries and Schumer are prime examples of Democrats on a leash held by Israel's Netanyahu. Hell, most of the Republicans seem compromised and don't even get started on the odd connections with Epstein and the president
I mean spilling the beans about it all being a big conspiracy where both the Dems and GOP are working together.
The only ones I see working together are the GOP actively voting to strip you of your rights
There is literally proof they do spend it on both parties. Why the fuck wouldn't they?
Because Republicans almost universally lower taxes on the wealthy when they get in power and Democrats almost universally raise taxes when they get in power.
But less and with enough loopholes when they got Dems in the pocket as well.
Wow Democrats have really brainwashed you to think they are you the only good ones? AIPAC also donates to both parties. It's all about control.
Good, no. By almost every metric yes they are better.
Disclaimer: not an American.
It's necessary political theater. Republicans are the bad cops whilst Democrats are the good cops. Citizens tend to align to whichever party supports their personal philosophy - broadly, either working together or preventing, punishing, and purging the "bad" elements of society, both for a promised better future. Both are still cops, though, and receive their funding from the same types of interests. Sometimes the same donors. They're largely on the same team.
This keeps the majority trapped in the political sports arena, thinking things will improve if only their party can finally get their way... but they just keep getting thwarted by those pesky Demonrats/Rethuglicans! They only need to keep voting blue no matter who or red even if brain dead and support harder while compromising more, then it'll get better next term! The Democrats have been oddly inept for decades and the Republicans actively hostile toward their own constituents, but what's the alternative? Voting third party? Criticizing their politicians? Hah! That's handing the election to the other team, right? Right? They must hold the line!
So whichever party wins the majority throws their voters a bone or two, otherwise ignores their campaign promises whilst blaming the other party for it, and further erodes the overall rights of the American public, often strengthening the very rights eroding policy they earlier decried, á la Obama extending elements of the Patriot Act then signing the USA Freedom Act that furthered its aims.
Republicans took full control and their voters ARE getting their way. They were just too stupid to realize the consequences of what they were asking.
I'd argue they're getting more than they voted for. I'm certain few of them wanted the increases in living costs and decrease in quality of life associated with the Trump administration. Otherwise, Trump wouldn't keep trying to distract and displace the blame.
Just like Democrats, they voted for the promises their candidates loudly and publicly made, and either ignored, were never aware, or severely misunderstood the effects of their politicians' past actions and what would come from their future actions. To be fair, it's vastly easier to hoodwink American conservatives. They're quite dim.
They know the public mood shifts, and so cover all their bases by corrupting as many possible outcomes as they can. You're the one not thinking things through, I'm afraid.
They will spend on both parties, it's called hedging your bets. For those wondering why the Democrats take that money ask yourself when was the last time you contributed to an election campaign
They wouldn't need to hedge bets if they simply funded one party and made the other extinct.
Like the other person said, but also there are real differences between the two party establishments; those differences are just narrower than they'd like you to believe.
I can agree with that, but it is a very different thing than saying there is controlled opposition.
I mean, they're not 100% controlled opposition lile you see in dictatorships, but they're maybe 80% of the way there with how they pretend to want things their voters want but then oppose them at every turn.