News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Obama was litterally perfect. He had to be against gay marriage to get elected. Thats what you guys seem to be missing. Some times you have to project messaging that contradicts your policy intents.
Like all the Supreme Court justices who did a 180 on Roe v Wade. Some times you just have to fucking lie to the median voter. They don't care they have the memory of a goldfish.
Fucking Lol.
The only thing funny is pretending that some alternative main stream progressive candidate existed in the 21st century. Who is this mysterious progressive candidate you guys are comparing presidents too.
News flash buddy you 'more progressive than thou' liberals are losing elections and the consequences are getting costly.
Saying Obama was literally perfect is just… extremely wild. I mean he was fine, I had issues but whatever, enough to vote for him at least. Issue is plenty of normal milquetoast ass democrats have not voted since Obama because fucking republican-$50 ass candidates do not energize the base. They see no point in going to vote for “nothing will fundamentally change.” Pretending it’s progressives fault is literally the problem with democrats. Progressives literally have been shown to be one of the highest % voting block, and most do still vote Dem, and even those who don’t it’s much less than those that vote libertarian/constitution party. Like, half as many. Yet democrats spend more energy fighting 3rd party candidates than they do fighting republicans. Adopt more Republican policy than progressive policy. Shits just fucking sad.
Yea he was the perfect candidate to win the 2008. & 2012 elections. I base that on the evidence that he won. breaking an 8 year losing streak. Now i think your criticism applies perfectly to Hillary clinton. I base that on evidence that she lost the 2016 election for not being progressive and populist enough.
I support most progressive causes, I'm starting to get really annoyed with progressives losing us elections because you'd rather have your way than a democratic result. Don't like how centerist the median voter is? Well thats a you problem not a median voter problem. the third party voters, and non-voters are certianly to blame here. Third party votes were a vote for trump. None of you are progressive you're active trump supporters.
Jesus. Saying a candidate is perfect, thus there was literally nothing they could have done or been better on… just because they won… is insane. Like, again, I am not saying Obama was terrible. He was fine. But fucking far from perfect.
Yea i just want to know who was a perfect candidate, who was a perfect president. Which president was better than obama and why? Or are you just unicorn hunting to divide the party. Like is that what you do just find something you dont like about a person and say 'he's not perfect so i will not vote'
Thats the vibes i get here. Biden was awful obama was okay, like who do you want running the country, point at a person i can learn about so i can figure out what progressive ideals are about. Seems like its just about hunting for perfection that doesn't exist.
I mean idk if you know the word perfect.
This whole thing started cuz someone was saying progressives need a PERFECT candidate. We don’t. We just need someone who is not actively fighting AGAINST us. A DNC who is pro democracy, not suing to remove 3rd parties from ballots. Not attacking third parties. Someone willing to listen to constituents and adapt policy, plenty of extremely popular policies/positions. Like ranked choice/STAR/etc. voting, universal health care, get money out of politics, etc. I’m not asking for someone to kill all landlords or nationalize the top 100 companies or anything crazy.
Like I said, Obama was ok. He wasn’t perfect, but he at least was adaptable which is why plenty of people would vote for him. He wanted change, we need change, hell Trump won because he will change things. Not for the better, but people are stupid and want any change, since clearly what we currently have is not working. Biden and Clinton were both promising to basically keep things exactly the same, while actively fighting against progress and courting republicans. Kamala just Echoed Biden and also decided to adopt Republican border policy.
Sorry i guess my comment was directed at the person further up the line. I just don't understand how someone could look at the political landscape of 2012, and come to the conclusion that there was a better candidate out there, but we just didn't democracy hard enough!
In my mind, and in the face of republican authoritarianism and accelerationism. The perfect candidate to me is any warm body that prevents a republican take over. Now thats not really my political ideal, but thats a political reality. I totally get where you are coming from. I'm frusterated from this endless thread about hindsight rating Dem Presidents while the worst administration in the country is destroying us and our world order.
Also final point im trying to make is if someone has a 2028 candidate or a 2026 candidate whos a perfect progressive, im all ears.
I mean, like I said Obama was fine. He listened, which is great. That’s why he was my example. He wasn’t perfect, but he was good enough for everyone. I am fine with that. But Clinton and Biden and Harris have all pushed back against progressives and embraced republican shit and like… no. We need to get better as a party, not worse. People won’t vote for shit democrats, but the DNC refuses to learn that, and will actively fight to keep money in politics, keep old centrists in power, and fight against progressives.
And uh, AoC is a fairly popular democratic figure that supports progressive ideals. She’s not perfect, but I mean, she’s decent. If the DNC doesn’t spend 5x the legal limit of donations fighting against her like they did Bernie with their “victory fund” (aka ensure a Clinton victory by breaking campaign finance laws fund) she would have a pretty good chance. But… I doubt the DNC learns their lesson… ever.
Oh we need a better party for sure. No question there. Like i said ideals are extremely removed from the two party system. I love AoC I hope we give her a fair shot. She's worked hard her whole career and if the firebrand we need. Honest and relatable.
Knowing all that you understand my worries about AoC and the median voter. The DNC would need to get behind her now and start branding hard for 4 years. There's a lot that goes into getting a mainstream candidate elected, and there's not much we can do to get some of less centrists re-branded in the face of fox news. I'm not sure the DNC can provide her with the support she needs to win an election, nor will they even endorse her for a senate seat. I would tho.
Ragging on the candidate that won the election is just illogical to me. Ragging on the party that can't develop young talent is all fair game. Im here for it.
Ehh just sounds like the excuses they always come up with on why oh no we caaaantttttttt. Fox News is gonna call literally every single democrat a fucking communist it literally doesn’t matter. Just run someone who progresses the party. Stop caring about republicans & Fox News, and start worrying about having a party people care about enough to get off their ass and vote.
I think we need to put the party, the platforms, the voters and our candidates into a realistic perspective and not reflect on Obama and bidens short comings. Progressive policy should be easy to sell because it addresses the needs of many. We have a messaging problem, you dont need to convince the dems to come left you need to convince the independents your policies are better.
I mean, there’s plenty of progressive policies at like 60% support or more from what I remember for the whole country? I think it’s a harder sell to the DNC to allow a progressive policy than it is to the actual constituents.
Also, I think Clinton and Harris had larger problems other than being a woman, but I do agree it could be a problem for AOC. I’m not particularly pushing for her to be the candidate, but the first that comes to mind that’s possible.
She's my hopeful contender for the future. I would like to see more energetic and educated young people in there with a backbone and a will to fight.
I do not think the public understands progressive policy. This last election was a perfect example. You had Kamala promising down payments on housing, child tax credits and a whole bunch of progressive policy that addressed major voter issues. People voted for raising taxes on themselves instead of the rich. They don't even want progressivism. Like they proved it 4 months ago. They said it was gay and they wanted to trade social security for billionaire tax cuts. Anything but a black woman!
I mean… she also said she was going to be tough on immigration, continue to give bombs to Israel to destroy Gaza, not break from Biden on basically anything, toured with the fucking Cheneys, and plenty of other … great… things. Not to mention she had a late start… after primaries could have happened…. So… yeah. Lot of reasons she did not do great. Plus a lot of her “progressive” stuff was…. Eh…. Child tax credits already a thing just keeping it isn’t exactly progressive, I don’t remember much on the housing but her business stuff was also something that sounded nice but was also… not much. Like you wanna help small businesses then pass Medicare for all dude, when a small business doesn’t have to compete with free health care, they have a much better chance.
So glad you guys could destroy america to virtue signal about Gaza. We needed that 2% of protest non-votes and Jill stien votes. When they're hauling your friends off to Gitmo remeber that. Won't be another election so point is mute. Good luck day dreaming about. 'the perfect progressive candidate' when the BEST progressive policies barely enjoy a majority support.
Great glad you brought up Gaza. I think it's wonderful that we went from soft support of isreal, to full on Genocide. Like grind up the palestinians and use them for the foundation of Trump hotel genocide. Not slow rolling generations of terrorism genocide.
So ya dude this is what im saying about the messaging, you're still hung up on whats wrong with Kamala, while the alternative who was elected, removes medicare entirely. Promotes actual removing all the people with no final destination genocide. Cuts weapons from Ukraine to give MORE to isreal
EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOUR PROGRESSIVE DREAMS HAS BEEN DESTROYED. You will never get these policies passed now. Just stick with voting for Jill Stien. So fucking stupid you watched Kamala trying to reach out to the median vote and thought wow, we'd be better off with Trump because then the Dem's will come further left with me.
Dude they're going to deport you for your progressive views. And then we can finally win an election. So Like idk hows this wonderful progressive vision playing out? Does it end in Gitmo?
lol I did not vote for Jill Stein. Also, if you think Harris would’ve magically stopped Israel from continuously killing Palestinians during a ceasefire… well… they didn’t. Nor did they stop the entire genocide happening while Biden was in charge. It would have been… less public? Cool? I guess?
The democrats won’t pass anything progressive either, so it’s not like my progressive dreams were gonna happen if Harris won. And like, the genocide shit was one single point of the many things that were issues for her. One of the most obvious things she could have done to signal she is not Biden and will listen to constituents.
Like I understand foreign policy in the Middle East is a lot but acting like there’s nothing we could do about us sending bombs to commit genocide, while we were actively telling Ukraine they could not attack Russia using our weapons, is just silly. (Yes we did eventually let them attack Russia, but the fact that there was a time they had to hold off, meanwhile our bombs are dropping on civilians in Gaza, is wild.)
No its alright, because now we cut USAID to palestine effectively starving them. They won't last long under the bombs while starving.
I care about the 70 million americans who depend on social security to survice. I care about the 30 million americans that are food insecure and facing empty food banks.Me and everyone else in america could care less about palestine when grandmas life is at risk.
I'm going to sumerize your political view. My way or the highway. If i don't get what i want everyone should suffer. If i can't get 100 million people to agree with my political opinion than 330 million people should suffer.
Now we've got the most evil regime passing the most evil policy they can think of every day. 45% complete with project 2025.
The way i see it you guys had a clear choice: A. Candidate that may not promote progressiveism, but is not regressive and we know what to expect. B. Candidate that wanted to do a military based mass deportation, and enact 1900 policies erasing 100 years of progressive progress. C. Wasting your vote on a third party candidate who said what you wanted to hear, but existed only to split critical vote.
Reality called. We're on our way back to 1920 but with nukes. Nationalism and international paranoia. First amendment is under attack. Everythings under attack. You finally beat them neo-liberals, congrats on your nazis
At the end of the day you are either an educated voter who understands congress passes funding for isreal, or you pretend that the president writes budget laws, and then help vote in the president who is 1000x more genocidal. You pick the one that starts a war with canada and europe, and every liberal policy on the books.
You supported 1900's wars, race relations, economics. Like soooo progressive wow lets get everyone a ribbon, or arm band. So anyway, great long term planning on implementing progressive policy. I'm sure the Gulag will be a bastion of marxist thought.
So, what’s your plan on passive progressive policy? Keep voting for centrists that keep campaigning with republicans? That remove third parties from elections? That run attack ads on third parties? That refuse primaries? We keep doing that and the party is going to be where republicans are now in 20 years. If the DNC refuses to adopt progressive policies, they lose. That’s not my fault. They would rather Trump win than give up their power. Can’t support a party that doesn’t represent me. I would like it to, but it refuses.
Yall need to understand people criticize the DNC because they want it to be better. Most progressives still vote, and even if they did not vote for Harris, they voted down ballot. But when you sue to remove their candidate from the ballot, then they don’t show up and then you lose those local elections. When you continuously attack progressives and defend the DNC’s choice to abandon progress after it had the biggest victory it’s had running on the promise of progress in 2008, you’re helping to cause voter apathy and that leads to losing local elections. Which leads to republicans controlling the house and senate and presidency.
Personally I'm considering the possibility of a third party that can sweep a majority. I'm exploring ideas and policies that work. I'm running them by my friends from different walks of life. I'm personally thinking of taking a run at Susan Collins seat in Maine. A very right leaning district. If I could get a right wing district as a centrist, we would have a friendlier face to progressive views. We would have a person that could message progressive policy to the middle. If we could replicate this in multiple red districts and take the senate maybe we could defund isreal. I'd love to not be accountable for death and resume sending food aid to Gaza.
As you know progressive policies come from Congress. So we need to get a friendly majority in congress some way or the other. The DNC has got to go, we need to shame them into submission or leave them for a better voting block. If the DNC is still in place we're sstuck with lesser of two evil candidates and small incremental changes.
I like small incremental changes. I appreciate the scocial progress from 1950-2025 we are heading in the right direction until Trump got in. Now we are back at 1920 and you want to talk to me about Kamalas proposed policies she was using to win an election. Issues that polled well with median US voters.
You know 70% of voters consider immigration in elections? It's a real issue people vote on. You and i may not agree with them but we can't drown out their voices that defies democracy.
I dont know what to do i'm just in awe of the lefts response to this presidency and congress, and the endless policy. We're still talking about biden and the DNC. they are dead and gone. irrelevant to our future. If we had Kamala we could be debating each other all day about how to get a better progressive candidate. now the real question is how will 1/3 of the country survive this admin? How will democracy even work in 2 years?
Glad we can at least agree on some things. I just try and stop people from attacking the leftists because most still will vote down ballot, which helps with congress and local elections and local amendments and other ballot measures, but stopping them from voting means losing all of that. Can’t really blame them for not voting for a party that refuses to represent them. I’d rather encourage someone to vote third party than not vote.
And yeah, while I understand immigration is something people think about, that was honestly one of the biggest things to piss me off. We did not need to validate their bullshit racist irrational fears and decide to be “hard on immigration.” Like, stop playing by their bullshit games and do something right.
I know, but i mean i hate to be the one to say it, but its not just fox news viewer. a large number of american voters are too biased for a POC woman. it needs to be addressed as well as what progressive platforms poll the best with the center. Ways to frame progressive goals that reach people etc. We can totally do it, but i dont see a clear path for AOC to a whitehouse victory in this climate. I'd support what ever we needed to get there, but i think its kinda ignorant to ignore. One thing hillary and kamala had in common besides being competent politicians, was being women.