378
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2026
378 points (99.0% liked)
politics
30712 readers
1718 users here now
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 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Fucking bullshit...
The prior DNC fucked up the vice chair election Hogg won.
The new DNC chair, said the ethical thing to do, was to re-run the vice elections, this time according to the rules.
Hogg would have 100% won that, but he declined to run in the election despite being virtually guaranteed to win
Hogg's problem should be with Jamie Harrison for fucking up the first one that Hogg won.
But my problem is Hogg refused to run for the re-election, and it seems he never wanted to win in the first place. It seems like his plan was to lose and pivot to a super PAC which is what he said he was going to do when he denied to run, but I don't even think he's done that.
All he's done is try to get people to disengage from the Dem party, and he started almost exactly as soon as neoliberals lost power.
I don't know if he's corrupt or just fucking stupid.
Edit:
So to be perfectly clear:
DNC voting members elected Hogg
Due to a technical error about woman/minority candidates, the DNC chair said it was ethical to run the election over instead of accept the results of a fraudulent election
Hogg refused to run, even though the same voting members who elected him were gonna vote again.
Hogg spends a year shit talking the very people that elected him to be a vice chair. And claims that a wave of progress that happened without him, somehow proves that that the party isn't progressive even tho they've elected Hogg personally in 100% of positions he's run for. And that means we shouldn't trust the people who elected him and ushered in a wave of progress.
If anything, this proves the DNC made a mistake when they elected him the first time.
Dude should not be involved in a party if he doesn't even understand how this works.
Especially since he didn't get loud again till after primaries and right before the general.
Ah yes, he didn't really want to win, that makes sense 😑
I mean...
He ran thinking he would never win...
Won...
And the refused to run in the re-election he was guaranteed to win...
So yeah, any rational person should be able to figure this one out chief.
all you ever see you do with your comments is attack the left, givesomefucks. You run interference for Ken Martin ignoring Gaza in the last thread I saw you in, and here you attack Hogg. You are as rabidly conservative a "democrat" as they come.
Theres nothing but fascism down the road that your opinions live on.
I agree wholeheartedly with your comment, I've seen givesomefuck spew conservative talking points non-stop since I joined Lemmy.
I've followed them since before the Biden Harris shift.
I'd say you're way wrong.
I didn't at all agree with them before then but they have convictions and data to back it up. I'm OK with what they post honestly.