this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2024
90 points (83.6% liked)

politics

19172 readers
3712 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The data show the Democratic Party retaining advantages among people of color and young adults, but in 2023 it was in a weaker position among these groups than at any point in the past quarter century. Democrats’ reduced support among Black and Hispanic adults should be especially concerning for the party, given Republicans’ continued strength among White adults, who remain the majority of the electorate.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

And its not unconditionally - Blinken has explicitly told them to avoid civilian casualties

Yeah, and when they don't listen, we're going to support them at the same level we would have if they did.

If that's not unconditional, where's the condition?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

we’re going to support them at the same level we would have if they did.

Meanwhile, back in reality, Israel just lost $17B in US aid, with more to follow.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

https://apnews.com/article/congress-israel-hamas-military-aid-speaker-johnson-a0f135bcee45afcbe2a90453c4aa894a

Fourteen Republicans ended up voting against the bill, concerned about the lack of spending cuts to offset the $17.6 billion price tag. That compares to 204 Republicans who voted for it. On the Democratic side, 46 voted for it and 166 against.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

So the House is dysfunctional and that somehow means Biden hasn't unconditionally supported Netanyahu's genocide?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

The height of morals. We refuse to fund genocide because we can't be assed to find the money.

Yaaaay.

And that's the Republicans. Show us where the white house is enacting the Leahy Law.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 months ago

Actually aid has been slow walked but you’re not wrong that we’d almost certainly come through and not leave them in the lurch.