Like getting rid of Schumer, Pelosi and all the corrupt old guard?
161
alienbringerMar 25, 2026
+39
Pelosi is already gone… She already announced her retirement and her term will end after this midterm election.
39
ButterRollercoasterMar 25, 2026
+7
We did it, Reddit!
7
Jorge_Santos69Mar 25, 2026
-4
Bro who upvotes this stupid shit.
-4
A_Rogue_GAIMar 25, 2026
+14
"We're going to continue doing the exact same thing we've been doing since 1993."
14
backpackwayneMar 25, 2026
-78
They are not corrupt. Old and ineffective maybe. But not corrupt.
-78
mightyboinkMar 25, 2026
+62
Their stock portfolios would disagree.
62
CatEnthusiast69420Mar 25, 2026
+27
Ya idk if getting money from a foreign government is not corrupt
27
Prefect79038Mar 25, 2026
+13
This Right Here.
AOC fought Pelosi to deny congress from being able to trade stock while in office. Pelosi slapped that down without any discussion on the floor.
13
backpackwayneMar 25, 2026
-43
Like it or not, it's done legally.
-43
AmazingRefrigerator4Mar 25, 2026
+42
Corruption and legality are not mutually exclusive.
Taking bribes and lobbying is corruption but it's legal. Just one example.
42
Ok-Sprinkles700Mar 25, 2026
+23
Access money can be legal and is still corrupt.
23
backpackwayneMar 25, 2026
-35
What have they done illegally? What deal have they made that was "corrupt?" You sound like Trump villifying the "radical left" with just negative platitudes with no evidence or reality to back it up.
Yes they are old and ineffective. But the corrupt part has just been added with no evidence to back it up.
-35
mightyboinkMar 25, 2026
+12
Trump and the Republicans are so much more corrupt and vile and anti American traitors.
And again, being corrupt isn't illegal in American politics.
12
whoopashigittMar 25, 2026
+24
It’s already been said. Stock portfolios. Net worth. Congress has a set salary yet these people are multimillionaires. As someone else mentioned you can be corrupt without breaking the law.
If they’re taking payouts and/or bribes instead of serving the interest of the constituents, that’s corruption.
If they’re using insider information to make trades, that’s corruption (and it’s illegal).
24
mightyboinkMar 25, 2026
+7
Just because it's legal, doesn't mean it's not corrupt.
7
CirclemagiMar 25, 2026
+3
It's done legally so it's a okay! /S
3
GrafZeppelin127Mar 25, 2026
If bribery were legalized, would that make it less corrupt?
0
insertUserNameherenoMar 25, 2026
+3
You mean lobbying?
3
e2theithetaMar 25, 2026
+3
Ineffective??! She impeached him twice! The second time in 5 days. You’ll never see a more effective Speaker.
3
PegyBundyMar 25, 2026
+5
Yes. Roe is gone, the wealth gap widened every year she was in washington, she endorsed jeffries, and neither impeachment did shit.
Democrats have gotten their asses kicked for 25 years. The only thing good was gay marriage and maybe the ACA if you ignore the absolute cluster f*** that is US health. I suppose you can argue it better but the same can be said about a partial d*** amputation compared to a full d*** amputation.
5
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+2
Lots of people are alive today because of the ACA. Trashing it for not being perfect is sociopathic.
2
kloiberin_timeMar 25, 2026
+2
Saying it could be better isn't saying it's bad, it's saying it could be better. I'm glad we got *something* but even in the best of times Healthcare is fucked in this country.
2
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+1
Op wasn't saying that.
1
PegyBundyMar 25, 2026
-2
You can't gaslight me into believing the aca is a good thing. On a scale of normal to sociopathic not allowing pre-existing conditions or having caps is sociopathic. Forcing everyone to buy insurance from the very people that made those rules is sociopathic. Criticizing both is pretty goddamned normal
Once again democrats served up a shit sandwich and we are supposed to say yum! Donald Trump isn't president because Dems were good at their job. Stop f****** defending them
-2
Gratefulgirl13Mar 25, 2026
+4
ACA was a starting point. It was supposed to be the framework to start building it out over the coming years. Clearly our “leaders” didn’t get the memo and we got stuck with what’s left. While it saved lives, especially by doing away with preexisting conditions, it falls short because it wasn’t developed.
4
No-Personality1840Mar 25, 2026
+2
It was a starting point that codified for private insurance companies into law. The insurers made put like bandits under the ACA because now the government was paying the premiums instead of individuals. When I was on it, the government paid BCBS 18,000 /year for my privilege of having a small network of providers. I needed an xray after a fall and rather than the urgent care 2 miles away I had the privilege of using in-network facilities 30 miles from home. The ACA was a corporate giveaway with few cost controls
It’s now unaffordable for many.
The corporate power brokers would never have allowed anyone that would defy them anywhere near the White House. Obama was their candidate of choice; Wall Street backed him over Hillary and he received more in funding from them than she did. His cabinet was a Wall Street dream. As Rev. Wight said about his congregant, Obama was a politician; he’d say anything to get elected. (Paraphrased)
I campaigned and voted for Obama but let’s not be blind to the faults of our leaders lest we become blue MAGA.
2
PegyBundyMar 25, 2026
-1
You're proving my point the Pelosi was bad at her job.
-1
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+3
I guess you think people should be denied healthcare for having preexisting conditions. Good to know.
3
PegyBundyMar 25, 2026
+3
I guess you think insurance company should maintain the right to f*** people over. Good to know
3
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+1
I think it's more important that people with conditions continue to live than to successfully crusade against capitalism.
1
PegyBundyMar 25, 2026
+3
That's probably inaccurate, but I'm glad that the propaganda makes you feel better. Because it hasn't helped our health.
Avoidable mortality roae in the US from 2009-2021 and declined in most other high income nations [source](https://www.brown.edu/news/2025-03-24/avoidable-deaths)
I wonder why that is? I bet it has nothing to do with absurd out of pocket expense and high deductibles.
3
UniqueOutside108Mar 25, 2026
no it isnt, and it isnt even close.
0
No-Personality1840Mar 25, 2026
If they can’t afford a policy it’s a distinction without a difference. .
0
sweetempoweredchicknMar 25, 2026
+2
C'mon, you know that stock trading compromises all of one's values, UNLESS they are a special person that my in-group approves of like Ro Khanna.
2
Blue_Swirling_BunnyMar 25, 2026
There are maybe half a dozen who aren't, but the rest of them are on the take one way or another.
0
seriousofficialnameMar 25, 2026
-1
Yes I'm sure their ineffectiveness has nothing whatsoever to do with the bribes /s
-1
fumphdikMar 25, 2026
-2
Just because a thing isn’t illegal, doesn’t mean that insider trading amongst congress is not corrupt.
-2
backpackwayneMar 26, 2026
+1
Insider trading is illegal - There has been no proof Shuemer or Pelsoi has done that. Only propaganda from Trump that you are repeating without evidence. If you have evidence, please present it.
1
WithUnfailingHeartsMar 26, 2026
+1
Hi, sorry this is off topic, did reddit notify you about my DM?
1
backpackwayneMar 26, 2026
+1
I have no idea what this is about.
1
WithUnfailingHeartsMar 26, 2026
+1
I sent you a message over reddit about a potential Ukraine Fundraiser, but the way Reddit is with most platforms makes it so people aren't signaled about it, so I thought I'd let you know about it here.
1
backpackwayneMar 26, 2026
+1
If you asking about posting a fundraiser, that is not allowed on r/democrats.
1
NicolasCageFan492Mar 25, 2026
+42
> According to a close source, Buttigieg has spent half of 2026 on the road, hitting 10 states, five of them battlegrounds — no wonder he brought a helmet.
> Buttigieg zeroed in on the current president’s success, cobbling together the disparate blocs of voters that unexpectedly sent him to the White House for a second term.
> “It is really important that we understand what it means that this president stitched together this very unlikely crew that includes traditional Republicans, Libertarians, authoritarians, and white nationalists,” Buttigieg said. “We have to have a bigger, better, different coalition.”
> Though he didn’t mention it, Buttigieg likely has in mind Barack Obama’s union of young people, Black and Latino voters, educated professionals, Independents, white working-class voters, and lot of LGBTQ+ people among them all, for a 2028 repeat, even as he listed many of the same issues that brought those voters together 20 years ago, despite their differences.
> Democrats “should be able to build a supermajority coalition” based on the party’s platform, Buttigieg said, putting on his accountant’s visor to tick off the issues and numbers: paid family leave, a higher minimum wage, raising taxes on the wealthy, universal background checks, and what Buttigieg called a public health insurance option.
> “If we can’t get those two-thirds supported positions over 50%, that means we’re missing something in terms of the coalition we built,” Buttigieg said, using that word again.
The hardest part is that this is not something that can be calculated. There has to be a vision and the party’s leaders must persuade people to see their vision.
Teddy Roosevelt had the Square Deal. FDR had the New Deal. LBJ had the Great Society. Reagan had the Mandate for Leadership. George W Bush had compassionate conservatism.
You can’t retrofit a policy platform by finding out which positions are most popular and adding those to the platform and expect people to support it because it’s made up of popular positions. You have to understand **why** these positions are popular, effectively communicate your vision, and bring people over to your side.
This becomes extremely difficult when 30%+ of the population lives in an alternate reality. But I don’t think it’s totally impossible. I think using pathos and appealing to our values is a way to short circuit ideological blinders. This country needs a political Great Awakening.
I’m thankful to Buttigieg for the effort and energy, he’s a valuable member of the opposition 🫡
They live in an alternate news reality, but the same physical reality. You can cause dissonance and pop the bubble by showing up in those places
5
kummer5peckMar 25, 2026
+5
I like his pragmatism. Something the party needs more of to form a big tent coalition. Too many democrats have become tribal and animus towards the rest of the party when they don’t get their way. Well folks, it’s either the most popular democratic candidate or more MAGA. It should be a pretty obvious choice.
5
SlowRunner2026Mar 25, 2026
+7
Whatever platform they build, it cannot be "It's our job to protect Israel."
7
socialistForDEMar 25, 2026
+3
Ok what if we build a coalition based on our love of Israel and willingness to pay any price in money or lives to do war crimes for them? Cuz that seems to be Josh Shapiro and Gavin newsoms plan
3
liebkartoffelMar 25, 2026
+1
\>You can’t retrofit a policy platform by finding out which positions are most popular and adding those to the platform and expect people to support it because it’s made up of popular positions.
Sounds like \*someone\* hasn't heard the good news about popularism!
/s
1
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+1
Dude has been saying this shit for years. These are the low hanging fruit of political issues, if we can win and deliver on these, we can parlay that into greater progress.
1
ViciousKnidsMar 25, 2026
+79
Is it denouncing Israel and pac money?
79
spewing_honey_badgerMar 25, 2026
+42
You know it’s not. 🤣
42
UvanimorMar 25, 2026
+17
If you came from the future with irrefutable proof that the next election could solely be decided by who accepted the least AIPAC funding, both republicans and democrats would still bend over backwards for that cash grab.
17
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
Dude literally campaigned on massive campaign finance reform in 20.
0
TitleOfYourSaxTapeMar 25, 2026
+4
Ah, campaign-finance-reform-for-all-who-want-it.
4
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+3
If that's how you define amending the constitution to patch citizen's united and a public matching system for grassroots donations to enhance their power relative to corporations in the short term.
3
KelorMar 26, 2026
+2
Buttigieg campaigned on a lot of things in 2020 before flip flopping on them.
He said that Biden was sharp as a tack about three weeks before the debate and despite his many assurances that Biden was fine that wasn’t true.
He said the chemicals burnt off in East Palestine after the train derailment were safe and that wasn’t true either.
2
Silent-StormsMar 26, 2026
+1
Name one thing he flipped on.
Citation needed.
1
KelorMar 26, 2026
+1
At one of the primary debates he raised his hand when asked if the act of crossing the border should be decriminialised.
>All but one Democratic candidate onstage for the second night of the presidential debate say they would make illegal border crossings a civil, not, criminal offense.
>South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg says he would end the felony criminalization because it is "dead wrong."
[https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/most-democrats-promise-to-decriminalize-border-crossings-during-2020-debate](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/most-democrats-promise-to-decriminalize-border-crossings-during-2020-debate)
Then a few weeks at the very next debate he said as president crossing the border would still be illegal and a "purity test."
[https://web.archive.org/web/20201118094718/https://twitter.com/sawyerhackett/status/1184898062415749120](https://web.archive.org/web/20201118094718/https://twitter.com/sawyerhackett/status/1184898062415749120)
1
AppropriateBeing3539Mar 25, 2026
+1
Pete would never. He’s a cuck
1
gbg111Mar 25, 2026
+52
Let me guess, it's capitulating to centrists and blocking young progressives from gaining any representation.
52
genericusername11101Mar 25, 2026
+34
This guy Dems.
34
kummer5peckMar 25, 2026
-6
Putting the progressives in the drivers seat definitely won’t get it done. We need a diverse coalition, not one that only caters to the loudest minority.
-6
AgreeableLife6Mar 25, 2026
+9
because capitulating to the "center" has done so well for democrats....
9
kzzzo3Mar 25, 2026
-23
Maybe the young progressives should be less extreme.
-23
AgreeableLife6Mar 25, 2026
+16
name 3 actually extreme views that major progressives have?
16
kummer5peckMar 25, 2026
-4
Policy isn’t what matters, it’s messaging that wins and loses elections. If AOC got the nomination the democrats are toast because so many people in the middle just don’t have a positive opinion of her and other progressives.
-4
Vegetable-Error-2068Mar 25, 2026
+9
Ah yes, the extreme views of "wealthy people need to pay their fair share" and "wages should be fair" and "healthcare shouldn't bankrupt you"
If you are threatened by these, that's a mark against you, not them.
9
rabbitwow20026Mar 25, 2026
-3
It’s more so the lack of how to accomplish it.
Only way healthcare for all happens is having the American public pay 6-15% more in taxes.
Until yall sell that to the public just shut up.
There is zero way the math maths out without doing high single to double tax increase.
-3
[deleted]Mar 25, 2026
+1
[removed]
1
rabbitwow20026Mar 25, 2026
-2
If you only have campaign slogans sit down.
It’s what BS populism is. Just screen popular programs just never implement them.
Bernie lost to Biden the second he put together a plan and smallest tax increase he could do was 6% and it still didn’t add up math wise.
-2
2d6DoomedWizardsMar 25, 2026
+4
You're right, you guys obviously have this all under control.
No left wing person is obligated to vote for center-right neoliberal capitalists, especially ones that ONLY care about courting the far-right over to their side.
Good luck with the slow spiral into fascism! Alienating the left to court the right ain't gonna do it, hope you've got a plan b, DNC bot.
4
Beginning_Opinion618Mar 26, 2026
+1
No.
1
EBXLBRVEKJVEOJHARTBMar 25, 2026
+9
does it shoot common sense?
9
BPhiloSkinnerMar 25, 2026
+4
If you can find any.
Paraphrasing Oscar Wilde: "Common Sense is never common, and rarely sensible."
4
HoightyToightyMar 25, 2026
+17
The secret weapon is coalition building. You know, what Democrats have done, tried, or failed to do ever since the party's founding.
17
Vegetable-Error-2068Mar 25, 2026
+3
The only coalition Democrats are interested in building is the one with Republicans, donors, and lobbyists.
3
UncircumciseMeMar 25, 2026
+5
Is it a Death Star we can aim at this current administration?
5
Karlend41Mar 25, 2026
+8
The current head of the democrats, Ken Martin, has this very silly idea that the party will succeed in spite of it's shortcomings by being the party of everything for everybody.
They want to appeal to the conservatives that got thrown out of the republican party by Trump and MAGA. This lead to a constant stream of fake democrats like John Fetterman running as progressives but just being republicans when in office. They've filled offices with these losers and they're going to drag down the party for the decade.
They want to appeal to the left without supporting any leftist values or pushing progressive ideas. They've actually worked with Trump against figures like Mamdani and constantly work to hamstring them when they get offices. You have to work against the republicans and your own party to get even the most minor of concessions.
They want to work with moderates and careerists like Schumer, Harris and Buttigieg who's only concern is keeping their jobs. No interest in fighting the republicans, no interest in pushing changes that would benefit their voters and doing everything to restore the pre-trump status quo that's never coming back.
The result is a party that can do nothing for anybody. If anything it's helped Trump and the Republicans gain and keep power. The party needs to drop the old losers, get rid of the republican plants and get people who are actually going to fight for this country and it's people.
8
Faux-FoeMar 25, 2026
+1
It’s like asking a group what toppings to get on a bunch of pizzas. There is always some rando that wants a Supreme.
Then inevitably that person that ordered a Supreme will dive in on the “safe” pies that were ordered for people with dietary restrictions.
Meanwhile that supreme pie sits mostly untouched except for the 2-3 slices that just that one person grabbed.
Currently everyone wants a cheese pizza, but our head dems keep ordering Supremes for people that are skipping out on the bill.
1
UsherOfDestructionMar 25, 2026
+5
Traveling the country trying to get various types of non-right voters to give up their ideals and meet in some center coalition?
Sounds like what every Democrat presidential candidate has been doing for decades.
5
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+3
Can you explain what the in the article lead you to conclude this?
3
UsherOfDestructionMar 25, 2026
+5
Democrats “should be able to build a supermajority coalition” based on the party’s platform, Buttigieg said, putting on his accountant’s visor to tick off the issues and numbers: paid family leave, a higher minimum wage, raising taxes on the wealthy, universal background checks, and what Buttigieg called a public health insurance option.
No specifics on wealth tax (which traditionally means an ineffective one). Public option is known to be ineffective and not the same as the universal healthcare other civilized countries have. No mentions of reining in executive power, abolishing ICE, defunding DHS, ending wars, all the stuff important to the progressive left.
This is just more of the same "We want an all encompassing Democrat party, but you progressives and social Democrats need to move to the center while we don't move at all."
5
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+4
This isn't a f****** campaign website. He described a bunch of issues people broadly agree on.
No one is asking you to move anywhere.
4
UsherOfDestructionMar 25, 2026
+5
And I'm saying they don't broadly agree.
5
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+2
On solving the problem, they definitely do. On specific remedy, probably not.
2
UsherOfDestructionMar 25, 2026
+3
Yeah, that's the important part. They want to not be so harsh on the rich and the corporations who have driven this country to division and ruin, and half their party is done with that shit. We want politicians who fight for what's right, not what's convenient or easy for the moneyed interests to get onboard with.
3
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+1
You can torture and kill all the billionaires you want, and it won't make anyone's life better.
Turning down progress because you don't feel it's punitive enough is so f****** stupid.
1
UsherOfDestructionMar 25, 2026
+3
Nope. Just want them to pay monetarily.
3
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+2
Then I don't think there's a conflict.
2
No-Personality1840Mar 25, 2026
+1
One step forward, two steps back. People want bold policies, not same old same old. That’s Democrats and Republicans. You’d be surprised at how many non-Fox watching Republicans support Medicare for all.
1
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+3
They support universal healthcare/ a public option, not Bernie's specific bill.
And yes, that was my point.
3
telmesumpmMar 25, 2026
+4
Buttigieg Talarico Sanders AOC any combo of those would be f****** amazing for pres/vp
4
HarkoncitoMar 25, 2026
+19
Let it go with Sanders, you don't need (more) politicians likely to die in office.
19
telmesumpmMar 25, 2026
+4
Good call
4
photon45Mar 25, 2026
+3
The DNC hears you and they have decided it will be...
Gavin Newsom & Liz Cheney
3
DickieB22Mar 25, 2026
+2
Unfortunately I think this is more likely than the others. Newsom didn’t just flip flop on Israel and go from “apartheid state” to “I revere Israel” for no reason - corruption is a powerful weapon
2
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
Newsom is just not likely. He plays well on social media right now and gets attention, so he gets name recognition in polls. Voters don't actually particularly like him.
0
electrobentoMar 25, 2026
+1
Newsom might win, but only because he’s not MAGA. Buttigieg, AOC, etc might win because they represent a new, better direction for the country.
F*** Newsome. I’ll vote for him if he’s the choice, but he’s just more of the same Democrat bullshit at the end of the day.
1
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+1
Buttigieg/AOC would be phenomenal. She might be a riskier choice though.
1
ElysiumSproutsMar 25, 2026
+3
Wow, the comments here are amazing. I've read that conservatives are losing their minds over how badly Trump has destroyed the GOP. All they've got left is the keyboard troll army trying to divide Dems.
It's laughably transparent.
3
ShardBorneMar 25, 2026
+2
Or it's people genuinely concerned that the tepid centrist/corporate policies that got us here in the first place aren't a sufficient, or lasting antidote to right wing populism.
But I'm a right wing operative sowing division among the Dems, so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
2
Jorge_Santos69Mar 25, 2026
At least you’re honest about it!
0
Silent-StormsMar 25, 2026
+1
It's definitely salty Bernie guys, in part.
1
symphonicroxMar 25, 2026
+3
Buttigieg as president would be incredible. I would proudly vote for him. He can actually formulate his thoughts into coherent sentences, which is important to me.
3
GarbagePailGrrrlMar 25, 2026
+2
Nearly $200k taken from AIPAC, NO THANKS
2
indri2Mar 25, 2026
+2
$50 taken from someone working for AIPAC. Those memes from TrackAIPAC are (deliberately) misleading,
2
No-Personality1840Mar 25, 2026
From the article:
Unlike one of the candidates he was stumping for — Democrat Bob Brooks in Pennsylvania, who’s trying to unseat a MAGA Republican and is one of the new breed of “real guy” Democrats running for office this cycle (see Graham Platner in Maine) — former Mayor Pete is not a fan of Medicare for All.
0
RVarkiMar 26, 2026
+1
He thinks single payer is the ideal system, but he wants to start with a public option first
1
paculotMar 25, 2026
+2
Is it a nuke? I hope it’s a nuke.
2
MunkeyslovebananasMar 25, 2026
+1
His secret weapon is to get black voter's support. He had 20-30% in 2020 compared to Joe Biden's 60-70%.
You're right, the new guy barely anyone had heard of before the campaign couldn't come close to the numbers of the long time politician and vice presidential partner to the highly popular first black president.
Must be a Buttigieg problem 🙄
1
thapeelllllcccMar 25, 2026
+1
Let me guess, more “enlightened centrism”
1
ArtificialBra1nMar 25, 2026
+2
*Secret weapon paid for by AIPAC
2
plightroMar 25, 2026
+2
Unless he's building a Time Machine his electability isn't recovering
2
sevsnapeysuspendedMar 25, 2026
+1
dumbledore’s secret weapon
1
Confident-Pause-1908Mar 26, 2026
+1
Is it an exploding red hat?
1
ThisIsPeteHelloMar 26, 2026
+1
Sometimes I wish Pete was more effeminate. Imagine going from the first black president, to an actual fascist monster, to President Ripp Taylor? It'd be glorious.
1
ChuckaChuckaLooLoo3Mar 25, 2026
-1
Dear Pete:
Stop dancing around the edges of running for some kind of office and actually run for some kind of office. Once you do that, I'll start donating money to your cause again. Because right now, it's too vague of a mission for me to figure out what you're really up to.
- Love, a Dem voter
-1
UnleashtheducksMar 25, 2026
It’s a Metal Gear
0
smersh101Mar 25, 2026
-1
Democrats don't need a "secret weapon" to win in this environment. They just need to not f*** up.
-1
Vegetable-Error-2068Mar 25, 2026
+3
They need to stop being America's second right-wing party and actually be left-wing and punt all the geriatric power-addicted oligarchs in the nursing home.
3
TheBalzyMar 25, 2026
-1
Like going out into the woods with Shumer, Pelosi, H. Clinton and the rest of the incompetent losers?
-1
Funny_Requirement166Mar 25, 2026
-5
He’s changing his sexuality to get the conservative votes.
-5
Specialist-Clock-914Mar 25, 2026
+1
That’s why they secretly like him though
1
Funny_Requirement166Mar 25, 2026
+2
lol I was kidding. He’s my president.
2
No-Personality1840Mar 25, 2026
-1
This says it all for me:
Unlike one of the candidates he was stumping for — Democrat Bob Brooks in Pennsylvania, who’s trying to unseat a MAGA Republican and is one of the new breed of “real guy” Democrats running for office this cycle (see Graham Platner in Maine) — former Mayor Pete is not a fan of Medicare for All.
-1
RVarkiMar 26, 2026
+1
He's not a fan of its immediate implementation. He wants to establish the system with a public option, and then work towards single payer
1
RublesAfootMar 25, 2026
-3
People going to actually vote?
-3
ShardBorneMar 25, 2026
+1
Well, hopefully they'll see just how bad Trump is and settle for our milquetoast policies. Then we'll be rid of Fascism for a few years.
1
Vegetable-Error-2068Mar 25, 2026
-5
Buttigieg? The guy who had financial ties to the vote-counting software used in the primary election?
The slimy guy who had a slimy job at a slimy firm lined up for him since he graduated?
The guy who called the DNC the first night of the primary in 2020 because Bernie got more votes than him?
He's a weasel. He's yet another donor-friendly centrist who will just demotivate people and refuse to do what is necessary and just.
-5
CRISPRcremesMar 26, 2026
+1
Nice smear campaign, poser.
1
LEDinYourMirrorsMar 25, 2026
-4
The left lost to Trump twice. How about we change tactics.
-4
Vegetable-Error-2068Mar 25, 2026
+2
Democrats spit in the left's face every election and fall over themselves to suck up to Republicans.
Democrats have been reliving their Vietnam flashbacks of their loss to Reagan for every election since Reagan.
They aren't "left" in the slightest. They're objectively right wing and people hate them for it.
2
indri2Mar 26, 2026
+1
Well, yes. That's what he's doing. Less focus on memes and social media likes, less listening to consultants, pundits and celebrities, more talking to all kinds of people all over the country.
1
[deleted]Mar 25, 2026
-5
[removed]
-5
kzzzo3Mar 25, 2026
-1
Enough with this AIPAC conspiracy bullshit. You guys are obsessed. You guys are sounding like right wing conspiracy nuts with this.
-1
2d6DoomedWizardsMar 25, 2026
Yep, there's the official DNC line: Criticism of Israel or their lobbyists in this country = you must be Nick Fuentes. Wow, you're an early adopter of the new propaganda, congrats.
F*** off. Seriously. F*** you, personally. The 1.3 million dollars he has received from Zionists isn't a "conspiracy." I also assume Gaza isn't a genocide in your view.
0
kzzzo3Mar 25, 2026
What an unhinged comment
0
2d6DoomedWizardsMar 25, 2026
+1
You said me pointing out that Hakeem Jeffries has received (a lot) of money from Israel's lobbyists (for a reason) is tantamount to a "right wing conspiracy theory" when it's public record.
THAT'S unhinged.
1
Jorge_Santos69Mar 25, 2026
-1
You’re proving bro completely right lol
-1
2d6DoomedWizardsMar 25, 2026
+1
You're right, me pointing out that Hakeem Jeffries has received (a lot) of money from Israel's lobbyists (for a reason) is tantamount to a "right wing conspiracy theory" when it's public record.
Sure thing, boss. lol.
1
Jorge_Santos69Mar 26, 2026
+1
Bro you didn’t even mention Jeffries, you can’t even keep up with the nonsense you’re saying lol
1
ToraToraTora1942Mar 25, 2026
-9
The middle of the country will never vote for Buttigieg. If they won't vote for a black woman, they won't vote for a gay person for President. The Dems will need a more middle of the road candidate in order to win the presidency.
-9
Jorge_Santos69Mar 25, 2026
+1
Gay marriage has super broad support currently. He’s not going to win the Evangelical nutjobs, but a straight Democrat won’t either
148 Comments