73
submitted 4 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] sxan@midwest.social 8 points 4 months ago

Anybody following this able to give a balanced summary? I find The Hill to tend right-leaning and don't much trust their analysis.

The Hill seems to be placing the defeat of Bowman on his stance against the genocide in Palestine, which is becoming a sort of dog-whistle saying, "stand against the invasion of Palestine, and this is what happens to you." It may in this case be true; I can believe it, but I don't trust The Hill to not be constructing a narrative.

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 4 months ago

Israel/aipac flooded his opponent with money because bowman was critical of Isreal.

Dems also changed their minds one actually supporting the incumbents here.

[-] Tinidril@midwest.social 16 points 4 months ago

Dems also changed their minds one actually supporting the incumbents here.

This has never been a standard they apply to progressives.

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 4 months ago

Amazing how that happens every time

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

Compare the party's treatment of Bowman to their treatment of Coathanger Cuellar.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
73 points (96.2% liked)

politics

19107 readers
4443 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.
  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