r/AskDemocrats

I’m generally conservative, I’m a 25M and I live in St Charles County (fairly suburban with a very mixed demographic politically).

My issues as they currently stand aren’t necessarily tied with gas or inflation, although they are a burden on everyone. One person doesn’t create inflation like that overnight, it’s a group problem. My issues are that it seems like Trump is moving away from America first, fast. He lobbies with foreign powers to swing elections to get “yes men” in congress who will ONLY vote with the party. There’s becoming less and less balance of power, and it does seem to be this way on both sides.

Should I vote democrat federally (Congress) in this upcoming election in hopes to stop Trump from having complete control?

I don’t agree with democrats policies, but I don’t necessarily agree with MAGA policies either. All I care about is equal opportunity for all people (not equity), no bailouts or buyouts of big corporations (no data centers inside communities). In short a society with law and order, purpose for its peoples, limited government overreach, limited government handouts, one where its peoples respect and help one another (not forced obviously), one where the box of freedoms doesn’t feel like it’s getting smaller and smaller by the year.

You know, we’re celebrating 250 years this 4th of July and I think we lost our purpose of what it means to be American.

For those of you who think that it will, I'd like to point out that Republicans did an autopsy for the 2012 election, and the 2014 midterms were still a red wave regardless. What makes you think this scenario is different from 2014?

I guess one of Mamdani's government-run grocery stores is opening up soon. He plans to have one in each of the five boroughs by 2029. Not sure why it takes that long, but whatevs.

When someone steals from one of these grocery stores, how should it be treated? What kind of security actions or precautions are reasonable to help prevent theft from these government-run grocery stores?

Should they be treated any differently than if they stole from a family-owned grocery store? If so, why, and how?

How would this play out in California, where the threshold for theft is $950? Anything beneath that is considered to be petty theft or a misdemeanor.

I mean, he was a pretty conservative Republican.

I chose to word this ignorantly because I know it’s an ignorant question, but tbh I don’t come across any male people in my day to day life that I could sincerely assume vote democrat. And appearances can be deceiving and all that but…

All the men in my family are republican, all the men I work with are republican. Men who are strangers to me say republican things like its good small talk. The only place I ever see men express leftist views is the internet.

Anyway, I know they’re out there somewhere, but they’re clearly somewhere I’m not. I just wanted to spark a conversation.

Why can't we out smart or out wit Republicans.

In my state, judicial and local office elections are non-partisan, meaning that the ballot doesn't specify whether the candidates running for the position are Republican or Democratic leaning, though if one investigates the candidates, it is easy to figure out if major democrats or republicans endorse them or if they have a clear liberal or conservative bias. The problem is that a lot of people go to vote on election day without having done any research, so they end up just picking the incumbent or the name they like better.

I saw a headline that 30% of Democratic voters voted for the Republican-appointed judicial nominees in last night's primary election, likely because they had the incumbent title next to their name.

The Democratic party should make a page where you put in your address and get a sample ballot, that adds a 'Republican', 'Republican leaning', 'moderate', 'Democrat', 'Democrat leaning' label next to each candidate in the non-partisan election boxes

Someone who has contacts in the party leadership, please pass along this suggestion to them

Has she produced any evidence to support that very serious allegation?

If this has to do with gerrymandering, do you think that typically-blue states are not already gerrymandered?

What happens in the future, if due to bad timing, all the new seats are also locked in by Republicans, creating an even worse shitstorm?

Trump promised to lower gas and grocery prices when he won reelection in 2024, yet now they continue to rise due to all of the trouble he needlessly stirred up in Iran. Notice how the Republicans are not saying a word against Trump for any of this? If all this was going on under the administration of a Democrat, the Republicans would all be screaming their heads off right now. Talk about double standards...

So I’d call myself a conservative NOT MAGA I see all these video and online of extreme ideas from the left but I assume you all see the exact same thing from the right I just wanna to know what the average person on the left thinks should happen on certain topics

Guns are we for them or against them and why

Free healthcare (I hope we can all agree it should be free)

Ai and privacy

Are the alien files that dropped a distraction from Epstein files

Car laws I see a lot of people talk about emissions and shit and a lot of companies get away with it by making new cars huge I wish they would make cars simple and small again I enjoy fun tiny cars I like working them I think the emissions laws and safety laws on cars now make cars huge and expensive to make which which in turn makes cars expensive to buy and worse for n the environment

What do we think about random food dyes and just over all chemicals in food

We have freedom of speech do you think there should be laws on certain words or phrases

And last do you think people who want to live traditionally is a problem or anything what do yall think about it in general my wife stays at home with the baby and I work she told me before that that’s what she was into I had the same thought what do yall think about that

Throughout Trump's second presidency, I've asked you all if you consider the Democrats responsible for all the horrific things Trump did, due to you all blaming them for why Trump won the election. Now, thanks to recent court decisions, it seems Trump and the Republicans could even pull it off with their gerrymandering scheme to the point where they keep the House majority. With that said, for those of you who blame the Dems for Trump's win, do you even seriously believe they're responsible for why Trump and the GOP could succeed with their gerrymandering scheme?

Or, why does the political establishment on the Western Left want to commit political seppuku over immigration? In the UK, Keir Starmer - the most unpopular PM in modern history - would rather commit to police state tactics - and lose election after election - than heed the popular will and reverse his open borders policy. All he need to do is close the borders and remove illegal and criminal migrants and ReformUK goes away in six months. The same can be said for Europe and the US. Left parties would rather fight their own citizens and put them at risk than limit migration.

Why? I refuse to believe that bourgeois lefty guilt and noblesse oblige alone is driving this. What's going on that means that we have to take millions of migrants in and can't send them back? What would happen if we closed the borders for just a few years so we could catch up a bit?

I'm genuinely asking, I swear. The actions of the left on this issue defy rational explanation and you've no room to complain about conspiracy theories when your only responses are guilt and insults. So, why is unlimited immigration worthy of throwing away democracy?

As we know, republicans used to be progressives and democrats conservatives. The switch happened in the 1930s onward, democrats became liberal and republicans conservative.

Right now, we're seeing Republicans and especially MAGA supporting very radical ideas about the government, America's role globally and fusing religion with politics. It's not liberal, but it's very radical and in many ways opposite of conservative, which is defined as "Conservatism is a cultural, social, and political philosophy and ideology that seeks to promote and preserve traditional institutions, customs, and values" Democrats on the other hand ARE trying to maintain a world order defined after WW2, are very much trying to resist change.

So the question isn't whether republicans are turning liberal, but rather are they increasingly radical and democrats are increasingly conservative?

And why democrats are failing is the same story as with conservatism throughout history: the old story doesn't ring true anymore, it doesn't offer meaning to people and a majority want something new.

Edit for clarification, here are the definitions of conservative and radicalism:

"Conservatism is a cultural, social, and political philosophy and ideology that seeks to promote and preserve traditional institutions, customs, and values."

The word actually has no connotations regarding political platform. The opposite would be radicalism:

"Radicalism refers to political, social, or ideological beliefs that advocate for fundamental, "root-and-branch" change, seeking to alter the core of existing social, economic, or political structures."

In the US car prices and choices are currently notorious. China can now make EV's quite inexpensive, but trade restrictions prevent most from being sold here. We are paying double what the rest of the world is paying for some model types.

One worry is the Chinese gov't may install snoop-ware & lock-ware in such cars. But allowing the import of non-broadcasting components like batteries, motors*, and frames could allow cheaper onshore EV manufacturing. That would be compromise. Perhaps a mix-and-match "kit car" industry will pop up if we form good standards.

Yes, the Chinese gov't did subsidize EV expansion, but by trying to punish them, we are punishing ourselves: the rest of the world is getting low-price EV's, but not us.

* Batteries and motors currently use extensive electronics to manage efficiency, but standards can be formed to allow 3rd-party non-dictator-nation controllers.

This will be the largest transfer of taxpayer money to a sitting president by his own personal attorney ever. The suit has no basis and is 4 years past the statute of limitations.

The judge in the case has set a date to look at the merits of the suit but if the DoJ settles with trump he will get the payout. And I only say “if” because it won’t happen if the dems start hammering on this. If they stay silent then all the right leaning news outlets will too. He won’t lose a single voter but the dems will continue to hemorrhage support.

What’s the difference between sex and skin tone?

Why can there be trans women but not trans black people?

I’m currently writing a paper on the reasons USAID was cut in 2025 and the impacts of it today. Some reasons I came up with were some countries reliance on the aid and the us wanting to save to prioritize domestic issues. I was wondering if anyone thought there was more to it than what we are being told or are the reasons being given valid and there’s nothing else to be said?