politics
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
view the rest of the comments
Rational people understand it’s an emergency, and we need to have the biggest tent with the most people in it.
Who is the Dick Cheney/Liz Cheney constituency though? Whose opinion will be swayed by the former VP of a deeply unpopular administration at its end? Or by a former Congresswoman with a infamous last name?
This is a nice-to-have for Democrats, but is it actually moving the needle with voters? Is it actually changing minds or increasing turnout? Harris and her advisors certainly think so, she's out there campaigning with Cheney actively, but where is the movement in the numbers, cause I'm not seeing it.
Just not big enough for the left, naturally.
The "center" has run to and supported her so they're getting what they want. If the left wants anything you have to get in the tent first. There's a reason Bernie ran in the Democratic primary. Keep our democracy and work on shifting left via primaries and ballot measures. Otherwise we've got an R dictatorship and I'm not rich enough or white enough to deal with that.
We're already in the tent. In the back. In the "I assume they will vote D" seats.
And we will this time. (At least, I will.) While D cheerfully becomes the new conservative party and R becomes/remains the batshit crazy party.
Somehow the Republicans inviting Trump and the racists to take over had the net effect of pulling D to the right.
The people who no longer have a home are progressives. R made their own fucking bed, but the Democrat leadership kept the light on for them, so they will be OK.
Most of .ml and hexbear and other "tankies" are vocally saying they're going to vote someone else like de la cruz or west (or not at all). All of those same people can't respond to the fact that if they want third party viability then need to 1)make sure voting remains a thing (aka vote harris this election)and 2) work to get something other than ftfp voting and work hard to get progressives in the primary3) don't expect quick change because the system is set up to maintain a status quo which means a lot of willpower is needed for changes.
is obvious I think. Palestinian genocide should not be supported by our country but Harris has at least talked willingness to pull netanyahu back somewhat. Rs want to let netanyahu be further unhinged in his genocide, let putin commit a Ukrainian genocide, then start a new one at home starting with the Trans and quickly spreading to other lgbtq, Latinos and whatever the outgroup of the hour is.
basically the main driver behind this two party divide. RCV is why Alaska, home of Sarah Palin has a democratic house representative. I know people talk about other systems too, what I know is just about anything is better than the FTFP we currently have.
Before '08 politicians hadn't seriously considered M4A. Now what we got, the ACA/Obamacare hasn't been good but is a hell of a lot better than what we had before.
Better than what we had is basically the aim. Rs and billionaires have been playing that game for themselves since before Reagan and are why we're in a sea of shit. We're not going to magically fly out of the shit into a socialist utopia, it is a long slog back to a shore of reason then trekking to somewhere better. All I'm saying is voting can't be the lone basis of fixing our system but is a bare minimum to keep a system in place. A revolution is only nice on paper and it's just as likely the "bad guys" win.
In other words: Yes, Stalin is a murderous dickbag who won't let us use his territory to bomb Japan and steals every piece of technology we send him but we need him to beat Hitler.
forging that relationship at the time was helpful and a clear benefit and, unlike then, the poll numbers are making it clear that campaigning with support from war criminals is not helpful.
Which is why we're gonna completely ignore the sizeable uncommitted movement and probably the entire state of Michigan.
Exactly. As long as they dump them as soon as they win. The thought of having a Cheney in the Harris cabinet is unacceptable.
If she wins, there will suddenly be a ton of "former" MAGA that are suddenly "center-right" and ready to cooperate.
Remember when Obama tried that?
that's who kamala was alluding to when she said she could have republicans in her administration.
I'm aware
They won't. We're watching D jump right in response to the Republican own-goal of the past few years.
somehow
Yea I feel the same way. People not taking it seriously enough think they have the power to get something by not voting for Harris or Trump beyond an ego boost. So many folks today think they have morals and not voting because they think Dick Cheney is somehow going to suffer for a Trump win is beyond me. For example, Hasan. He is safe in his state of California because HE KNOWS that CA is FPTP and Harris will win CA so he writes in Bernie because his vote has no power. But trying to pretend its a moral stance is a joke and cowardice.