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.
- 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.
- 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
Did anyone actually watch the video? She's upset that neither side represent what she deems acceptable.
She's young and doesn't understand that government doesn't get fixed in a day. Where we are is the result of influence from corporate stooges since Reagan. It's come to a boiling point and I understand her frustration. A vote for Harris is a vote for steering the ship towards what she deems is acceptable, but that ship sails slower than a lot people can understand.
I'm old and I'm still waiting for the government to be fixed.
We keep breaking it by voting for Republicans every now and then.
If Democrats ran every branch of the government at every level I still doubt it would get fixed.
California is doing pretty damn good. Not perfect, but head and shoulders above the rest of the country.
In what way is CA doing 'pretty damn good'..?
By bulldozing homeless camps I guess.
You live under a rock or something?
I mean it guess they're not banning books or switching to school vouchers but I'm pretty sure low income households are doing just as bad if not worse over there
Are they, like, tearing down homeless encampments on a monthly basis?
Guess you have been living under a rock. Strong economy AND strong worker protections, lots of unions, high minimum wage, robust anti-discrimination laws, there's countless things that make life in California better for low income households.
Exactly: Even if they ran everything they'd do stupid shit.
"Nothing is perfect, therefore everything is equally shit."
What a stupid philosophy. Like all "bothsides" bullshit.
That's not what I'm saying at all but don't let that stop you from punching left.
Is the stupid shit Democrats do significantly less stupid than the stupid shit Republicans do?
If you keep getting punched everywhere you go, it's time for some introspection my friend.
Yes, but it's still stupid shit that will get done in my name, with my money, that I have no power to prevent.
And in your opinion I should be happy about it.
You're not happy about a significant reduction in stupidity of the people in control of your government?
You're happy about our government still being stupid?
It'll never be smart, because we always demand more of it. Which is fair. Being better than the average, being better than before, and moving in the right direction are all excellent things that we should be happy about.
I've come to accept that the best I can ever hope for from our government is that it's marginally better than it was before. As long as I don't look too close at the details to find the ratfuckery or corruption or red tape.
But I refuse to be happy about it the fact that government will always be stupid.
Improvement is good and should be appreciated.
I'm not going to give people a reward for not doing something they shouldn't be doing in the first place.
Then they'll stop making the effort.
Are you significantly older than Chappell Roan? Because I'm imagining you're the one who doesn't understand something.
She's not that young, she's been doing music for a decade and working service jobs till now. And you can understand something and still feel it is unacceptable.
She's 26. That's fairly young for a voter. Not really sure what her cv has to do with being considered old.
Service industry work can build wisdom.
Idk about wisdom but I can attest to a speedy loss in faith of the human population.
Some would say that can be the same thing.
She's been getting a lot of hate for not endorsing Harris and people fail to realize the difference between endorsing and voting. Her entire point is that the government can't be fixed in a day. Voting for Harris is the obvious choice but her being in office isn't going to magically solve all our problems.
Except, by definition, she is endorsing Harris by publicly supporting her candidacy. Endorse doesn't mean you agree with everything they stand for, but if you are publicly saying who you are voting for, that's an endorsement.
A: this isn't really an endorsement, more than it is an acknowledgement of how fucked the options are. If you'd like to know the difference, go look at what Swifts endorsement looked like
B: she wasn't even going to say who she was voting for, but libs decided to harass her until she did
example: I use windows for work but i'm sure as fuck not going to recommend it to other people. Saying that i'm forced to use windows for work is not an endorsement. I'd go so far as to say that in this context it's more of a complaint or indictment than a endorsement.
She is telling the world that she thinks Harris is the best choice to vote for in this election. It's 100% an endorsement. Literally by definition. People seem to be confusing endorsing someone to marrying yourself to all of their views.
Err, you working from a different dictionary?
This is why she resisted saying who she was voting for initially, and why she is explicitly saying she is not endorsing
What does voting for someone do if not show support for them? In a democracy it's the ultimate form of support.
Lmao, idk maybe go watch her videos, she is definitely not voicing support and certainly not approval
Just so I'm clear: you're saying that if I had a gun to my head and was forced to choose between getting shot or eating dogshit, and I chose dogshit, that would be considered an endorsement?
She is neither being forced to vote for anyone, nor forced to let us know who she voted for. So, no, you're not clear about it at all.
You really don't see the distinction? Being forced into making a choice you don't like, and voicing a public approval of someone's candidacy?
I mean think what you want i guess
The problem is she's trying to bring nuance to a bumper sticker platform.
I agree with the core of what you’re saying except I disagree that she “doesn’t understand” how slowly politics works. I think her decision to vote for Harris anyway speaks to that kind of understanding, else she’d endorse a third-party candidate/write-in in a poor attempt to speed-run democracy.
Yeah I get it. I was young once and I’ve even had to have the bitter realization that even Revolution neither happens in a day nor resolves anything quickly. I ask for the passion of the young to hold hands with the wisdom of us older folks. It’s easy to demand sudden change, and important too, but building bases of power are important.
Vote for Kamala then hold her feet to the fire. Vote in every primary. Discuss what you think with people around you when it comes up, I know I’m the annoying pro trains girl at work. Build the support and make those maga losers afraid to show their faces.
And entertainers can do so much. Cobain got people who wouldn’t otherwise thinking of homophobia as uncool for example
Ugh, train people are the worst. WE GET IT, YOU LIKE TRAINS.
Edit: I genuinely thought this was a typo and they meant "pro-trans." But maybe they actually did mean "trains."
I’m not cis passing enough to be openly talking trans issues at work. Nah I talk public transit. Shit like replacing air travel with high speed rail.
If it makes it better I’m also annoying about other infrastructure. Dams are excellent
Kamala isn't in the correct direction at all though. The democratic party serves to delay progress in favor of the Republican party. There's a reason they lie so much and confuse and refuse to address issues progressive voters want to address. It's not gonna get better unless people stop voting for the same "lesser evil" presented to them and pushed to them in the media.
It's not going to get better under Trump either, and your ballot has more choices than President on it. I'm sure you volunteered for local progressive campaigns, right?
In the American elections you can definitely vote in.