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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
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
More likely she’s running for senate.
Ah yes, I remember when Trump became a Senator.
Fun stats: 17 U.S. presidents were previously U.S. senators, and also 17 were previously state governors (additionally, Harrison and Taft were territorial governors, and Jackson was military governor of the territory of Florida).
Six U.S. presidents had held previously both governor and U.S. senator roles, including Jackson and Harrison's non-state governorships.
5 U.S. presidents were not elected to public office prior to holding the presidency - Taylor, Grant, Hoover, Eisenhower, and Trump.
Why do you think this?
I'm not the guy you're responding to, but historically it's been a lot easier to be taken seriously after a stint in the Senate. Hard to say if that's still the case, we live in weird times, but the Democrat establishment is a lot more bound by tradition than Republicans, and it frequently leads them astray.
It's very possible with a coalition formed through other recent success stories like Mamdani, she's concluded that a coup of sorts is possible (and I mean that with the utmost excitement). They might have numbers showing now is the time to capitalize on a ground swell and really shift the party. I'm assuming they've got some sort of data backing this, even if it's just "we don't know if we can win but we know the establishment Democrats will lose"
I know I’m a day late here replying but this narrative is just antiquated like our entire system. If we want to keep at this, we don’t need her after a stint in the Senate, we need her now. What exactly will she gain by going that route? Because it’s the best way to gain respect? Maybe she’ll get some experience?
Look, statistically you are right. But let’s run the facts, normal is just a setting on the dryer and we’re not playing by the standard rulebook anymore.