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
Dug a bit, and apparently this seat has literally never been held by a Republican; this is quite the misleading headline.
Her name is "Chasity", by the way, not "Chastity".
This shit is exactly how things were reported in the runup to the 2024 election. Even if they don't fuck with the elections, I am confidently predicting the midterms are not going to be a blowout like people are hoping.
The Dems might, might, barely squeeze out a majority in the House. And then starts the age old game of having to capitulate to the 2-3 congresspeople who say they're Dems but vote with the GOP every time.
Not a snowballs chance in hell of Dems winning the Senate.
People are going to be hit with a truck of reality come the mid terms. Not that they'll learn anything. Next election will be the same shit of "we're totally going to win guys!" before fizzling into nothing.
If you are hoping for the midterms for justice to be served against this administration, keep dreaming. It's not going to happen. Ever. Trump will die before he ever sees the inside of a courtroom regarding Epstein. No matter who the next leadership is, they'll choose to move on without giving any consequences in the name of "unity".
And the people will grumble, and ultimately do absolutely nothing about it.
First of all, IF the Midterms actually happen unmolested by MAGA, it WILL be a giant blowout. MAGA only has a one vote lead, and literally EVERY special election has gone against Republicans badly.
The Manchurian DINOs are a realistic problem, and Dem leadership needs to strongly address the issue with those people. That will require NEW DEM leadership across the board.
And the Senate wasn't in contention before, but with MAGA being so universally reviled in this country, it's now in play.
And Trump probably won't see a jail cell due to Epstein, unless we suddenly get about a hundred smoking guns, including photos and videos. The evidence is too messed up, the chain of possession is destroyed, it has been under the control of MAGA, and NONE of it is trustworthy as evidence.
On the other hand, I believe that he will see a jail cell over his Insurrection and his Stolen Classified Documents, and a LOT of other stuff. Those prosecutions have been put on hold, but they aren't gone. When Trump is out of office, Jack Smith can refile, and start up right where he left off, and he seems highly motivated to do just that.
O
I hope your optimism is vidicated, but....
This specific race was for a deep-blue seat, prior to this race the Republican candidate had at best gotten 18%, and this time the republican got 38%, the most any republican has ever gotten for that state seat. Comparing Trump vote to state senate run seems to be apples and oranges for this district.
Well, except for the fact that not a single seat has been flipped. I suppose I can grant that the Republicans slipped 10-15 points in these races compared to the election where Trump was running, but of the three chances to actually flip a republican seat, none did anything.
On the senate, looking at the seats up, I could see maybe Georgia, NC, and Maine as potentially flippable, very remote chance of Texas... So 2-3 gains for the democrats at most. I don't think Senate is realistically in play, they need to flip 4 red seats to get even a simple majority, still well short of a filibuster proof majority and impossibly short of a veto-proof/remove president from office majority.
While not 'dead' dead, the supreme court basically gave him a 100% pass on the insurrection, they basically declared that a president cannot be held criminally liable for anything while in office. The classified documents maybe but the supreme court can easily intervene and say the records are forever under the president's jurisdiction to classify as he pleases.
It's important to remember two things: SCOTUS ruled that POTUS had immunity for any OFFICIAL acts as president, AND this has not been tested in any court.
Official Acts as president would be those outlined in the Constitution, not literally everything he does, like MAGA likes to tell you (hint: they lie, all the time). MAGA was making noise about charging Obama with murder for his drone strikes of terrorist targets (even though they'd have no problem doing worse), but this ruling would give him immunity for that, since that falls under his Constitutional responsibilities. On the other hand, if Trump were to make good on his threat to shoot someone in the head on Fifth Avenue, he could still be charged with murder, since the murder of an innocent American citizen would NOT fall under his Constitutional responsibilities. Gee, where did the order for ICE to start shooting people in the street originate?
Likewise, there is no possible way that any activity as seditious as leading an Insurrection could ever be interpreted as within a president's Constitutional responsibilities, nor would stealing hundreds of classified documents, some of which were likely sold.
He will still get away with countless crimes, hidden by his presidency as well as the sheer flood of corruption that flows from him on an industrial scale. But there are plenty that he can still answer for. For instance, his corruption has directly violated the emoluments clause in mind-boggling ways, and all of it is expressly forbidden in the Constitution, and therefore could NEVER be construed as "OFFICIAL" acts.
The Supreme Court has never put guidelines on the presidency before that ruling, and now there are actual boundaries, as defined by "OFFICIAL Acts." Obviously, MAGA is going to interpret that as broadly as possible, and it's up to the rest of America to interpret it tightly, and test it in court, over and over and over.
I generally ignore anything from News Week, Raw Story, or the Daily Beast. They all do stuff like this. They twist facts to get a story where there is none.
Who the fuck calls themself Chasity?
Nobody. Usually it's the parents who decide their child's name.
Not me, I got to pick my own name as a child. Admittedly, "Small-Weiner Stegosaurus" might have been a regrettable choice.
Chasity does.