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
If we ran a better candidate...
Then people wouldn't be saying that stuff about them.
Like, those people weren't the reason Biden lost. They were trying desperately to warn everyone that Biden was going to lose.
And a big part of why Kamala lost is she didn't understand that and thought people personally didn't like Biden, so she literally and repeatedly said she'd have made all the same decisions as Biden.
Like, you do get that right?
If a women says a wound is infected and without amputation the patient will die, if the patient refuses amputation and dies, it doesn't mean we burn the medicine woman as a witch for killing him.
It means next time we should listen to her when she warns us, because she was right.
All youre worried about, is burning the witch because that makes you feel like you solved the problem and are preventing it. But you're not, so you're gonna keep burning innocent's and genuinely believing your the solution and not the one ensuring people keep dying of infections.
You're just causing even more damage.
People don't understand how voting between two candidates works.
Ironic.
I’m sorry, but I don’t follow how their comment on Kamala Harris losing displays a lack of understanding on voting between two candidates.
My understanding is that in such an elections people either vote for one, the other, or abstain. They vote for one over the other because they either like the one enough or dislike the other enough. They abstain when they don’t feel strongly about either. Does that sound right to you?
My understanding of what the person you responded to said is essentially that people didn’t like Biden because of his policy and were on track to abstain because they didn’t dislike (or weren’t worried about) Trump enough. Harris wrongly thought people disliked Biden personally but did like his policy, so stayed that course. That led to people not liking her and therefore abstaining while Trump riled up his base that for some reason liked him.
What am I missing here?
I would be more inclined to view it as she's actively trying to dissuade people from helping the patient that everyone knows is sick.
I think the issue is you're saying "she" meaning Hillary or Kamala...
Meaning that because I used the example of a medicine woman/witch, you seem to have assumed it represented Hillary/Kamala just because it's a woman.
Is that what happened?
No, I'm using 'she' in the context of the medicine woman in your story, or more simply, those continually suggesting non-support for the Democrat party because of their failings. The math of our system allows for two parties at most in the sense of presidential elections.
Rather than seeking to push people away from the D's it would be a far more beneficial thing to work to implement local and state level rank choice or similar system votes. Until that happens it's a choice of 2 options, and one, while dull and stagnant, is leagues ahead of the other in terms of treating the population with some level of civility and dignity.
That may be the confusion...
Because absolutely no one had said anything Bout that till now...
No one's doing that either.
Hillary/Kamala are not the party.
Neoliberals are not the party.
None of them have any political power anymore, especially not at the DNC.