this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2024
480 points (97.4% liked)

politics

19096 readers
3114 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 215 points 3 months ago (5 children)

Wow! I can't believe she didn't intentionally make the obviously worse choice. Unironically. This is entirely new territory as a democratic voter!

[–] [email protected] 53 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I see it as purposeful messaging that they're willing to change and be more progressive, if that's what we want. Now we need to prove them right and get out to the polls.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago (2 children)

To be fair though, democrats don’t have a problem getting out to the polls, especially for national elections. No Republican has won the popular vote for 20 years; the only Republican wins in this time were based on technicalities.

I think what we’ll see in November is the same high voting numbers, but a much different demographics pivoting the central block from old centrists to younger progressives.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

This is why Kamala and co need to release their plan to unfuck our election system, so we never have to deal with this bullshit again... If they don't, the left needs to start pushing it

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

20 years

But Bush did it ... in 2004. Fuck, has it be 20 years already?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That’s the last legit Republican National win. He only won the popular vote in 2004 due to 9/11. He lost the popular vote in 2000 and won by Supreme Court decision.

These fuckers HAVE to cheat to win.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

That was also a colossal violation of the Constitution, because of probability and statistics.

I was too young to understand at the time, but I read that the conservative justices blocked the recount citing concern that the batch of uncounted votes might indicate an attempt by Democrats to steal the election.

But we can easily show that the uncounted batch was too small to change anything. Consider that, even if every single uncounted vote went to Gore, the resulting variance would still reside well within a statistical margin of error for that sample.

In other words, that election was the US’ first true tie in a presidential election since 1800. By the constitution it should have triggered a contingent election, which is the business of the legislative branch, NOT judicial.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 3 months ago (1 children)

A very strategic pick.

His wiki page reads like a check-list to attract the republican women voters.

White

Male

From Nebraska

Veteran.

Supports Abortion rights.

"Think of the children" (both him and his wife were teachers).

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 months ago

Cat and Dog Dad too!

(I believe the cat has crossed the Rainbow Bridge but the energy remains)

[–] [email protected] 29 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (6 children)

Penny for your thoughts? Pennsylvanians seem to be big fans of Shapiro, though I've not heard of Walz before just now.

[–] [email protected] 83 points 3 months ago

Shapiro is a HUGE Zionist and has had problems in his office with sexual harassment (not by him, but his aides). With some saying he helped to cover it up.

He may play well in Pennsylvania, he does not play well in many states like Michigan and would not play well with the youth vote. The only real reason to pick Shapiro is for AIPAC money.

[–] [email protected] 67 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Shapiro has an extended history of being quite sympathetic to Israel to the point of problematic statements and treating anti-genocide protest as something it's not.

Walz has none of that baggage and seems to care about people. He's a far better (from what I know) person to be one heartbeat away from the presidency.

He should campaign well and I expect him to keep hitting Trump. Vance will self-own without too much assistance. Punching up will be a great look.

If Walz is her pick, I'm giddy.

I'm fairly far left and I want human rights for all. I don't understand why the party of small government needs to know my internet habits, what happens behind closed doors, what books are read, or why specific medical care (gender affirning or reproductive) is sought.

We're people. The republican nanny state can fuck right off.

That said, I'd like a better safety net. The nation has the money for it if we had a rational tax code. This combination on the ticket gives me hope that all the above are priorities.

I do NOT want Shapiro except as a calculated play for Pennsylvania. I have 0 interest in a war to defend Israel's right to be 1940s Germany.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 3 months ago

Walz also coined the "weird" label for Republicans we're using now

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago

Shapiro's approval rating is fine, but not high enough that the speculation of him guaranteeing Pennsylvania is justified.

On the other hand, he comes with a lot of baggage - some justified and some not so much - but all of which are terrible optics. He is an incredibly vulnerable pick whose only merit is the vain hope of delivering PA.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago

Shapiro hasn't been good for education in PA, including leading the closure of several rural public universities and promoting student vouchers. Along with other views, he would not be a progressive pick.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

"Weird" - Walz

[–] [email protected] 26 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I hoped that Biden dropping out heralded a tipping point away from the arrogant, conservative old guard that was stifling progress and toward a more progressive future.

I'm more hopeful still. I missed hope.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

It funny how Harris is touted as a change from the old running for president. She’ll be an OAP at the end of her first term.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

I was already tired!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

In the US, normal full-benefit retirement age is 67. If Harris gets the full two terms she'll retire right on time.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Online accelerated program? Interesting.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I genuinely did not see that coming. I feel strange.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's hope. You're feeling hope. Kind of tingles, right?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

It's actually scary at this point