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
Isn't this just saying vote for Harris?
It’s a way to reframe the argument from a vote FOR a milquetoast candidate, to one AGAINST a would-be Dictator.
Know that none of the 3 possible options for voters will immediately stop Israel’s current terror campaign on Palestinians and the Lebanese.
Instead, all it does is set up the future environment and Government whom you can influence the actions of. Only ONE option provides an opportunity which could reign Israel back in, and it sure as shit isn’t a possible 2nd Trump administration.
Yep. But they’re still uncommitted about it, so it’s fine.
That’s just endorsing Harris with extra steps.
We endorsed Harris with a Venn Diagram.
I guess what they're trying to say is "We do not endorse this candidate, she doesn't represent our views, but you need to vote for her anyway because that's the only choice that will prevent a far worse outcome."
But if that's so, I feel like they probably should have just said it, instead of dancing around the point like this.
As if this isn't the shit people have been trying to tell them for months now...
But mah integriteh!!!! Mah principals!!!!
Particularly because some will take that to mean they should vote third party, which given how our shitty electoral system works, is essentially just a vote for Trump in terms of the end result.
Sometimes it's more about the journey than the destination
Best comment
Yes, but I imagine the roundabout is to maintain pressure.
I want Kamala to win but I also want her to fix the fucking gaza problem, and she can't be allowed to forget that.