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
Polymarket has him pretty low. And Shapiro doesn't seem like an objectively bad pick, but his response to Gaza protests and student protests don't seem to me like they are going to move the needle in the demographics Harris needs for the WI/ MI/ MN trifecta. Its also not clear to me that "not-picking" Shapiro loses her PA.
That being said, I think he's an Walz does more for the ticket. So if you go Walz, you have to lock in MI and WI, and MN. This seems very doable. If its Shapiro, he has to lock up PA. Like if she goes Shapiro and doesn't lock up PA, thats the ball game, because you are basically sacrificing either MI or WI and you've lost because really need both of those.
GA and NC are both 100% on Kamala, obv, and I'm writing AZ off and assuming VA is fine.
That all being said, I think Kamala's early moves and numbers have been extremely convincing and yet again I find myself without a weekend to dig into the Florida data. It might be that this is all hand wringing over nothing, because the grass-roots energy is real, and thats something that Biden never had and was never going to have. Biden has no base and didn't think he needed one; Kamala recognizes the importance and is doing, frankly, a better than Obama job at building one. Obama had a whole campaign season and super-human charisma, with deener and doufas as opponents. Kamala has had a few weeks and a couple coconut trees, with an actual christian fascist movement opposing her. In-spite of that, she's already at the scale of doing more with less, so in some sense I want to let her cook.
I think that Walz is the smarter pick and you might just have to do so to lock up the undecided vote and not leave that on the table. Otherwise you may have left too much hanging out there convincing yourself you can lock up PA when thats still a real gamble, even with a Shapiro pickup.
Edit: If she goes Walz, I'm pulling out a heloc and betting on her in polymarket. I think she lights this shit off and takes a commanding lead by signalling to the progressives that she's willing to play ball.
I'd say that makes him an objectively bad pick. It's confirming to people who are finally cautiously optimistic that they won't have to vote for someone whose support for genocide was a given that their optimism was completely unfounded.
You might be right.
Shapiro was also the first and strongest voice calling out Bibi as a terrible leader as early as November 23 because of his handling of this specific issue
Depends.
I’ve got a friend that is pretty deep in their Palestine support, to the extent they are part of a social media bubble, and their entire bubble is full of articles and opinions painting Shapiro as an anti-Palestine, extreme Zionist, who is former IDF.
That’s the information they lead off with when characterizing him - no mentions of his criticisms of Netanyahu.
Michigan’s large Muslim population wrote off Biden, and the pivot to Harris showed a pretty big jump in support for her vs him. I think that Shapiro would absolutely cost her the race in MI.
Of course, the opposite could be true - Jewish voters (as well as the incredibly powerful AIPAC) may lean in to Trump if Kamala appears to be too critical of Israel. Shapiro could temper those sentiments.
Harris better absolutely be thinking about these things in making the decision.
Pretty thoughtful for a tropical ding dong.