this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
225 points (99.1% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2329 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
 

If she wins in November, Vice President Kamala Harris may face a hostile, Republican-controlled Senate in no mood to confirm the senior Cabinet officials she’ll need to run her administration.

Anticipating that scenario, Harris’ team is exploring whether to keep in place some of the Biden administration officials who’ve already been confirmed by the Senate and wouldn’t need to face the gauntlet again, four people familiar with her transition planning said. 

Her aides are also looking at the option of initially retaining some current officials so that she'd have more time to make staffing decisions. With only a few months to build a campaign after abruptly replacing President Joe Biden at the top of the ticket, Harris has had little time to focus on the makeup of a new administration, the people familiar with the planning said.


🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] gsfraley 203 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Whatever happens, I hope she keeps Lina Khan for FTC, that's the appointment I care the most about.

[–] [email protected] 101 points 2 months ago

"Regulator angers capital for doing their job" is one of my favorite headlines.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 months ago

That's the canary in the coal mine with what she'll do with her administration.

[–] barsquid 19 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Fucking brace yourself for all the “will you prosecute Donald Trump as attorney general?”s

[–] logi 10 points 2 months ago

Just lie and then do it anyway. It worked to corrupt SCOTUS, it should work here.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

Sorry, the best I can do is giving Garland a lifetime appointment as AG (* while Democrats control the White House). Think of how much of an epic clapback that would be since they blocked him from a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. They'll be so upset when we continue to empower the guy specifically chosen for being extremely inoffensive to Republicans!

[–] rockSlayer 13 points 2 months ago

Khan is a good one, I'm personally invested in hoping that Jennifer Abruzzo stays in the NLRB