this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
1142 points (97.0% liked)

politics

19149 readers
3896 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] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I fully agree with you but look up what happened in that district when she was first elected. Her dem opponent was threatened and assaulted and literally run out of town. Stack on that GA being a VERY gerrymandered state and it’s a no lose for her. She’s not from that district and if fact started in another district before they saw how ripe Ranger and Rome GA were for fear tactics and gop shenanigans. My parents live in Ranger and I fucking HATE it there and it’s very possible that the fetal-alcohol fucks nuts that populate that place would elect her any how but don’t discount the tactics used and how unqualified she is.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

you but look up what happened in that district when she was first elected. Her dem opponent was threatened and assaulted and literally run out of town

What happened in her first election is abhorrent but are we going to discount she had a 2nd election she also won very handily it was 66% to 34%?

Stack on that GA being a VERY gerrymandered state and it’s a no lose for her.

I disagree with this. I'm not disputing GA is a gerrymandered state but she still had to compete in a primary election in 22. She got 69% of the vote out of all other Republicans trying for the 14th district of Georgia. There were 5 other options for a Republican house rep in district 14. They actively chose MTG and this could show us the disengagement of voters lead to these very polarizing figures taking hold and the important of participating at all steps of the election process instead of only focusing on the one big day. Life is stressful and likely full of other important things but we have to keep in mind everything we interact with is political. Its an exhausting mindset but everything we touch, do, eat, see, etc is influenced by politics, many people might not think it that way but it is. There is a reason why the topic of coal power if very contentious. We aren't using coal for the sake of being evil, we are using it because its a fucking mess. There are clearly the corporate angles but we also have to think at the constituent levels. Coal mining jobs are super high paying jobs with very minimal education requirements, something you can do right out of high school maybe even without any schooling, so those jobs lead to economic movement in those regions and if a mine closes it could possibly kill a whole town's economic backing. So that is why you have the whole "putting people back into the mines" talk on the republican end and also why Democrat Senator Manchin is very conservative even for a democrat because that is what his voters want even though he does hold up many things when dems had some form of majority rule in senate. I'm not here saying keep coal mining but this is more a point of seeing why people would vote for someone like Manchin. In my view coal is dying a slow painful death and the deregulation people are following is mostly keeping that industry on life support at best since even from a economic point of view coal is losing out to other forms of power generation like natural gas but I can easily say this since my livelihood isn't massively affected by the coal industry and the runoff effects it may have in my area

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don’t disagree but I think this oversimplifies the war on people in souther states through scare tactics and manipulation. These people didn’t vote in a vacuum. They have been radicalizing rural communities for decades for what seems like these very moments we are witnessing. Coal is just another smoke and mirrors tactic to grift and to continue to disenfranchise and promote anti- intellectualism in the American south. I seem to remember in right before covid that there were at least 3 major solar outlets offering free training and better wages to miners. They were ceremoniously met with zero interest cause “solar is woke” or some garbage like that. That level of delusion is the product of decades of grooming. Same with MTGs district, Bobart, etc.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That level of delusion is the product of decades of grooming

I mean its the fact that change is scary. Many of these peoples great great grandfathers were miners. It has been the livelihood of these communities for more than a century now. So while I'm 100% for retraining and the such its hard to convince people who see change as a negative. Stick with what you know is rather normal.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Normal and completely unsustainable. Everything, EVERYTHING changes. If you don’t change with it you are actively holding back human progress for the sake of being afraid of the new. Not to mention that that sentiment is complete fed into and amplified by the gop.