this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2024
760 points (94.4% liked)

politics

19119 readers
3817 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
 

Gretchen Whitmer responds to calls by some Democrats to vote ‘uncommitted’ in Michigan’s primary on Tuesday

Gretchen Whitmer, the Michigan governor, pushed back on calls to not vote for Joe Biden over his handling of the Israel-Gaza conflict, saying on Sunday that could help Trump get re-elected.

“It’s important not to lose sight of the fact that any vote that’s not cast for Joe Biden supports a second Trump term,” she said on Sunday during an interview on CNN’s State of the Union. “A second Trump term would be devastating. Not just on fundamental rights, not just on our democracy here at home, but also when it comes to foreign policy. This was a man who promoted a Muslim ban.”

Whitmer, who is a co-chair of Biden’s 2024 campaign, also said she wasn’t sure what to expect when it came to the protest vote.

Rashida Tlaib, a Democrat who is the only Palestinian-American serving in Congress, urged Democrats last week to vote “uncommitted” in Michigan’s 27 February primary.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hamid 15 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (2 children)

This is somewhat true, however there was also a fascist uprising in the US during the 1930's that was only just avoided.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

only just avoided

The US in the 1940s: proceeds to round up and cage human beings specifically because of their race and country of origin

[–] Nahodyashka 2 points 8 months ago

Hitler be looking at how the US is handling the Native "problem" and be taking notes

[–] hamid 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Poor wording on my part, the immediate fascist takeover they planned was avoided. Then, when people in the US learned of Nazi atrocities and the US was drawn into the war, their efforts were curtailed long term. However you're right in saying they were never fully killed off.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I wonder if right wing fascism will arrive more easily and more quickly if we vote Biden vs sitting on our hands and watching trump be elected. Maybe I'm just old-fashioned but I'll try give the non fascism side a leg up every opportunity I get.

[–] TokenBoomer 1 points 8 months ago

Without reading your comment, I made the same logic comparison. Kismet.

[–] KaTaRaNaGa -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yes, the “fascization” of the US government has been unfolding for decades.

To make a leap from that to an inevitability that “destroying the system to start over” is the only cure…

Well, isn’t the cure is worse than the disease?

What are the practicalities your presumptive solution hand-waves away?

Insurance and reinsurance markets, for example, provide regional/national/global stability for business to happen in the face of mass catastrophe. Medicare and Medicaid provide millions of people with healthcare.

These details, and literally thousands like them, make up the everyday function of government—even if they are currently not working in some places or not working as well as we’d like in many others!

If you’re actually committed to the welfare of millions of ordinary people, then your position has got to be more nuanced than “destroy the system!”

What are we destroying? What are we replacing it with? What kind of work are we doing to ensure a reasonable transition? Who is the we that is organizing toward a new vision? How do we work with opposing forces inside and outside of our camp?

All of those questions fall under the banner of politics and the answers are constrained by the agendas of the participants engaging with the existing system.