this post was submitted on 27 May 2024
502 points (97.4% liked)

politics

19240 readers
3982 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] just_another_person 129 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Good. More young, moderate, non-psychopaths need to be representative of their people. I may not agree with her other policy positions, but it's at least good to see someone on the other side of the aisle who isn't a religious nut or Trumpist.

[–] ThePowerOfGeek 80 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Good for her. She's facing a steep uphill battle because she's not the GOP's preferred candidate. But the party needs more smart, moderate, clear-thinking representatives like her. Hopefully with this campaign she will be an example for others.

[–] meco03211 29 points 6 months ago

Oh they'll make an example of her. I'm sure the GOP want all the newcomers to know just what happens if you don't toe the line.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart 68 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Im wondering why she doesn’t run as a Democrat but trying to pull the nuthouse closer to centre is a good thing too.

[–] billwashere 90 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I’d actually argue this is better than just running as a Dem. As a Dem its just noise. But as Rep she stands to get some exposure and getting the base there to actually have a conversation about these important issues.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

The political reality in ND is that having the (D) is the end of the road for you. Since neither party actually represents a specific policy platform, I guess it's 6 of 1 in an environment like that.

After all, what are modern Republicans even about? Obviously they want to deny global warming, police uteruses, kill queer people, theocratize the government... but what policies do they actually care about that aren't equally present in the Democratic caucus?

[–] Sterile_Technique 24 points 6 months ago

what are modern Republicans even about?

Cruelty. You can run circles around pretty much any issue pointing out examples of their hypocrisy and inconsistency, but they're pretty reliable with harming their community.

Once you acknowledge that the cruelty is the point, their bullshit starts to make a lot more sense.

[–] Viking_Hippie 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They want to deny police uteruses? 🤔

[–] blanketswithsmallpox 3 points 6 months ago

Not even metaphorically. They want to deny all uteruses. Police or otherwise lol.

[–] jj4211 30 points 6 months ago (1 children)

To run as a Democrat in ND is to automatically lose. The portion of the electorate that will refuse to look beyond the team sports identity is so huge, if you actually want to participate, you have to technically be a member of the correct "team".

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

I am amazed at how broadly your comment could be applied to nearly all political scenarios. There are three independents or non-blue/red in all of both houses of congress. And one of them is Simena who got elected as a Dem I believe.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago

“I never wanted Miss America to be my peak in life,” Mund told The Independent. “I wanted it to be the springboard for whatever comes next.”

Well, at least that's a positive attitude. She didn't wanna end up the high-school quarterback who peaked and relived stories of greatness like Al Bundy.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago

This is the feel good news I needed in my day.

[–] sagrotan 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The qualifications you need as a politician these days

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

We are not utopians. We know that an unskilled labourer or a cook cannot immediately get on with the job of state administration. In this we agree with the Cadets, with Breshkovskaya, and with Tsereteli. We differ, however, from these citizens in that we demand an immediate break with the prejudiced view that only the rich, or officials chosen from rich families, are capable of administering the state, of performing the ordinary, everyday work of administration. We demand that training in the work of state administration be conducted by class-conscious workers and soldiers and that this training be begun at once, i.e., that a beginning be made at once in training all the working people, all the poor, for this work.

- alleged mushroom.

[–] blanketswithsmallpox -1 points 6 months ago

FLazy: No public nudes.