this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2024
379 points (99.7% liked)

politics

19222 readers
2331 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
 

Lawyers representing state legislative leaders were in court Thursday in Raleigh, arguing to throw out an anti-gerrymandering lawsuit that targets the state's new political districts.

The lawsuit argues that the state constitution guarantees the right to fair elections, and it says the new districts violate that promise. The Republican-led legislature argues that no such right exists, since it's impossible to define what "fair" means.

all 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 146 points 6 months ago (3 children)

We have a right to bear arms, but we don’t have a right to fair elections?

The solution is left as an exercise to the reader.

[–] homesweethomeMrL 13 points 6 months ago

They just don’t seem to be able to not drive everything there, do they.

Okay MAGAs. You continuously demanded it.

[–] PunnyName 9 points 6 months ago

Something about "shall not be infringed", and they couldn't care less about anything else.

[–] Sanctus 80 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Well the alternative to fair elections is political violence. Choose wisely, the people enacting that violence could be a wildcard for any ideology.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer 12 points 6 months ago

Hmm, don't see anywhere in the Constitution where elected officials have a "right to life". Your move NC.

[–] ryantown 78 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Republicans haven't wanted fair elections in decades.

[–] FuglyDuck 27 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 months ago

Well, unless you count the time they used to be the democratic party before everything was switched.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 months ago (1 children)

In a fair election that everyone voted in, there wouldn't be any republicans. They have to cheat to be in power, what does that say?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

I wish I had neighbors like yours.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod 45 points 6 months ago

The Stop the Steal gang is inconsolable

[–] EndOfLine 30 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I'm sure that it will be fixed after this election and broken again before the next. The Supreme Court made sure of that back in 2022 with the Merrill v Milligan verdict where they admited that the racially gerrymandered districts were illegal, but allowed to be used anyways so long as it's relatively close to an election.

When an election is close at hand, the rules of the road must be clear and settled. Late judicial tinkering with election laws can lead to disruption and to unanticipated and unfair consequences for candidates, political parties, and voters, among others.

  • Brett Kavanaugh
[–] homesweethomeMrL 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

His post-grad ghost writers (“clerks”) said that.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

[–] SeattleRain 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

B-b-b-but Democrats struggle to win elections because their base doesn't vote!