this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2024
341 points (97.5% liked)

politics

19121 readers
2830 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
 

Summary

Oregon Democrat Janelle Bynum won a seat in the U.S. House, becoming the state’s first Black representative after defeating Republican incumbent Lori Chavez-DeRemer in a closely watched race for Oregon’s 5th Congressional District.

Bynum led by a strong margin in key counties, ensuring a Democratic victory. Her campaign emphasized combatting extremism, reproductive rights, and economic growth, and she received significant support and funding from national Democrats.

While Republicans retain a narrow lead in the overall House, Bynum’s win represents a major gain for Oregon Democrats amid a competitive election cycle.

top 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] finitebanjo 55 points 1 week ago (3 children)

That puts the house at 211 RNC and 201 DNC, then? Republicans need 7 more to claim majority.

[–] dhork 58 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

Right, but every seat Democrats manage to siphon away is one less vote in support of fascism. And House Republicans do a lot of internal fighting. I will laugh out loud if they can't pick a speaker again, and it somehow affects the timeline for counting the EC votes.

[–] Myxomatosis 33 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The future will be miserable but I will at least be able to find joy in their failures. The backstabbing and incompetence in the Trump admin will be legendary.

[–] Makeitstop 22 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Trump was already a paranoid nutcase who fostered an atmosphere of chaos and betrayal the last time he was in office. Given the way his declining mental state has been making him even more hostile and unstable, I can't imagine how bad it's going to get this time around.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago

My boss said that if they don't get anything done in the first 2 years, it's not likely to happen in the next few. And they've been involved with the government since Carter.

I hope y'all are right.

[–] Myxomatosis 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And I don’t see it going well for JD Vance either should he step in. Most of the country hates him.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Doesn’t really matter if the entire Republican Party is behind his ideals (Peter Theil’s cock with a side of project 2025) We have no voice.

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

That would be intentional. They'd have to screw with the timeline for counting the EC votes if Trump kicks it between December 17th and January 6th. Otherwise, the House would be obligated to create a Harris/Vance administration.

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

Well, looks like I'm going to pray for something for the first time.

[–] morriscox 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Having the President and the Vice-president be of different parties used to be a thing until a law passed banning that.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

There's no law "banning" that. You're talking about the 12th amendment revising the electoral process so that the VP is elected in a separate EC election, rather than being the runner up in the presidential election.

That same 12th amendment requires, when a presidential candidate does not have 270 votes, to select the president from the top three candidates based on number of EC votes. If Trump strokes out after they cast their votes on December 17th, no candidate will have received 270 votes. When they go to count the votes on January 6th, the only valid EC votes cast for president will have been cast for Harris, so we get a Harris/Vance ticket.

The Republicans could spend one vote on Vance for President, allowing the House to vote for him. But then a similar situation happens in the Senate with Walz, and the Senate only gets to choose between the top two VP candidates based on EC votes. We could theoretically end up with a Vance/Walz administration.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Lmfao. Imagining a Walz and Vance admin is cracking me the fuck up right now holy shit.

[–] morriscox 2 points 1 week ago

I appreciate the correction.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The dynamics of the game are way different with a Republican Senate and president. I bet they'll fall in line in a heartbeat if they keep the house.

[–] simplejack 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Exactly. People forget they not all the republicans are MAGAs. The GOP equivalent of Joe Manchin exists, and they’re going to have a lot of power with a slim majority.

[–] Homescool 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's over. It's a MAGA world if you are a Republican. Its a mandate, like it or not

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

Yeah I’ll be curious to see if they censure their own party members lmfao

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

I don’t know the answer to this and am too drunk to research right now but. I really wonder how many of the people causing ire beforehand are still even left in congress now. I’m worried a lot of the loud voices were replaced with trumpie fucking losers. But again. Just assumption based on my end.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Yep, control runs through California, which is taking its sweet time counting the votes. It will be days before we know who controls the house, although it’s going to be the republicans more likely than not

[–] lennybird 32 points 1 week ago

This is also why people need to vote blue no matter how blue your state is.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 week ago

California's "sweet time" includes allowing votes postmarked on Election Day to arrive and be counted. You might not be happy waiting but I'm glad to live in a state that values every vote and makes voting as accessible as possible. I won't say "easy" because our ballot was 6 pages long, but it was easy to read and mark at home, and mail or put in a box or hand to a person.

[–] Snapz 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Irresponsible to say "taking it's sweet time..." these days without also mentioning explicitly that this is the specific effect of decades of a GOP cause to sabotage how votes are collected, processed, tallied and reported.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What did the GOP have to do with the vote counting in California? I appreciate California for counting every vote but I’m not sure what republicans had to do with making it slow

[–] Snapz 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is that a serious question?

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

Yes, please explain. Each state manages their own electoral system and California is a deep blue state

[–] Snapz 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The answer here is complex and I doubt you actually want depth. But to clarify your statement, each COUNTY within a state manages their own election. California is also one of the biggest states in the country and the population of some counties dwarf the size of entire U.S. states. So the first answer is, it's a complex operation WITHOUT any obstruction attempts, but we live in this reality, and gop obstruction is rampant and regular at this point.

An epicenter for election threats and disinformation in California is Shasta County. It will probably take some time for them to dissect all of the subtle ways that this fucked their process, but late in the election cycle, their garbage county supervisors hired a lawyer with no election admin experience to replace the departing competent person who had run elections. Here's an account from a local paper wrt some of what is allowed to go on in that country:

"CalMatters’ Sergio Olmos visited last week and reports that the presence of self-appointed election observers has led some elections workers to quit. The observers spend their days at the county’s registrar of voters office on the lookout for any misdeeds related to voter fraud. Though voters are legally allowed to enter the office to observe the election process, staffers report that the observers have been following workers into their breakroom and attempting to open doors to see inside their offices. Their intensity pushed Tanner Johnson to quit after working as an account clerk for more than a year. He says that 10 of the registrar’s 21 employees have also left. *Johnson: “They want to catch us in a lie, so they’ll try to trick you into saying something. A lot of times they’ll be secretly videotaping you or recording you. … I make $19.64 an hour. I’m not going to be a martyr for $19.60 an hour.”

So that kind of ceaseless, cowardly, undemocratic intimidation has been long present. It leads to stressed, threatened volunteer temporary workers who don't get paid enough to deal with that bullshit so if nothing else, they naturally slow down. It also leads to high turnover for those positions from the fear/stress, which means people are more likely to be undertrained or frankly, lower quality job candidates as you've already cleared out the "starting lineup and the bench" in some cases and then you're just desperate for any bodies off the street - including some of these pieces of shit themselves that learn the systems so they can purposefully volunteer and obstruct from the inside work challenges to ballots that are false, but require time in a process for people to then come and do a focused verification process to reclear as flagged ballot - like the tidbit that was caught streaming those "sample" verification ballots and then immediately challenging the validity of their elections process because they didn't have those ballots (that he obviously stole, on camera)

At the larger systemic level, they've challenged valid systems meant to expedite voting and vote processing so much and for so long now, that you're left (intentionally by these GOP efforts) with a patchwork of disjointed, disconnected and overly careful processing flows that move especially slow to attempt to satisfy their never meaningfully justified "voter fraud" bullshit - claims they are now, suddenly silent about, just like with those "caravans!!!" at the border

I could write you an essay, but I doubt you actually, truly give a shit.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That makes sense, I hadn’t really considered that. Thanks for the detailed answer

[–] Snapz 1 points 1 week ago

I appreciate your measured response and you listening to reason here and having the strength to say you learned something new in the exchange. Wish you well and hope you spread to others - If we all convinced one person of the bigger picture right now, we might be in a much different reality.

[–] flames5123 3 points 1 week ago

AP still hasn’t called her. And they have 212 RNC and 200 DNC. So if it’s 201, then republican need 6 to claim majority now.

[–] Bustedknuckles 22 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Hey, that's my district. Nice to make the news!

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

Woooo. Hope she represents you well friend.

[–] Bustedknuckles 2 points 1 week ago

Thanks, me too! But it's been awhile since I've had a Representative in the House that I was happy with. House districts are too big for their stated purpose OR5 goes from Portland suburbs to Bend

[–] crystalmerchant 2 points 1 week ago

Mine too! Way to go

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

The Republicans were absolutely inundating the district with the most vile stuff, like how she "voted in favor of rapists." They dramatically outspent her campaign.

I'm really happy she won.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Countdown until Chavez-DeRemer sues saying the election was stolen or that redistricting was gerrymandering in 3, 2, 1...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's the most evenly divided district in Oregon in partisan terms and she ran on a "bipartisan" theme. She'd be pretty hard-pressed to make her case.

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

She’d be pretty hard-pressed to make her case.

Logic has never stopped any republican.

[–] eran_morad 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Yeah, I didn't have a lot of hope that the Dems would have enough neocons left in the House to lean on and stop the absolute worst but they might, might have enough to stop a complete fascist takeover.

[–] DrMorose 6 points 1 week ago (3 children)

My inner cynic is coming to the surface on this one. I would rather the GOP control all 3 branches so it doesn't give them an excuse that the "other side" is holding back progress or some other bullshit. Yes it would mean unchecked power, but it might be the only way to open people's eyes.....I can't even finish that because I doubt even that would happen.

[–] Iheartcheese 20 points 1 week ago

No matter what they can always just say dems did it and their base will say 'yes daddy'

[–] Seleni 4 points 1 week ago

Oh, they still have all four branches. It’s just Oregon got a bit more Blue.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Sadly it won’t work that way. I’ve seen republicans vote against legislation. Then go home and claim it with their populous cause dems forced it through. These people are fucking scum.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

Finally some good fucking news.

[–] PumpkinSkink 3 points 1 week ago

This is spectacular to hear. I have to wonder if the shift in control will exacerbate the issues that prevented the passing of a budget, however. I haven't thought it through fully yet, but whatever the make up of the senate and house are, passing a budget is priority #1, and how that shakes out is going to be one of, if not the most significant short term effect on the economic situation of regular people.