politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
And if the Dems don't mount a REALLY effective campaign and candidate, she might be the leading bet for who's gonna win.
She is the ONLY one left who captures even a sliver of Trump's base. But she also has the appeal of people thinking they're making a "liberal" choice with her. And make no mistake, most of the country does not follow politics or drama and know zilch about her, only that she sounds "down home country" the way she talks and she don't wanna associate wit dat there Trump fellow after he diddled dem kids.
When media and interviews turn their eyes to her and start grilling her on the batshit things she said like jewish space lasers and so on, it will only serve to launch her higher in viewership and attention. Trump won on this tactic and Dems still worry about a "perfect candidate" who will preserve the status quo that nobody cares about outside their dusty halls of ancient pageantry and old money.
We are SO fucked.
I think enough of the MAGA base is incapable of voting for a woman that she starts in a pretty deep hole even within her party. I don’t see her getting the nomination, and if she does I see her struggling to inspire turnout in the general. Sexism impacted both Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris, and will be even harder for a GOP candidate to overcome.
If that is what you think, you are 40years and 2 steps behind. Misogynistic rhetoric hasn't been en vogue since the 80's, and if you think Hillary or Kamala lost only because they were women, you really don't have anything useful to say and instead are leaning on the trope of "common wisdom."
There’s literally a movement within MAGA to repeal the right of women to vote. Yes, I absolutely believe that the misogyny is present in today’s GOP. Further, multiple polls and other research studies have found that a significant number of voters in the US does not support the idea of a woman for president. Here are a few references:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1532673X251369844
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4782780-americansready-female-president-dipping-survey/
Anecdotally, Michelle Obama recently observed the same thing: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5607777-michelle-obama-us-not-ready-woman-president/
And if you combine her observation with the GOP views on women as president reflected in this pew research poll (notably “Republicans (86%) are twice as likely as Democrats (43%) to say it is not at all or not too important if they ever see a woman elected U.S. president”), I think there’s ample reason to believe that a Republican candidate for president would struggle to gain support from a statistically relevant group of voters.
And no, I do not think that Clinton And Harris lost only because they’re women. I did not say that at. Evidence suggests that misogyny was one of many factors, though.
What with the hypocrisy and shifting goalposts for MAGA/GOP types, a female Trump 2.0 would seem quite plausible to my eyes. These types don't care for conserving anything in particular nor for standing up afor any fixed set of values. They are, quite literally going along with the flow.