this post was submitted on 17 May 2024
161 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19145 readers
2200 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
top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mrtuttle@lemmy.sdf.org 14 points 6 months ago (1 children)

i can't wait the state to respect this the way they respected the voters' wishes with marijuana legalization.

[–] rjthyen@lemm.ee 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

And minimum wage laws, and campaign finance laws, we show up to for the ballot measures, but not for the people in office.

Edit: or we're perfectly happy voting for people that go against our voting interests. It's horrible either way

[–] jeffw@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think the thing with marijuana is the amendment passed on a referendum and then was struck down. We’re minimum wage and campaign finance reform ballot initiatives?

[–] rjthyen@lemm.ee 3 points 6 months ago

I can't remember the specifics well enough to state anything as fact, I'm pretty sure we had something on campaign finance that disappeared after voter approval, and I know we had a ballot initiative on minimum wage that they reworked after the fact into something better than many places, but not quite what was voted on. Marijuana felt like they straight manipulated rules and it disappeared with their reasoning being that it technically was more than one rule at once.

Even if my poor explanations aren't great, I can state as a fact that our voter pool seems to not care at all that their elected officials don't give two shits about their interests. I know plenty actually do, but our averages voter just looks for the R

[–] solarvector@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 6 months ago

the people of South Dakota, not the politicians in Pierre, will be the ones to decide whether to restore Roe v. Wade as the law of South Dakota

This reminds that although abortion rights are the most important result of Roe v Wade, there are other rights that were abrogated when it was overturned. It's hard to say all that was lost, and those generally won't be recovered with these efforts.

[–] rjthyen@lemm.ee 10 points 6 months ago

One of the dumber parts of this is that, prior to Roe vs Wade being overturned, SD had an abortion ban on the ballot twice since (guessing here) 2006 and voters voted it down both times. Roe v Wade gets overturned and our elected officials immediately enact they're own rules and now we have to fight for our rights back. I hate that our state still votes for Kristi and others like her, but hopefully we can get a little win bank this year.

[–] shasta@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

What did they do with the bananas?

[–] CraigeryTheKid@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago

for scale, of course