this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2024
181 points (98.9% liked)

politics

19240 readers
2741 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 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 30 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Leopards

Edit: RAWR

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 30 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Trump has already threatened a purge and revenge against people who hurt his fee fees.

Same old shit. People supporting radicalization and installation of a dictator find themselves shipped off to a gulag or out of a job because they all think they’re going to get to participate in the new power structure, except dictators never share. They put family and extreme loyalists first. The rest are just window dressing to be traded out at first inconvenience.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Yup. Naturally the typical dipshit that would vote for donvict is not going to be much of a reader. This is a tale as old as time.

[–] aramis87@fedia.io 25 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I don't fucking care, do u?

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

If it is a sign that the GOP will start ~~beating~~ eating itself, that would make my life a lot easier.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Really the best we can hope for with this is that the federal government goes into total gridlock for the next two years and they cant do any 2025 shit. Itd help if Trump died since Vance wont be able to control the republican Blot flies.

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They did run on the campaign claim that the government is too inefficient and never gets things done.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yet if I piss on the managers computer I am accused of "Corporate Espionage" and "Assault with a acid".

[–] GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The over consumption of mountain dew can lead to many abilities some would consider... unnatural.

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 15 points 1 week ago

Of course I care. The fragmentation of the Republican party is something that many of us have been hoping to see for a long time.

The good thing about the situation now, for those of us who think Trump is an evil piece of s***, is that he doesn't have too much power. He can kind of pressure people who are up for re-election in 2 years, but his voice will mean nothing at all in 4 years. Also, many politicians want to wield their power so that they can either feel powerful or get richer, and if all they do is rubber stamp the word from the White House, nobody's going to give them the time of day.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

These Republicans have three options: Obstruct, switch parties, or quit whining.

Looks like obstruction is back on the menu, boys.

[–] Tronn4@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Something something leopards eating faces

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

That's leopards feasting on faces like never before.

[–] LuxSpark@lemmy.cafe 15 points 1 week ago

Womp womps all around.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It would be funny AF if someone managed to slip him some Polonium into his McDonald's, thereby causing the US to curbstomp Russia out of Ukraine.

[–] BadmanDan@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Off topic, but damn trump is unsettling to look at in this pic.

[–] GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I agree completely, but your comment begs the question: can you supply a picture of Trump that isn't? He always looks like mummified foreskin wearing a cotton candy toupee to me.

[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

So, funny story, I had my foreskin mummified the other day. Have you guys seen it? I smeared some pineapple cotton candy mixed with motor oil on it...accidentally.

[–] rhythmisaprancer@moist.catsweat.com 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I guess they aren't fans of Concrete Blonde.

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm gonna have a drink and walk around
I got a lot to think about

[–] credo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This is why voting in Congress should be anonymous. And this is exactly why purse holders wanted voting to be public- so they could carve out any nonconformists.

Any way. These fuckers better learn from the Greeks and form a Phalanx.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Anonymous voting by elected representatives may be the goofiest thing I've heard of in a while.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Such a bad idea. Now you have no idea if your representative is actually representing you or not!

[–] jacksilver@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Also no way to verify the vote is real if no accountability

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

I mean there are ways to ensure it, the most low tech option is to have a camera rolling, have all the Y/N votes stuffed into the box. Open up the box and count.

[–] credo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Your belief that anonymous voting in Congress is “goofy” reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of how our political system operates. Public knowledge of each individual vote does little to influence electoral outcomes. I.e., voters rarely track day-to-day legislative decisions, and even when they do, their understanding of the complex procedural dynamics is limited. Campaigns are primarily won or lost based on messaging (truthful or otherwise), rather than detailed voting records.

The real leverage in our system comes from financial influence and political pressure exerted by donors, interest groups, and party leadership. This influence depends on knowing exactly how legislators vote, enabling these entities to reward or punish them accordingly. When every vote is public, politicians feel compelled to serve those who fund their campaigns rather than following their own conscience or serving the broader public interest.

The proposal I highlighted for rebuilding trust is to restore anonymous voting in Congress. This follows the same expectations a anonymous voting in general elections. By keeping individual votes private, representatives are enabled to make decisions based on their judgment and principles rather than on fear of retribution or loss of funding. Many political scientists and reform advocates agree (see discussions in the American Political Science Review or reports from nonpartisan think tanks like the Brennan Center for Justice).

It is telling that your comment has garnered so much support. This demonstrates how easily public perception can be shaped and how difficult it is to foster informed discussions about positive legislative reforms.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The fact that pretty much every other democracy that doesn't allow rampant lobbying and corruption works with public voting but one doesn't should tell you that the problem is not with public voting.

[–] credo@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There are different systems. We have something called a 2-party system. Please consider yourself informed. Thanks for the downvote.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Well, you've got "confidently incorrect" down pat. Consider yourself informed.