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 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Waltz/AOC would have a much better chance of success since America is still pretty sexist.
Dems should prove thsy by actually allowing a decent woman being the candidate
Right now isn't the best time to try to prove a point.
Time for more terrible candidates i guess
Yeah, because Hillary, Kamala, and AOC are all candidates of equal quality (women), and even considering a woman is a mistake, because as we all know, women shouldn't and can't try to become leaders in government.
Libs are so fucking eager to surrender to misogyny. It is sickening.
The problem isn't that the previous candidates were women, it was that everyone fucking hated them and their policies were monstrous.
What point are you trying to make? Because one of those is not like the other...
Each of them is better than Trump, but Hillary and Harris are basically Republican light with shitty, shady pasts.
They fucking managed to LOSE to fucking Trump that tells you all you need to know about them.
I am well aware. But my dream is AOC / Walz for 2 terms, then Walz and his VP pick
"Okay, we've had a 40 year old president now. Time to switch back to someone pushing 70."
Also Walz will be in his 70s in 2036, AOC will be pushing 50. I'd much rather Walz 2028-2036 and then run AOC 2036-2044.
Sexism is more of a problem when you're trying to win over conservative voters....