220
Kamala Harris Will Visit Abortion Clinic, in Historic First
(www.nytimes.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
220 points (97.0% liked)
politics
19008 readers
3996 users here now
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.
- 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.
- 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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It is not. There is a history of the Democrats including people who are anti-abortion within their tent.
I kinda think if they actually cared they would have codified Roe during his free reign no? This feels more like a bargaining chip than anything, same as the random pot seminar.
Broken Senate rules basically require 60% to bring something that isn't budget-related to a vote.
Why vote for either party that put forth the broken Senate rules?
Because not voting is worse
Voting 3rd party is a vote
Voting 3rd party is better than not voting for sure
Not practically, especially when plurality takes all and there's no ranked choice voting system. Say you had a candidate who was 95% perfect for you, another who was at 80%, and another who agreed with 10% of your beliefs. Now let's say that only the latter two had a realistic shot. When you throw your vote away on someone who never had a chance, rather than the guy who came close and could've won, you may as well have voted for the guy you agreed with least.
Take a look at Hawaii's special election in 2010. This district should have been a shoo-in for a Democrat running against a Republican. But when two Democrats run against a Republican? Their vote splits and the guy with 40% of the vote wins - even though one of the other two better lined up with 60% of the voters
Thanks for playing, though.
You may vote for the genocidal old man, but I can't/won't in good conscience. And the "he's worse" argument (when I'm not voting for either primary party) is a silly hill to stand on.
Either you let them walk all over you, or you vote for a candidate that will implement ranked-choice voting.
President Trump thanks you. At least he should put Netanyahu in his place just like he did Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong Un, Xi Jinping, and Viktor Orbán
Because unless most of the populous is going for the same alternative you are, voting for some other party mostly benefits the major party farthest from your views. It's a consequence of FPTP, which always collapses into a two party system.