284
Murkowski, done with Trump, won’t rule out leaving GOP
(www.cnn.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 24 Mar 2024
284 points (97.3% liked)
politics
19047 readers
4684 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.
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.
- 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
https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/southern-states-pushing-forward-with
https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/retaliation-texas-ag-paxton-demands
https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/republicans-issue-new-government
https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/west-virginia-bill-would-mandate
https://newrepublic.com/article/178576/republicans-reveal-end-game-fight-trans-kids
And, in advance of your reply, please don't bother telling me the yellow liquid that smells like piss running down my leg is rain. Conversion therapy kills. Getting proper treatment saved my life, and they explicitly want to take that away from me. Address this rather than trying to explain it away, or just don't waste both of our time. I'm sure you have more productive things to do than deny what I can plainly see.
WTF. I don't know where to start.
I don't understand what's happening in the plains states. It's like a tornado sucked out all their humanity. I hadnt seen that yet.
You lost me with piss... 🤷
I actually have a lot of empathy for people who are shit on. I don't hate you or think you should have to feel that way.
The piss comment is a reference to an American idiom. I guess they missed that one in your training.
Training?
A reference to the phrase, "don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining," ie, I can see what is happening in front of me. And they'd implement this shit on a federal level if they could; there were 40 such provisions they tried to get into the recent budget bills. The Twitter caucus has decided that I am an abomination, that my existence as myself makes me a pedophile, and that pedophiles deserve to be killed. The rest of the party is generally apathetic towards this, and will let them run the show on such matters if they are in an unassailable position. I thought John McCain was someone who I could have voted for in 2008, but he was the last Republican who was even remotely there; even the Republicans who managed the absolute minimum bar of recognizing a coup attempt when it tried to hang them, went along with the program the vast, vast majority of the time, right up until the doors were being hammered on by an angry mob.
I actually mentioned Bush/McCain because they were no where near as bad as now. Voting R wasn't as scary then.
Can do it now, now it's a coup, like you said.
So yeah, given this, in what sense is it realistic or reasonable to not vote for the person with the better chance of beating them, IE, the democrat. I don't love that I have to bet my life, and the lives of lots of others, on a keynesian beauty contest, but I'm not going to be dumb and throw the contest just because I don't like it. Why would you want to persuade people to do that?