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.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
Well since you've said it - yeah the Dems have more political power. Which is why it would show leadership and political finesse for Dems to focus their messaging around policy changes that would enable a fairer and safer voting system that eliminates spoiler candidates, like approval choice voting. THAT would attract 3rd party voters. Because it includes them. Instead the messaging above alienates and divides people. It's bad.
I actually don't understand how we all collectively watched Whose Line? in the 90s and somehow still don't understand the concept of "yes, and," and including people's concerns. If Dems want 3rd party voters, they will have to respect their concerns and not try to verbally abuse them, or use fear, obligation, guilt, or shame to emotionally abuse them.
And btw yes I'm voting for Kamala. But man watching Dems fumble EVERY ELECTION because they can't let go of emotional manipulation and abuse rhetoric is so cringy.
Yeah watching the Dems is painful AF. They get real close to GETTING it and then fall back into their political safe zone. The 3rd party voters might not have the numbers, but they have good ideas for the future of the country that need to be considered.
We need more Bernies & AOCs on the inside to pull dems back (at least) toward centre and make them understand that 3rd party voters have some great ideas for bringing positive change and equity. Even if the Dems can't fully embrace them, let's nudge the needle back toward progress by paying attention to them. The Dems might do. The GOP won't. So if there are only two viable parties in the presidential (and congressional) race there's a clear choice if anyone really wants the opportunity to (frustratingly slowly) change anything for the better.
I always say it's easier to shame dems into doing the right thing. The GOP have no shame to leverage.