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
Not trying to be rude, the media cycle buried that result.
The unions got the sick leave, after the media reported the strike ended without it.
It was accomplished a couple weeks later, if I recall correctly.
https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid
4, not the 7 they wanted or deserved. he doesn't get any credit for this. he broke the strike weakening their position.
I'm partially agreeing, I want to point out that they did get 7 days allotted.
Not all 7 of those are from sick time, so you've got a point.
I find it a reach to say the administration gets no credit when it's definitely been assigned to them on multiple fronts for the effort.
Congress was involved here too. Do you think our president should be a despot?
Were you directly involved in negotiations?
The people who were directly involved, gave the Biden administration credit for an assist.
Dig deeper the people who gave credit were the same members who didn't support the strike in the first place. iirc.
I blame everyone involved who voted to break the strike. don't try to assert for me things I havent asserted.
So you don't acknowledge when you're wrong, and will continue to move goalposts. You're taking a defensive posture.
It's becoming clear now.
You're a bad faith actor.
You're of course welcome to continue believing that. Thats of course your prerogative. But I'm just going to point to the results since they speak for themselves.
Harris is missing 20million votes. You were warned and decided that arguing with me about the lesser evil 'optimal voting strategy' than realizing the danger harris was putting you in was a good idea. 👍 Good job. Now go convince those 20million other individuals since you've failed here.
You know what they say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink. (I know you struggle with analogies, you're the 🐴)
Yes please, tell us how marxists and leninists will save humanity and not be the same as it ever was and always has been.
😂 never once have i mentioned them. Seek help you're arguing with ghosts.
Ok. What solution do you have that will work?
Please, elaborate on a working solution.
Do you have anything realistic that can change the results of citizens united vs FEC's ruling?
You said you warned us, but your cake day is not old enough to account for that. You're lying or you've been banned for being what you are.
I'm discussing facts with a bad faith actor. I'm looking for your true colors.
You spouting words doesn't make them true.
Yes, there are solutions to these problems. they've been well discussed by many people over many years. I won't be engaging with you specifically here because well frankly your not worth my time and we're well off base from the original conversation on Biden being a fucking strike breaker. which he, and congress, empirically were.
Am I happy he got them 4(!) days of sick leave? sure. do I think he fucking absolutely short changed them? 100%. you don't get credit for not pushing someone off the ledge just because you patched up their leg. You've been told to look deeper at the union groups involved and which ones played with the biden admin vs which ones were actually on strike. go do your homework. I'm happy to be proven wrong here. this is half recalled information. But beyond that shrug.
Your cake day, aka account origination date, is very recent. You claim you warned folks. You haven't been around on here long enough to do that at all.
Nice contradictory paragraphs. I only engaged with you to determine which flag you're waving. It's clearly been the one I called you on to begin with.
Paraphrasing you for anyone who doesn't want to read a bunch of half recalled (mis)information:
Idiots the lot of you, you think this is the only place people and myself have been making efforts? You morons have been getting warned the entire fucking year via student protests, media articles, poll numbers.
But apparently supporting a fucking genocide and shouting 'lesser evil' was more important to you than winning the 25 electoral points. No fucking wonder harris lost. Couldnt even say 'genocide is bad mkay, we'll follow our fucking laws'
Never mind her absolutely non-existent labor/working class economic policies.
I'm sure your protest vote will be heard by Trump and the senseless murder.
Y'all literally are like I don't care the other guy wants to expel all Muslims (& anyone they don't like) from the country and accelerate the genocide - she's not breaking the law to stop another country who's committing murder on the taxpayer dollar.
She's not screaming exactly what I want to hear. I believe the president controls the whole world.
Therefore I choose to accelerate the genocide from someone who wants muslims and people associated with that skin color out of the country, because what matters to me is how quickly the yahoos finish the job.
That's your argument right now.
Weave harder, you're almost convincing folks you actually understand and aren't in favor of Gazan eradication.
That's how contract negotiations work dumbass
😂 hard to negotiate with a gun to your head via the government.
optics matter and he failed to secure that.
I agree, optics matter to the public and media.
The media has sane washed an insane old person, while negatively spinning or outright ignoring any Biden accomplishment.
The fact is, in this system, we're trying to convince a small group of undecided folks in a few swing states to get involved and make a choice.
The majority of the public is too tired and busy to bother to review the facts, and happy to watch an opinion of the matter - whether it's true or not.
If it fits into their world-view there's no need to challenge it.
No, that undecided group does not exist, this election clearly demonstrated that. Trump results are nearly identical to 2020. What exists are people who are not engaged or disalusioned. They also are poor and going to vote is a meaningful event that takes energy that they don't have.
Yeah, you're acting in bad faith here too.
The numbers of votes clearly show over 24 million people sat out 2024 vs 2020.
Undecided doesn't mean they'll make a decision on voting day.
I know of several people who willingly sat out because the state they're in was always decided and they didn't feel it would matter.
You just said exactly what I said while also saying im acting in bad faith.
Apologies, I didn't figure the math right. ~16 million.
I disagree.
Your first statement was that an undecided voter group didn't exist.
That's what I'm responding to.
Undecided did exist as ~16 million fewer votes were cast. Those could be protest votes could be voter roll purges...
We don't know what they've decided because they didn't decide in a way that is counted.
That is all.
They can claim whatever reason they want. They abdicated their voices this time. Hope they're able to use them again.
I said exactly that, its not people choosing between the parties its choosing to engage, but even more than that its people for who voting is a burden and that in 2020 a lot of effort was put into giving people access to voting due to the pandemic.
That's what you wrote. You are backtracking on that statement now?
We know that ~16 million people didn't vote this time vs 2020. We know that around 60% of all possible voters participated in 2020. We don't know what that ~50-60% in (2024) actually want because they couldn't be convinced to decide. That is the definition of undecided. That is literally ~50% of registered voting people who left the choice undecided. A group you claim to be non-existent.
If they wanted to protest vote, they should and could have en masse voted for 'Gaza Freedom' or 'No Fascism' or any coordinated name as a write-in.
Several parties suggested it during their primaries. I can't find evidence of it occurring in those primaries.
At least 12 states have no registration requirement for their write-in votes on final elections. Most don't require it on primaries.
That didn't happen or wasn't reported. The evidence suggests the former.
I'd be more accepting of your claim if the facts actually supported your narrative.
The numbers show that only about 60% of people who can vote actually decided.
40% didn't decide even after considering.
Beyond that there's still 40% of the population who didn't even decide to consider voting.
Which group of undecided voting eligible citizens do you claim as non-existent?
You didn't say exactly what I said.
Your initial statement was in disagreement with the statement regarding undecided voters.