this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2024
60 points (76.3% liked)

politics

18894 readers
2953 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


People in Michigan, and across the country, had been protesting for months over the Gaza war and the US government’s role in it, marching in the streets, showing up at the president’s public events, and pressuring their elected officials to support a ceasefire.

That year, then candidate Barack Obama was not on the ballot in Michigan because the state’s primary date violated party rules, so his supporters voted “uncommitted” to reject Hillary Clinton’s campaign there.

A memo written in late January by Waleed Shahid, a Democratic strategist, outlined the idea: use uncommitted in the Michigan presidential primary to “demonstrate a large rejection of President Biden’s backing and financing of the Israeli government’s war in Gaza”.

The next stop was Minnesota, a state with a progressive tradition, a sizable Somali population, and seasoned organizers who learned how to get messages out fast during the 2020 racial uprisings over the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis cop.

Potential volunteers were urged to sign up for phone and text banks, donate whatever time and money they could spare and join a WhatsApp group that shares actions people can take.

Organizers from Michigan and Minnesota shared what worked for them, followed by campaign leaders in Washington and Wisconsin, who detailed what they hoped to see in their states once voters had a chance to cast ballots for uncommitted options.


The original article contains 2,507 words, the summary contains 226 words. Saved 91%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!