this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
118 points (97.6% liked)

politics

19103 readers
3685 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

A recall petition is precisely "voting them out." It's a mechanism for doing it before an election cycle.

"I like you" and "I don't like you" are exactly, for better or worse, how elections work. A recall is simply the demand of the people to run an election off-cycle if there is sufficient support. You aren't going to get a recall petition certified if the only reason you don't like someone is "you don't like them," but there are many reasons to recall a politician that don't need to reach the level of malfeasance.

Again. Politics not private business?

I'm honestly struggling to understand why you wouldn't support that idea.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Many states require recalls be run for cause, I personally believe ALL recalls should be run that way.

If you don't have a reason for a recall beyond "feelings" then there is no reason for a recall.

See how it works in Washington as a good example, this prevents frivolous recalls.

https://ballotpedia.org/Laws_governing_recall_in_Washington

"Article I, §33 of the Washington Constitution states that a recall can only occur if the targeted public official has "committed some act or acts of malfeasance or misfeasance while in office, or who has violated his oath of office."[1]"

Show the evidence, run the recall.

No evidence? GTFO. See you next election.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Misfeasance quite literally means, in this statute and in a legally denotative sense, you did something someone deems inappropriate or wrong, but not necessarily harmful or illegal. I.e., you did something someone(s) didn't like.

You're literally arguing against your own point now. And honestly, I meant it and still mean it when I say I have so much respect for you. I don't understand what's happening right now.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

No, what they are doing in Nevada is an imagined grievance. They have no evidence, because nothing was done. No recall should be allowed without evidence.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

There are a handful of examples of recalls without crimes by the official; Santa Clara County in California recalled a judge because people felt he was lenient with a rapist for example.

The big difference with this one is that the things the recall proponents dislike are all imagined.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

I mean, being lenient with a rapist would be a breach of official duties and is well beyond the generic call of "well, we don't like you."

Here in Portland we had a problem with the DA failing to prosecute people, which, you know, is kind of his job?

We didn't recall him, we just voted him out in the next election.

https://www.kgw.com/article/news/politics/elections/multnomah-county-district-attorney-race-election-results/283-e5b76f7a-9497-488b-b432-08dc9deec27d

We'll see if the next guy wants to do the job starting in January.