this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024
294 points (96.2% liked)

politics

19097 readers
2951 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
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
294
Trump is winning big with his base, but there’s no sign that he's broadening support (apnews.com)
submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
151 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

It also highlights a Republican party that has made an about-face on central policy issues, favoring some big government programs and retreating from commitments abroad.

That's a strange take on history. Of course many Republican politicains have said "focus on the homeland" or whatever while voting for wars, so the stated positions aren't really changing, and I don't imagine that Trump would be anti-war anyway. And big government is also a Republican thing. I can point to specific examples, but we all know about them, so why bother?

Anyway, it's hard for politics writers, no doubt, but this is basic historical knowledge. They can do better.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

It will be people (in a few key states) who refuse to vote for Biden due to purity testing or vote third party who put him in office if it happens.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That is how basically every election has worked for 30+ years. About 40% of people lean republican, 40% democrat, and 20% independent. Campaigns are mostly about getting 100% of your 40% to vote than winning independents or opponents.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Way less people are Republican, but only in pure numbers, which doesn't mean shit when you use the Electoral College (or have 2 senators per state regardless of population, for that matter). The only voters who actually matter for presidents are in the 5 or so states that don't always go red or blue.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago

We already hit the point decades ago where GOP can't win a federal election without anti democratic institutions like gerrymandering and the electoral college. It needs to be replaced with something actually functional in leading government in policy supporting constituents to compete with DNC. I detest political parties, but the only thing worse than many parties is one party.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

Dubious methodology says trump in trouble -> upvote

Dubious methodology says Biden in trouble -> downvote to oblivion.

load more comments
view more: next ›