Why is some shitty author no one ever heard of who did a debate or two in 2016 being mentioned... Anywhere?
this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2024
-45 points (22.2% liked)
politics
19096 readers
3308 users here now
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I like Marianne Williamson and would vote for her.
Who funds this lady? This move does nothing but pull off the young liberal, doesn't-understand-consequences-yet, and gets-their-politics-from-tiktok vote.
Lot of people telling lies about the actual state of the Democratic primary in this thread.
No, she isn't. She lost in the primary.
There was no primary.
She's advocating for Biden to be replaced in an open convention.
I know. If anything they will nominate someone who shares Biden's views, not some crackpot who barely got any votes.
some crackpot who barely got any votes
She got about 3% of the vote (about the same as Dean Phillips, a sitting congressman and the only other challenger to Biden).
That's because the billionaire-owned media blacked her out. After the billionaire-owned media overcame their scare with Bernie, they learned that just not ever mentioning a candidate is the best strategy to sink a candidate.
I know about Marianne only because I watch Kyle Kulinski and The Breaking Points.
Marianne would wipe the floor with the establishment democrats if she were allowed to speak to the voters.
Oh, and the DNC never gave her a voter list that she legally purchased from the DNC. They took her money and gave her nothing.
That's nothing, she only got some many because there was barely anyone else running. Again, she does not share Biden's views. No way the Democrats nominate someone who is anti-vaccine.
If the only two challengers only got 3% each, then I'm sorry, but there are no challengers.
Dude, she got branded as a nutjob back in 2020. That's not going away, no matter how unfair it may be.
If the Democrats have a better option, they have two months to find it.
So far, every other Democrat says they're supporting Biden, and Biden said last week that immigrant women are being raped by their sisters (which I expect to be the clip played in Republican ads before the election).
Democratic politicians will publically back Biden without reservation, even as some scheme behind closed doors on ways to get him to just leave already. If those people are successful, they will be just as publically backing their new nominee, and act like they always have been.
It's just politics
If the Democrats have a better option, they have two months to find it.
Party leadership is uninterested in better options.
Marianne Williamson, who ran for president in 2020 and suspended her 2024 campaign in February, has officially reentered the race
Who?
The psychic warrior lady
She was widely mocked for saying "dark psychic forces", but "psychic" just means pertaining to the psyche.
She could have equally said "dark psychological forces".
My previous post was removed for being a video (mea culpa). This one is an article.
Yup, this is fine... She's still delusional, but the post is fine. :)