this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2024
341 points (90.5% liked)

politics

19050 readers
3891 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.
  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
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Maybe, but hopefully we'd get someone better than Pete.

[–] [email protected] 42 points 2 months ago (8 children)

I'm a member of the queer community and absolutely do not think this is a wise idea for this cycle. Maybe next time around Pete.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

Pete is 100% but he is not the correct gay candidate. He needs time to grow.

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

No, 100 times from this one seems excessive.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Yeah, but are we in the mood for a CIA spook to be vice president?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

More than the asset as President.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

ya but not you neolib scum

[–] [email protected] 36 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I've read this article twice and nowhere does he say the words "America is ready for a gay vice president." He says being gay has not been the detriment to his political career people assumed it would be. He's not going around telling reporters he thinks he should be VP. In the one quote that he is asked directly whether he would do it, he dodged the question.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yep. Who the fuck cares about the right. They want the most morally represhisble person to be their king. Could give two shit what they think about it.

Edit: for all the nay sayer in this thread you are obviously oblivious to the type of pull Pete has. We need to double down on progress. Yes an aging astronaut might look good on paper but the most progressive ticket America has ever seen is also good.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Alright I wasn't in before but... I mean what a strong name to platform on.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Not that one tho.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

But not him. He can't even do the job he currently has

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

Luckily, VP doesn't have to do much. And if you're right, better to get someone else in that role, right?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

Sure. Not him though.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 months ago (1 children)

As someone who was unfortunate enough to have grown up in Indiana, I'd rather Buttigeg stay there and keep trying to drag that state into the 20th* century.

*Not a typo, that state is just that far behind.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (2 children)

He's not there though. He's in DC as Secretary of Transportation.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Well then ask that bastard why my car broke down.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Doing a fuckall job of it, too. To hell with Pete, why settle for this guy for VP? Why is everyone so hung up on him?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

In think it’s because he’s an excellent communicator and stays that way even going on Fox News and such. Like even if we don’t trust him deep down, the skills he has are conductive to winning the election which is basically all that matters.

I don’t know if that makes him the most winning choice, because bigots, but we’ll see what happens.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›