this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2024
373 points (96.3% liked)

politics

18883 readers
3614 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

He's trying to time it for immediately after Harris announces her VP pick. He wants to steal the news cycle from her.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I just headed over to /r/conservative to skim the posts.

I'll admit that it was a very shallow glance at what they're thinking but it really doesn't look like they're as upset with Vance as liberals like to think they are.

They're not as smug as they were a few weeks ago but they're still pretty comfortable with their poll numbers.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

lol i'm guessing you haven't spent much time in /r/conservative. which i don't blame you for

but the reason they don't express dissatisfaction with anything going on in conservativeland is because you'll get banned if you do

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

So, now that JD has provided contacts to the Silicon Valley billionaires and proven to be an iron ball on Trumps feet, he can be replaced?

I wonder how much dirty laundry he culd wash from all the stuff he has already seen inside the campaign...

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago

Hey, with all this talk of unity and how the Democrats should be picking a Republican to run on some kind of centrist wet-dream ticket, how about the "liberal media" starts beating the drum for donnie to kick JD off the ticket and add someone like AOC to the ticket?

You know: for "unity". For the tone - the Republicans should be utterly capitulating to the Democratic Party.

Why does no one in the corporate media ever suggest it is the Republican Party that should cave to the leftist majority in this country, but instead, the reverse is something that comes up. All. The. Time.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Is it because of all the couch fuckin'?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

And the frogs.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Trump's communications director, Steven Cheung, denied the reports in a statement to Newsweek on Tuesday, "President Trump is thrilled with the choice he made with Senator Vance, and they are the perfect team to take back the White House. And any reporting to the contrary is nothing but ridiculous fake news from either nonexistent sources or individuals who have no idea what's going on.

Saving this quote for when Trump replaces Vance.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

that cheung dude is hilarious. it's like exactly what trump would say except at twice the writing proficiency. so 6th grade level instead of 3rd grade

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

They'll just yell at you and call you "fake news"

[–] [email protected] 52 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Replacing Vance now would also undermine any argument they might make about switching the names on ballots for the Democrats. Those aren't valid, anyway--Biden wasn't the official nominee until the convention says so; nothing was locked in--but they would now lose the possibility of using it rhetorically.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 month ago (1 children)

they would now lose the possibility of using it rhetorically.

I think you're over-estimating their commitment to logic, consistency or reality.

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

They don't, but it also has to sink in with the general public. When both sides are being switched out, there's a very obvious argument against the claim.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

That makes sense but MAGA has always leaned hard on the "but when I do it, it's OK" rhetoric.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Biden wasn’t the official nominee until the convention

Even then, nothing prohibits him (or Vance, realistically) from resigning.

This is mostly just funny to watch.

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

There is a legal point where states won't accept changes to the ballots. Also a practical one where there isn't time to print new ones. Neither point has passed, of course, but Trump was trying to imply it was.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

If Biden died on November 4th, he'd remain on the ballot the next day and - if he won the majority of the EC - Harris would be the presumptive President Elect on November 6th. If Vance resigned as VP, we'd see the same results under a Trump win. We have a clear order of succession and mechanisms for appointing replacements to downticket slots like VP per the 25th amendment.

The absolute worst case scenario is that Trump would force Vance to resign and then be stuck with a House/Senate picking his VP for him. But since he's not even the President-Elect at the moment I don't think that's actually an issue.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago

never interrupt the enemy when he's making a mistake

load more comments
view more: next ›