this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2024
580 points (99.0% liked)

politics

19089 readers
5152 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
[–] Zak@lemmy.world 226 points 9 months ago (7 children)

Minority leader Tim Knopp said:

we are deeply disturbed by the chilling impact this decision will have to crush dissent

Give me a fucking break. As a legislator, you have no shortage of ways to dissent including access to media, the ability to speak on the floor of the legislature, and the ability to vote on legislation. What you can't do, if you want to keep your job is not show up for work every time you know you're going to lose a vote so that the legislature can't do business.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 78 points 9 months ago (1 children)

"What about a musician who wants to express a nonpartisan message that young people should participate in our democracy?"

That's DIFFERENT she needs to JUST SHUT UP

[–] Fester@lemm.ee 18 points 9 months ago

“She said she votes for human rights, so we know she votes for the wrong team.”

[–] bluemellophone@lemmy.world 63 points 9 months ago (1 children)

As an Oregon voter, tough shit. We voted with a 68% majority to amend the state constitution, with explicit penalties for legislative absenteeism.

The chilling impact they are feeling is the will of the people bitch slapping their defunct political strategy.

[–] wavebeam@lemmy.world 45 points 9 months ago (3 children)

"But that's all just Portland voters! All the rest us of didn't want that!" - My idiot father. Yeah dude, Portland is most of us. Your vote isn't worth more just because you live around less people.

[–] Untitled4774@sh.itjust.works 22 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Land doesn’t vote

[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago

That's still a majority. Tough shit pops, do some math.

[–] xantoxis@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

It's not even true. There are 3 million registered voters in Oregon, of whom 565k are in Portland (well, Multnomah). While we lean very heavily D, most of the registered D's in the state are elsewhere.

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

"Portland" is usually used as shorthand for Clackamas/Multnomah/Washington counties, which are about half the states population overall. Shouldn't be shocking that half the states population does rather heavily influence how the state is run though. Did folks expect Harney county (10,135 sq mi, with 7,515 people) to be the big decider? C'mon now.

[–] xantoxis@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

Surprisingly, even if you include all 3 counties you're still only about 40% of the registered voters--although you are now at about 50% of the registered D's. Meaning the rest of the state skews Republican but not by that much.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.world 56 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Refuse to do job.

Get fired.

/surprisedpikachu

[–] Wrench@lemmy.world 31 points 9 months ago

Not even fired, but not rehired when their contract is up.

[–] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 35 points 9 months ago

we are deeply disturbed by the chilling impact this decision will have to crush dissent

What they really said is: Wah! Boohoo! We don't like consequences for our actions! Wah! Wah!

[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 23 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Daddy, why are they fucking around and when they find out, they're being little bitches?

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 6 points 9 months ago

Because they are little bitches.

[–] inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

The amendment says a lawmaker is not allowed to run “for the term following the election after the member’s current term is completed.” The senators claimed the amendment meant they could seek another term, since a senator’s term ends in January while elections are held the previous November.

What a slimey disingenuous BS argument. They are knowingly trying to subvert the law specifically aimed at their behavior while pretending it's SOMEHOW the will of the voters to ignore them.

[–] LadyMeow@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 9 months ago

‘Crush dissent’? lol good you clown, I don’t think law makers should be crushing dissent…