this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2024
532 points (85.5% liked)

politics

19047 readers
4296 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
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 59 points 6 days ago (56 children)

Jill Stein is polling at litterally less than measurable numbers.

https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3913&stream=top

"Undecided" represents at least twice the voters Stein appears to be garnering.

[–] sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world 0 points 5 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (10 children)

What kills me about this is if the neolib dems had taken just a moment at the primary to cast their vote for undecided to show the Dem leadership that genocide was a non negotiable issue they should do the right thing on, it might have worked.
It would have cost absolutely nothing, and we might be coasting to an easy victory right now. Instead we're here.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (55 replies)
[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 59 points 6 days ago (38 children)

"Once noble party" - ffs.

Jill Stein is a bad actor in this election, she understands how the electoral college works and she understands she's weakening the democratic party position. But let's not blame shift - the Democrats could be much better on climate change then they are today and if they were better Stein's BS wouldn't have such an easy time attracting voters. I dislike the title posing it as "Stein may hand Trump the whitehouse again."

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 48 points 6 days ago (11 children)

Even if the argument about getting X% of votes was true, the states to campaign heavy in would be the deep blue/red states. Especially since they tend to get ignored by candidates.

Instead she sticks to the states where <30k votes could decide the election and the market is saturated with the most expensive ad costs

It's blantantly obvious what's she's doing.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (37 replies)
[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 42 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Note: Jill is literally paid to run as a spoiler, and if you look at her actual policies, lot of transphobia, ablism, and support for pseudoscience

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 5 days ago (3 children)

guys it's not that hard, all we have to do is to not vote for still jein.

load more comments (3 replies)

Jill Stein has my vote! Seriously, she took it. Can someone help me get it back?

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 22 points 5 days ago (11 children)

It was nice to see the World News community finally realize that the DNC has been doing nothing but shooting themselves in the foot for a year.

Maybe this community will finally catch on and connect the dots between a random ass 3rd party getting blamed for stealing votes away from the Democrats, and Democrats not actually meeting the core demands of their constituency.

Or maybe not....

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›