763
‘I was not voting before, now I am’: gen Z voters on what they think of Kamala Harris
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
763 points (97.5% liked)
politics
19159 readers
4351 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
For sure. I throw judge selection under administration. The President doesn't know any of these judges, they are presented to the President by the team the President put together.
This is how it is done in Australia by our High Court. A judiciary panel shortlists the candidates and the Government usually takes the first on the list - conservative or liberal government, doesn't matter. The selection isn't politicised - the most qualified gets the job.
Our high court has a reputation for annoying governments from either side.
I wish... Our system is the heritage foundation chooses whatever judges align with what they want to accomplish, spend 2 decades calling liberal appointed judges "activist judges that want to legislate from the bench" and then hand the Republican president a list of activist judges who will legislate from the bench because everything Republicans say their opposition does is projecting what they actually intend to do...
I hate that it works... They do it first so when you push back on what they are doing it looks like the childish "no you!" argument so it immediately defuses any resistance...