politics
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.
- 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.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
I don't know that I'd go that far when characterizing his record.
Yes, he ultimately ended up certifying the election, but he also signed the Texas v Pennsylvania amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to help throw out millions of votes (despite the suit lacking any sort of standing, and being "constitutionally, legally[,] and factually wrong about Georgia" in the words of Georgia's AG, which rings pretty true when you read the brief). When he did finally vote to certify, the GOP letter he signed very clearly implies things would have gone differently if he had been allowed to vote for the slate of obvious fraudsters that were stopped before they made it to Congress. There was a long line of fundamental safeguards that prevented the illegal toppling of the government, every one of which was stressed to its breaking point (mostly with Austin Scott's help), and any of which could have tipped the scales, but Scott wasn't exactly on the side pushing for Democracy. That said, you're right. At least he did better than Jordan, I guess?
For the record, Scott's other political stances are:
So... several decades and a few million voters removed from where the actual American population stands, and farther to the right than even mainstream fiscal conservatives, but that's par for the course these days.