362
Michigan Republican congressman suggests nuking Gaza, ending humanitarian aid
(www.detroitnews.com)
this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2024
362 points (95.9% liked)
politics
19229 readers
3462 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
no, they're not. the people voting for these guys are the ones ushering them in. people voting for a so-called third party are voting against these guys
No, sadly with the way US voting works at the moment the chances of a third party winning is microscopic, so voting for a third party is only taking votes away from the only party that stands a chance of beating the republicans. Statistically third party voters would be more likely to vote democratic than republican if they didn't have a third party option, so in reality the more people voting third party the more they're helping republicans win. It sucks but that's the reality.
no. the votes belong to the voter, not a party, and its up to politicians to earn those votes.
i haven't voted for a democrat for president in over a decade and i'm not starting again this year.
You know politics isn't like sports, right? You don't identify with a team but instead you vote to get rid of cruel fatcat racists and replace them with people who will actually benefit the country.
Like who?
Like the majority of representatives and senators? Not to mention stopping the return of Mango Mussolini? Jeez, do we really have to spell this out for you?
I was wondering who would actually benefit the country.
(I dont see how that can ever happen until lobbyist bribery is utterly abolished and criminalized)
Oh. Yeah in the US, the electoral system doesn't really allow for that. All you can vote for is less evil, embodied by the Democratic party. I've been fortunate enough to experience different political systems, and I'm glad I can live elsewhere.
I'd have voted for Bernie in 2016, and he ran as a democrat
biden helped get us a country that elected Trump.
You know Trump was first elected BEFORE Biden was president, right?
I think they are referring to Biden being a career politician.
Among a hoard of other career politicians, he is not solely responsible for Trump being elected in any way shape or form.
No argument from me. It's just a sentiment I've heard from other people. It's not completely empty of reason, but I'd say it's way down on the list, with the outdated electoral college, and the Republican undermining of education, far right vitriolic propaganda and dog-whisling for racists, nazis and christian nationalists being towards the top.
only votes for republicans help republicans win
As much as it would be nice if the world worked that way, that's not how the world works unfortunately.
Can you explain why the voting system is this way in states democrats fully control?
I'm happy to inform you that there are Democrat-controlled states and localities that have successfully passed ranked-choice voting.
And there are states that have BANNED ranked-choice voting as well. I'll let you guess which party was behind those.
So does this change your stance on whether Democrats are doing anything to change first-past-the-post voting systems?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked-choice_voting_in_the_United_States
it is. a vote for Cornel West must be counted for Cornel West, not any other candidate
Your votes don't exist in a vacuum. There absolutely needs to be election reform to make third party voting a more viable option instead of a liability, but it hasn't happened yet so for now you live in a reality where you're voting in an imperfect system and trying to will the fantasy of a perfect system into existence instead of acknowledging that isn't helping anyone, least of all people who want to be able to actually vote third party.
Not in an effective way.
the ethics are in the act itself, not in the consequences.
The ethics don't matter if you don't get the outcome you want... The ends do not justify the means here.
deontological ethics are unconcerned with ends. the act itself is either ethical or unethical.
That's not how the US electoral system works. If the vote turns out 49%/48%/3%, then the guy with 49% wins. Unless your 3rd party is polling in the mid forties (and is therefore not a 3rd party) all you are doing is vote splitting
there is no reason to believe someone voting for a so-called third party would vote for another politician. it's not as though we don't know they exist, and haven't been browbeaten repeatedly about this.
Wow. What a mathematically flawed electoral system!
So now that we all understand how first past the post voting will always result in a two party system... what is the ETA on Ranked choice voting being implemented in all blue states?
You keep assuming that third party voters will vote for your guy. They very well may vote against him, if at all.
I dont think you understand anything about third party voters.
Do the work for third parties between elections. That's when the hard-fought progress is made toward rising platforms and ideas. Vote third party in primaries. Attend third party meetings and help organize. But don't make the work to spread new ideas and build other options even harder by allowing democracy to creep further backward and affect up to 35+ years of judicial decisions.
i have more important work to do than building a party
i will, but how will that have any bearing on the democrats or republicans? it won't. i'll be nominating jill stein for the green party, and then i'm going to vote for her for president.