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.
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
He does not support Medicare for all, and also does not support the green new deal, according to his wiki. He also supported increased oil drilling.
So he's pretty moderate right IMO, which sucks. I hope he's not her choice.
Yeah, see this is why I was so attached to Biden. The average Democrat isn’t really all that left. All this stuff with climate change and unions under Biden was very much an anomaly, and we’re probably returning to a certain amount of status quo with Harris.
Idk, I could be wrong; maybe she’s super left and this guy’s being floated as a gift to the New York Timeses of the world so the ticket will be acceptable to the six figure Manhattan shitheads that their editors are friends with, so they won’t print bullshit about her to try to lose her the election. And she still doesn’t want to destroy American democracy and all climate change remediation since Obama, which makes her worth voting for. But yeah we can expect a certain amount of corporate bullshit to come back into the equation now, I think. 😕
From what I've heard, it sounds like her senator policy stances were left of Joe? But chances are, her vp will prolly be more center, and who knows what her policies look like when she has to take stances that aren't representing just California.
Joe did a pretty good job as president courting progressives though. It was all much further left than his time in the senate. Still not far enough left for me, but better. I hope Harris follows that. The population generally is moving in that direction, so they need to.
The average Democrat is to the left of their representatives on a lot of things, including climate change: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/09/what-the-data-says-about-americans-views-of-climate-change/
Kelly is not an average Democrat representative, he's definitely on the right end of the caucus.
The Green New Deal was a white paper produced by a DC think tank. Obama implemented some of it. Biden implemented a lot of it through the climate change bill.
From wikipedia:
Kelly ran as a moderate in 2020 and voiced support for bipartisanship.[79][80][81] Since joining the Senate, he supported abolishing the filibuster in order to pass voting rights legislation[82] and a federal minimum wage increase to $15 per hour. He has criticized Joe Biden's approach to border security.[83][84] As of October 2022, Kelly has voted in line with Biden's stated position 94.5% of the time.[85]
Abortion
As a candidate in 2020, Kelly said he was "pro-choice" and was endorsed by Planned Parenthood.[86] He supports codifying Roe v. Wade into federal law.[87] He has said that late-stage abortions should be legally protected.[88]
Climate and environment
Kelly has voiced support for climate action, but said he "does not favor" the Green New Deal.[89] The League of Conservation Voters gave him a 97% score in 2021.[90] In 2022, Kelly also advocated for an expansion of oil drilling in the wake of rising gas prices.[91][92]
Guns
Kelly became an outspoken advocate for gun control following the attempted assassination of his wife, former U.S. Representative Gabby Giffords, at the 2011 Tucson shooting.[93]
Kelly voted for the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act in response to the Robb Elementary School shooting in Uvalde, Texas.[94][95]
Health care
Kelly supports building on the Affordable Care Act to include a public health insurance option.[93][96] He opposes Medicare for All.[97]
Immigration
Of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, Kelly has said, "Dreamers are as American as anyone", and has expressed support for it.[98][86]
Trump administration
In February 2021, Kelly voted to convict Trump for incitement of insurrection in his second impeachment trial,[66] and has been outspoken in his disdain for him.[99]
A mixed bag, could be a hinderance or could get with the administration if its truly more left than Biden.
This is interesting. People are calling him a mixed bag, yet looking into this he clearly supports expanding on existing solutions and has supported potential solutions that offer real-world results, such as expanded drilling. A realistic solution that makes sense in a swing state. The only outlier is Medicare for All and he'd probably say behind closed doors that he needed the votes and compromised with reinforcement of the ACA.
From what I remember and have seen recently, he strikes me as someone who is quietly playing the game. Becoming VP may allow him to step out and take more progressive stances. Or less progressive, of course. I'll have to look into him more, though it's my opinion he's a good pick, both for more favorable (for us) policies and for the larger election strategy.
I'll make an early call that he's more progressive than he seems at face value. Shame we don't have that bot which messages us X time later. I'd like to come back to this in the future, see if I was right.
Sure. He's white, straight, and male, to balance out the ticket for racists/sexists/homophobes. Package him, ship him out, and let's defeat Trump and Project 2025!
Also astronaut, veteran, and fairly progressive.
And from a swing state
Not a fan of him teaming up with Manchin to promote more oil drilling.
I'm just not a fan of Manchin.
Manchin can go to hell.
Manchin got us to 50 in a deep red state. There are so many red states in middle America that, in the current political spectrum, it is nigh impossible to get to 50 dems in the senate.
I hear you, Manchin wasn’t my guy, but we would have got bunk from the Biden administration without him.
Something something, it’s easy to hate, harder to love.
Anecdote time: last week a 30 year old woman I work with stated with confidence she wouldn't be voting this year. Earlier today she told me she would be voting for Harris and asked who the vp would be. I said Shapiro, beshear, or Kelly. She looked up each of them on Wikipedia and immediately said something to the effect of, "why have I never heard of Kelly? I'd vote for this guy at the top of the ticket. I hope she picks him."
The guy's bio speaks for itself. Plus we'd get fun twins hijinks at the naval observatory and I think we as a nation need that.
I like him, but PLEASE don't vacate a Senate seat right now..! The balance is too tenuous at the moment. The Rs just lost a seat with Vance that could be filled with someone that isn't batshit crazy; let's not pull the same stunt in AZ.
E: I'm hearing that the way it works in AZ is that the person leaving their seat gets to assign the new member. If that's the case, then i withdraw my complaint.
Democratic Governor appoints new Senator to carry out remainder of term. It's safe. A special election would then happen in 2026.
I'm still shocked no one is taking seriously the "Democrats should pick Romney as Presidential choice because reasons" that has seriously been floated.
I wonder: how many times has someone given a big platform to someone so they can suggest that the Republicans should select a Democrat as their choice? Probably never? Why is it that people always say - with a straight face and very, very seriously - that it is Democrats that should run Republicans on their tickets, because something something unity and tone.
Because it's not a good idea. They select him and don't convert Republican voters, lose a good portion of the progressive base and only get marginal, less reliable, swing voters with that move. That's at least a ten point loss right there.
It's going to be a safe bet like Josh Shapiro or, slightly less safe, Cooper.
I don't like that option, but I do think it would be effective to disrupt the Republican party. It'd really force a lot of modern "Republicans" to face what the party has become.
I think it'd be better to out him as VP under Harris than president though. To have a traditionally popular Republican candidate on the ticket would give them a huge platform to point out that the MAGA party is not the Republican party many supported before. It's just Fascists who stole it because people were too dumb to pay attention.
I would love to see Mark Kelly as VP and then campaign for president.
Not a fan, and I don’t like his relative lack of political experience. However, his status as a white male veteran who is the husband of Gabby Gifford could win some points.
Hate that it comes to that, but this is what we get. Fuck, I just want out of this shithole.
Unexpected
HuffPo be huffing something hard.
I'd like it to be mayor Pete. Young, smart, well spoken, Rhodes scholar, veteran. Plus it would set him up for a serious run at the presidency in the future.
It's pretty odd to me that people feel like they really need to shore up the "moderate" lane. Boosting the AZ chances makes perfectly fine sense, but Harris isn't expected to be particularly progressive. She's a middle of the road Democrat, so unless she's going to come out fighting for big progressive change, just run her as a solidly competent Democrat. No need to find a new Joe Lieberman.
Plus, for the love of god, don't give up an iffy senate seat.
I don't hate him, but he's already 60. That means that if Harris goes 1 term and loses, or goes 2 terms and can't run again, Kelly is 68 before he can run himself, which he will inevitably do. If he's 68 when he starts, then he is running the country in his 70s and we have made 0 progress on this age problem that seems to plague presidential candidates. Beshear is 46, which keeps him in his 50s for most of his terms.
Let's see what you folks missed...
Navy combat pilot. Would be the first of those in the administration since HW.
Arizona would be a nice get electoral wise.