567
Ron DeSantis met with swathes of empty seats at Iowa event, photo shows
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2023
567 points (97.2% liked)
politics
18802 readers
4331 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.
- 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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I mean... his plan for the USA is basically "WOKE WOKE WOKE WOKE WOKE WOKE WOKE WOKE WOKE" so I'm not surprised at all...
On the other side, Trump's plan is "ELECTION INTERFERENCE WAAAAA WAAAAA 😭😭 LAPTOP BIDEN HUNTER EMAILS WOKE RADICAL"
Like, Republicans? Are you okay? Dont you have anything better to offer? Yeah I see Trump supporters supporting Trump even harder but the moderates are rushing away from your party. You might have a problem... and don't come cry to us "voter fraud" after you inevitably lose 2024... look how fucking shitty your ticket is
The problem is a large percentage of Repugnantcans don't vote for anything. They vote against, with no regard to who or what their votes are going to. They would vote for a microwaved dogshit on toasted Wonder Bread if it meant "oWnInG tHa LiBz!!!!!!!"
I get what you say and I understand it but the American people in general didn't vote for Biden either... they voted against Trump
You could place a green plant with a [D] next to its name on the 2024 ticket and it would still beat Trump because everybody is fucking tired of the constant whining and dramas coming from the GOP
So in a way, we (and moderates) do the same as Republicans... but for better reasons
There was also a study where some of the stock portfolios with the most consistent returns were from people who had either forgotten about their account or died.
I'm not saying we should become a necrocracy, but not having a maniac at the helm is a start.
It's the inevitable outcome of a two party system. Only way to fix it is ranked choice voting or similar, but that'll never happen because the two parties who run the government know they'd be out of power if it was ever put into place
That and they would actually have to campaign. Right now, once they're the nominee, they get the full backing of the party and only campaign in "battleground states," for the most part. If they were up against a dozen parties, they might have to work for a change.
That’s the part that upsets me the most about this whole thing.
It feels like most people are voting against something, so it becomes even more divided because the next person has to go even more extreme. As I look around I see it more and more, in a lot of different countries.
I’m hoping the political game has reached a point where this either slows down or stops. But I’m not holding my breath.
No, no, they support him for his policies!
Oh, you want to know which policies?
Nothing in particular, they trust him to do the right thing.
Sigh.
Because he’s so pure of heart. /s
'BECUZ "OWN THE LIBZ," YA LIBRAL CUCK! FUCK YA, RON! BEAT THOSE WOKE ASSES!!'
/s