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
view the rest of the comments
I never understood the problem with what Hogg is doing. No politician should ever think their seat is safe. Every primary should be contested. If the incumbant is doing a good job, they will win, and the party gets behind them. But if the incumbent loses a primary, then they were probably not doing a good job to begin with.
What's wrong with that?
The problem is that the human trash in the Democratic Party want to sit on their fat asses and take bribes while doing nothing for the people.
Running for local, state, or congress sucks balls. You're basically a beggar, you have almost no power, you are beholden to your sponsors and party leadership, and you're expected to work long hours campaigning for shit you barely care about while pet issues get lost in the shuffle. Most of your time is on the phone making promises you won't keep to people who don't believe you. The rest of your time is spent in transit. Everyone hates you, you're surrounded by morons, and if you can't even sneeze on camera without your opponents posting the ugly sneeze face photo on twitter.
Basically, the DNC has to beg candidates to keep them around. One reward they like to dangle is support from the national committee. Blocking primary challengers helps the candidate save some cash make makes their re-election seem inevitable. It's a massive weight off, especially for younger politicians with few fonnections and fewer leverage options.
Is it right? Fuck no. I agree with you completely. But I can certainly understand why, if I were st the top of that ant hill, I wouldn't want climbers to get a foothold, either.
I could see the logic being that you'd end up spending a lot of money and resources on primaries that could be used in the general, but that's obviously only a problem because money in politics is a huge issue to begin with.
I'd still argue that the upsides (candidates that better represent the electorate, keeping the incumbents on their toes, ...) outweigh the downsides in that regard.