this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2024
283 points (97.3% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2375 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, aghast at Donald Trump’s candidacy and the direction of her party, won’t rule out bolting from the GOP.

The veteran Alaska Republican, one of seven Republicans who voted to convict Trump in his second impeachment trial amid the aftermath of January 6, 2021, is done with the former president and said she “absolutely” would not vote for him.

“I wish that as Republicans, we had … a nominee that I could get behind,” Murkowski told CNN. “I certainly can’t get behind Donald Trump.”

The party’s shift toward Trump has caused Murkowski to consider her future within the GOP. In the interview, she would not say if she would remain a Republican.

Asked if she would become an independent, Murkowski said: “Oh, I think I’m very independent minded.” And she added: “I just regret that our party is seemingly becoming a party of Donald Trump.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

A reference to the phrase, "don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining," ie, I can see what is happening in front of me. And they'd implement this shit on a federal level if they could; there were 40 such provisions they tried to get into the recent budget bills. The Twitter caucus has decided that I am an abomination, that my existence as myself makes me a pedophile, and that pedophiles deserve to be killed. The rest of the party is generally apathetic towards this, and will let them run the show on such matters if they are in an unassailable position. I thought John McCain was someone who I could have voted for in 2008, but he was the last Republican who was even remotely there; even the Republicans who managed the absolute minimum bar of recognizing a coup attempt when it tried to hang them, went along with the program the vast, vast majority of the time, right up until the doors were being hammered on by an angry mob.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I actually mentioned Bush/McCain because they were no where near as bad as now. Voting R wasn't as scary then.

Can do it now, now it's a coup, like you said.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

So yeah, given this, in what sense is it realistic or reasonable to not vote for the person with the better chance of beating them, IE, the democrat. I don't love that I have to bet my life, and the lives of lots of others, on a keynesian beauty contest, but I'm not going to be dumb and throw the contest just because I don't like it. Why would you want to persuade people to do that?