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 see this more as a loss of support for Trump, just like the many Republican endorsements for Harris. It doesn't change Stein's chances either way, and who supports someone is more a sign of how that person leans, not the candidate.
What will be interesting (but again, inconsequential) is how Stein will treat this. Ignore? Simple thanks? A rally to try and pull more of those who would follow him? (I think some will see where I'm going there)
They rejected it. From the article:
Nothing can hurt or help Stein's chances. She’s not a real choice. I don’t even think she's on enough states' ballots to get the required number of electoral votes.
She can't win, but she's on enough ballots to affect the outcome. I assume she knows this and either directly wants Trump to win or is so twisted around with hatred for the Democratic party she doesn't care that hurting them hurts the entire country.
Florida 2000 Presidential Election results:
Bush: 2,912,790 (48.847%)
Gore: 2,912,253 (48.838%)
Nader: 97,488 (1.64%)
If just 538 Nader voters had gone to Gore, representing 0.0091% of the total vote, Al Gore would have been president.
Tiny fucking margins can change the world. Ask a bunch of dead Iraqi people if they feel like there would have been no meaningful difference between Bush and Gore.
To be fair, the US Supreme Court decided the 2000 election. Gore's lead would have needed to be higher than the threshold to automatically trigger a recount for that outcome to have changed.
Given that more Iraqis were killed by the Clinton era sanctions, crippling food and medicine access for Iraq, as well as the general hawkishness of the Dems, as evident again with Israel today, it wouldn't have made a difference.
When it comes to invading and murdering brown people, both parties are pretty similar. Heck Hillary Clinton always got a hard on for escalating to war with Iran.
Right? Imagine Trump not being racist enough for David Duke. I bet he'd be really mad if he weren't straight vibin
Which is 0% since she literally cannot win enough electoral votes.
Agreed!