973
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 22 Dec 2023
973 points (98.2% liked)
politics
18894 readers
3411 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
Biden could theoretically pressure the HHS secretary to do that, but that would directly be a Trumpian act of a guy who ran on "look how not-Trump I am" and just is not going to happen.
Biden will use the system, as designed, and hope the chips land his way. If they don't, and public backlash is strong, Dems can safely run on it.
We can not like how the political sausage is made, or even like that said sausage is made, and still live in the reality in which one does have to make sausage in politics.
Maybe if the world didn't catch fire right before his election, this could be a thing, but with the past four to six years I just don't see it taking anything but an act of Congress
So you admit he can do it without congress. However, you think it would make him look like Trump and so he shouldn’t do it…
That’s very strange reasoning. What exactly do you think would be the actual consequences? Over two thirds of Americans support legalization. If Biden got marijuana descheduled it would likely be an incredibly popular move.
You're having a conversation about things you want and I'm having a conversation about how reality works.
That’s a lot of condescension for someone who can’t even answer a simple question.
It's a clarification that you and I are having two different conversations.
Consider re-reading this not as an argument, but rather as a teacher explaining to you why things work out a certain way.
I don't view the conversation as quite that way (I was just stoned and enjoying where it was going), but tonally.
This has to be a bit right? The irony of being high while also trying to justify why Biden doesn’t push for legalization is just too funny.
My entire last post is about how this is not a defense of anything. This is an explanation of why things happen the way they do.
Whether or not you want to call it a defense, you are providing justifications for Biden’s lack of action. Going on to suggest that your opinion is just “how reality works” even though you’ve made factually incorrect statements is just too rich.
Cool stay mad.
You're mistaking "uninformed" for "simple".
Exactly how was my question “uninformed”?
Because you apparently have little to no idea how the US government functions despite other people explaining it to you multiple times.
Their first statement was factually incorrect and their follow up explanation was just unfounded conjecture that made no logical sense. When I pointed that out they just refused to engage.