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
America has repeatedly proven it will not vote for a woman, no matter how qualified she is
The only women they had to choose from were members of the establishment.
Let's get a progressive out there and that way we have more data and can be more scientific about our analysis.
We've proven we don't like centrist women with status quo platforms pretty convincingly. Anything more is speculative imo.
And yet it's elected centrist man after centrist man. Funny, that.
Yes, they'd vote for a male neoliberal instead of a female neoliberal.
That doesn't mean they'd vote for a male conservative over a female progressive.
The last time there was another option on the table he became the first black president in our nation's history. Perhaps there's a lesson to be learned there.
I think it's a stretch to say Obama wasn't centrist, but really it's irrelevant. US voters were fine with voting in centrist men in if they were appealing enough, but once a centrist woman is put up, they'll let a self-confessed wannabe dictator into office with hardly a fight.
Obama certainly acted like a centrist but that's not how he campaigned which means that's not what won him the election.
Again, irrelevant. Also, he won twice, so his initial campaign wasn't the end all be all, either.
It's only irrelevant if you're intentionally ignoring facts which disagree with your conclusion
Nope. It doesn't disagree with anything, it's just irrelevant. Two admittedly centrist women missed the vote to the most vile candidate possible, while countless centrist men won to slightly farther right opponents. That math is crystal clear, and Obama's first election has no bearing on that.
I guarantee you a far left woman like AOC is not going to get elected. Too many independents think she's too far left. The right can win by being extreme right. The left can't win by being extreme left. Not in this shithole.
It'd be good if we could define things like "far left". AOC may be progressive, but not sure she's really far left anything.
She's about where the Democrats used to be and supposedly stood for at one time. Probably pre-Clinton for sure. The Republicans have been dragging the window to the right for years and years and all the money in politics sure ain't helping.
Nothing about affordable health care and not trying to actively poison the planet as much as possible is extreme left
That's what they said about far left black men until Obama came along running as a progressive and won handily. For some reason we didn't learn any lessons from that and went right back to boring centrist candidates afterwards.
The women who were presented to America had many more problems than their gender. I'm not discounting the reality that a woman has to be exceptional to be considered adequate by the electorate, but "America will not vote for a woman" is true until it's not.
America voted for Clinton
Yeah irc she won the popular vote. Unfortunately it's the electoral collage vote that wins you elections.
So the issue is not Clinton being a woman but the issue is the political system that americans never tried to change
Nah, I just think you personally are sexist and are looking to voters to validate your beliefs. Americans will vote for a women candidate. They just won't vote for an uninspiring third way Democrat, whether they have a vag or not.
Kamala?
Ok, yes, true, but Kamala never was chosen via the primary process, she was just forced on us as the default choice.