this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2024
212 points (98.2% liked)

politics

19148 readers
2007 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Some of this Progress 2028 stuff sounds based as fuck though. If only she was running on that.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 month ago (3 children)

For real. The fact that all of these are just more Republican lies is extremely disappointing:

“She’s committed to banning fracking, phasing out internal combustion engines, and rolling out the most progressive Green New Deal yet,” another section of the Progress 2028 plan reads.

“will support a nationwide gun buy-back program that will take dangerous weapons off our streets"

“Let’s remove barriers for undocumented immigrants who are undocumented!” one ad states, adding, “Access to affordable housing, driver licenses, and fair wages creates a stronger America for everyone.”

Republicans are so detached from the American people that they think these ideas would scare us. It's no surprise they suck at parody, but by putting these words into Harris's mouth they run the ironic risk of pushing undecided Independents or seemingly-ignored Progressives to vote for her.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago

The goal isn't to scare progressives or even the democrat base. This is to split voters who are center right to vote against the progressive version of Project 2025.

They literally saw how bad Project 2025 hurt them and instead of coming out against it, said "We should put a fake libder version of it together! That'll show em!"

The sad thing is that it might work.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

This all sounds fine, wtf.

And I love guns. Buybacks do nothing and dont take away my rights, so go nuts!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

I could see this working if targeted towards never Trump Republicans, but they're risking accidentally motivating people to actually vote for her based on something she was never planning on doing.