this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2025
578 points (99.1% liked)

politics

20394 readers
4826 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Let's not live in the real world and run a black woman as candidate, which has never been done before... Why not?
Oh, that's just coincidence.
As is the fact that even without racism, a woman lost to trump last time.
Nothing to do with the fact that racism and sexism exist and are actually very important to some people. /s

Come on. Run a black woman at a time when the consequences of racism and sexism being expressed in the voting booth aren't AS bad. Not when a dictator from day 1 is going to get elected in possibly the last ever election for the US. Then you run your most boring, conservative candidate who as few people have a problem with as possible until whatever passes for normality in the US returns.

What do you think that trump getting elected has done for women's rights, or POC? Yeah, better to be pragmatic because getting a woman on the ballot paper was not worth it and probably set us women back by decades, at a minimum.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

You're making the entirely unfounded assumption that sexism was the cause for those women's loss rather than them individually both being terrible candidates. Despite the Obama example showing you "racism exists, so only run white people" point is just completely bullshit. People literally made the same argument against Obama.

There were blaring warning signs that had absolutely nothing to do with sexism with both candidate. Easy had campaign choices and cultural movements that very easily explain the losses without diving into the dark heart of man, but somehow you just ignore those to focus on banning women and POC from running for pragmatism.

Whatever you believe about your non-racist internal beliefs, your actions are indistinguishable from racism. And I'm not sure you'll ever think there's an election so low stakes that we can select the best candidate if she's a woman, because you don't seem to have learned anything by the event that proved the whole philosophy as suspect.