208
PANIC: Florida takes huge economic hit as conventions reject anti-woke agenda
(washingtonpress.com)
this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2023
208 points (91.6% liked)
politics
19080 readers
3569 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.
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Has he ever addressed these publications publicly? There’s been articles constantly written calling him out and how Florida is gonna hurt. But never see any follow up from him.
Unfortunately there's no real mechanism to hold a politician's feet to the fire except elections. He knows there's no advantage in addressing any reality that reveals his ineptitude so he just wont.
I agree elections are important and the established mechanisms for influencing politics.
But ignoring the option for non-peaceful protest or targeted legal action/harassment (cough cough operation snow white and scientology getting tax exempt status ) at specific actors are how you control your politicians, especially when dealing with minority rule.
They'd love us to believe that a good 10 hour peaceful protest and some election 18 months away is the only way to directly influence democracy.
Real change happens when the wealthy are actually afraid of the consequences to their actions. Elections are simply a peaceful option to accomplish the same goal.
The question was why Ron wouldn't publicly address the reality of his policy decisions. None of what you mentioned will force him to do that. Sorry you misunderstood that to be dismissive of political engagement.
I didn't really take it as dismissive of political engagement, but I figured the statement "aside from elections there's no way to hold a politicians feet to the fire" was fairly incomplete and ignoring the options available.
I don't think an election, win or lose, would hold Ron's feet to the fire enough to get a confession/publically address the reality of his policy decisions. My statement wasn't a proposed strategy to acquire Ron's confession, but a reminder of another mechanism available to every one of us that can be used to assert the dominance of the people over our elected officials, and can be implemented at any time, not just elections.
So I don't really see how my inclusion of using "advanced negotiation techniques" against specific individuals has any less potential for success than an election (both in the case of Ron, and generally speaking).
I personally believe that now more than ever people need to be aware that the option of coming together with a common goal and implementing collective, non voting/election action is both available and an effective option - especially for younger people who rarely vote.