this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2025
682 points (98.2% liked)

politics

30937 readers
2750 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Obama's comments appear in a new video supporting Gavin Newsom's Proposition 50 which would allow the California legislature to draw new congressional boundaries ahead of the midterms

Barack Obama has entered the political fray ahead of November's special election in California, accusing Republicans of attempting to "rig the next election" in a new ad backing Governor Gavin Newsom's Proposition 50, a ballot measure that could reshape the state's congressional map.

"Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress to rig the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years," Obama says in the 30-second ad, urging voters to approve the proposal. "You can stop Republicans in their tracks."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

yall need more laws that are based on dynamic countering of negative forces

ie minimum wage should adjust yearly with inflation…

in this case, states that are against gerrymandering should form a pact to nullify its effects: if another state gerrymanders, between them they must gerrymander opposite to at least the same magnitude. if enough states get on board, gerrymandering is done

it’s possible to measure gerrymandering, and states know that it’s in their best interest to stop another state from doing it. the only thing that’s needed is inter-state cooperation

[–] themaninblack@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

These are a couple of great points:

  1. Minimum wage should be tied to inflation

Economist Robert Schiller has proposed a similar idea where we set up a reactive economic policy to execute automatically when some measures of inequality (e.g. the Gini coefficient) rise above a predefined level.

  1. An inter-state pact to manage the effect of gerrymandering

Great idea. Reminds me of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact)

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Economist Robert Schiller has proposed a similar idea where we set up a reactive economic policy to execute automatically when some measures of inequality (e.g. the Gini coefficient) rise above a predefined level.

we do it in australia and it works great… tied to CPI

Reminds me of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

exactly where i got the idea!

[–] themaninblack@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Am also Aussie! I know that the Fair Work Commission and a bunch of unions negotiating award rates consider CPI but is that just one factor they consider or the whole enchilada?