News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I love Jasmine Crockett but infuriatingly, a white man that talks frequently about his Christian faith is much more likely to win a senate seat in Texas.
conservatives/or "on the fence" are likely to choose a white man, christian over women any day, if they have to somehow vote for D, they would never do it for the likes harris, and clinton because they are women.
Tbf he's Presbyterian, the same church as Mr Rogers, and by this atheist's view, the only genuinely honest Christian sect as a whole. They focus heavily on Christ's teaching on community, believe in the charitable service of others as the devine will of god, and they don't prostilitize or require tithes. That's not to say bad people can't be apart of any faith, but as he's a minister of that church (like Mr Rogers) I'm inclined to think he's honest about those core beliefs and not just riding the good name of the church like other politicians have.
Ultimately none of that really matters. He's on record more progressive than Crockett, and unlike her, did not take AIPAC money. That should be a deal breaker for any voter I don't care what party, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or religion.
https://www.trackaipac.com/states/texas
Idk I have to respect the Quakers, even if the only Quakers to be president were remarkably awful (Hoover and Nixon)
Presbyterians, ELCA Lutherans, and United Methodists coalition together. Just FWIW. They have different theologies but very similar approaches to what ultimately matters out in the world: ethics
Are you not counting unitarians? Because hands down they're the best denomination. Only ones I see consistently waving rainbow flags and free Palestine banners.
Unitarian is not Christian. There are a lot of disaffected Christians at your local Unitarian church, but they welcome all religions as well as atheists.
what makes you say they're not christian? they believe in god and they follow the teachings of christ. calling them not christian feels very "evangelicals say ethiopian orthodox isn't real christianity" to me.
Most Quakers seem chill, but maybe I’m overlooking some shitty views they may hold?
Yeah, they're pretty good too, but don't really see that many of there churches these days.
Also your username is dumb and unoriginal. You aren't fooling anyone Rick.
Get off my lawn, kid
I also like Crockett, but to be fair I haven't seen much about Talerico I don't like beyond his Christianity. To be fair in that regard he at least talks the talk of a genuine Christian, rather than the hate mongering bigotry you normally see.
Remember that Crockett took a $25k paid trip to Israel by an AIPAC affiliate. Also Talarico's messaging blows hers out of the water with independents and moderate Republicans, and yet still manages to put him closer to AOC in attacking billionaires.
Agreed. If Crockett had more leftist ideals and political substance, she'd be a member of the squad. That is not what she is tho. I hope she stays fighting as a Rep and is supportive of initiatives coming from the left wing of the party.
And also of separation of church and state.
His faith-based takedown of the bill to put up donated ten commandments posters in classrooms was pretty great.
This is one of the things that gives me the most hope for him as a candidate. He is (imo) a great public example of how to a person of faith in politics. I think setting this example will have a large impact on US politics as a whole. I think there are a ton of Christians that would break with Trump in a heartbeat given the choice between a Talarico and a Christian nationalist (as unfortunate as that scenario is).
I've said it before and I'll say it again: progressive Christians are probably our best bet of significant progress. There are plenty of problems with the dogma and institutions of most modern Christian sects, but Jesus himself was obviously extremely progressive. And Christians as a whole (2/3 of Americans) tend to let Christian messaging heavily influence their vote.
A wave of Talaricos could seriously jeopardize the Republican party. This should be highly encouraged.
A white man who in 2026 has the political sense to say “Gaza is a genocide and that’s a simple moral question,” while Crockett took AIPAC money and voted to continue funding Israel.
The good news is that Crockett will remain in Congress where she has been a very effective critic of MAGA. I'm sorry she probably won't be able to move beyond that position, but that's the consequences of being a black woman politician in Texas. She's lucky to be in that office at all.
AOC, OTOH, has a good chance of taking Schmuck Schumer's or BackStabbing Gillibrand's seats, and I wish she'd get to doing it. Those two have to go, especially Schmuckie-Boy.
someone should take hakeem jefferies seat too.
I thought that part of the reason she was running for senate was that her district had been gerrymandered out of existence - if so, she will only be in the house until January.
Def not, her district is barely changing and is heavily Democratic. You can compare the old and new boundaries on the map here
From that exact page:
"Redistricted to the 33rd district but choosing to retire to run for U.S. Senate."
Alexandria has bigger things in store for her i hope. But someone needs to send Schumer to his retirement home in Tel Aviv for sure
This map convinces me of that. Even amongst the people voting in a dem primary, the rural people preferred the white church boy. Crockett is more qualified, but Talarico has a better chance of actually winning.
Fortunately, they were both good candidates.
What you see on this map is the Hispanic population overwhelmingly supporting Talarico over Crockett, and vice versa for the black population. This bodes well for a general election, given Texas is 40% Hispanic.
Because she has 3 whole years in the House..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasmine_Crockett
And Tarico only has checks notes 8 years of experience in House.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Talarico
But it's not just that, he's religious and the grandson a Christian church leader! Not like Crockett who...
Is religious and the daughter of a Christian church leader...
Well, she only takes some money from corporate PACS, and he takes... Well, he takes none, but...
The only thing Crockett has more experience in, is losing elections.
The only one she won, was because crypto bros bought it for her and the incumbent heavily supported her.
There's no logical reason for everyone to have such high options of her, except you all fell for billionaire and Republican propaganda
Can you give me a logical defense of:
Because I legitimately never understood her "rise".
Crockett has 3 yrs in the Texas House and 3 years in the US House.
Talarico's 8 yrs have been solely in the Texas House.
I think most people weight national legislative experience significantly higher than state legislative experience.
Plus Crockett has a demonstrated track record of getting national news coverage opposing Trump.
I'm really not looking to get into a debate though. I'm not a Texan and have only casually followed this race. They seem like remarkably comparable candidates overall. I just wanted to say that from the outsider's perspective, Talarico seems to have a better chance in the generals.
Brother. Do you know how rural all that purple is?? That's the East Texas Piney woods, just as rural as any prairie farmer
East Texas is also significantly more African American, even in the small towns
Looks like San Antonio has churros and Talarico voters.
It's not about race...
Talaricomis more progressive and can convince people to agree with him.
Crockett is more conservative and just yells at people, that's why the NRSC manipulated her into running, why after that came out she refused to acknowledge it, and why she's now claiming the reason she lost is racism and she's suing.
Even if we were skipping a general and either one was guaranteed to be a Texas Senator, Talarico.was the best choice.
It wasn't just "who's most electable" and frankly it's concerning that so many people didn't look deeper than skin color but are so opinionated on this.
You're the reason the NRSC tried this manipulation, because it worked on you.
We can't afford for it to happen again, look into candidates and what they actually have as a platform. Not just who's the most outrageous on social media.
Ah, but you're forgetting that this is america where if a white man wins any competition against a black woman, the only conceivable reason has to be racism.
If people vote based on the merits of the individuals' policy platforms or who they receive their funding from, then it's racism plain and simple. Only the people whose voting choices are entirely based on skin color aren't racist. Anything else is colorblind racism.
In case it isn't clear:
/s, but some people do insist on this unironically
I like her and it's clear her messaging is orchestrated to appeal to those of us who hate maga and the rapist in chief BUT she's an ardent AIPAC shill. Fuck every single AIPAC backed candidate regardless of party. Fuck them all.
This right here.
👏TRACK👏AIPAC👏.COM
Call me a dumb fuck, but where can I find this info prior to voting day?
My problem with Crockett was that she took corporate PAC money. Talerico ran on not taking corporate PAC money.
I don't think Talerico is nearly progressive enough, with the main issue I found being that he supports a public option over universal healthcare, which will ultimately leave insurance corporations in charge. I do hope that, if elected, he could be convinced to pivot further left and that he will continue to not take corporate money, but at this point, I'll believe it when I see it.
I love his gimmick! Being openly Christian and stuff, but not being an intolerant, genocidal brained, warmonger!
He seems to have threaded the needle of studying the bible and not becoming an atheist or a rabid right winger. His belief does appear to be a major factor in trying to help the people who need help. You know, like Jesus said you should.
For real dude knows how to work a Texas crowd
Same, me and my wife were split on this vote, but I'd be fine voting for either one, I just wish they were running for different seats. Hope Crockett sticks around to oust Cruz in 2031, but I imagine she finds another race before then.
And in the long run, as much as this also sucks, the presidency.
So far as I can tell, Crockett was practically an idpol/Woke-v1 psyop by conservatives. I never thought I'd be happy to see a black woman lose in Texas, or cheer for GenericChristianWhiteBoy#12, but here we are...