48
Polls include declared candidates for each party. Polls are open 1 August - 7 August 2023
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
48 points (81.6% liked)
politics
19159 readers
4523 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
I'm interested in who you think is the progressive candidate?
Progressives are all riding with Biden
I'm going to assume you're acting in good faith, but I hope you realize how ridiculous that argument is. The only reason this is so is because the DNC is systematically shutting down the primary process and so elected politicians would be harming their negotiations by supporting challengers.
They for sure align more with Marianne WIlliamson whose policy page is the most detailed and progressive I've ever seen in my lifetime. Meanwhile, Biden is running on "finishing the job" and saying the economy is fine.
Marianne WIlliamson loses a few people when she breaks out the crystals and starts talking about people's auras.
more importantly: the time she compared the Avatar film to the Israel-Palestine conflict, in a room with peacemakers from both sides, talking to them about "the great mother in the film not taking sides" and then proudly telling it to Cameron with cringe-meter-breaking confidence and smug head tilts sprinkled twice with "and do you know what they said" (meanwhile Cameron is just literally speechless at what's going on). Then she proudly acts out the reaction she got from the peacemakers which was... "slow nodding" (I'm not exaggerating) It's like a Tina Fey sketch.
She is beyond being "too California" (as some outlets try to downplay it as). It's just so randomly tone-deaf, not knowing how to contribute in a very serious setting, verbally shitposting out of awkwardness(?), then incorrectly evaluating people's politeness as a profound moment of unanimity that she fostered. So she proceeds to boast about it to Cameron.
Her campaign promises and positions does seem picture-perfect and social-progressive, but these instances does make one question what goes on between her synapses. It's not hard to copy paste what the youth and the progressives (like me) want into a list to score tiktok points. No wonder why brilliant intellectuals with legit academic backgrounds like AOC and Warren and Sanders back Biden instead of her; an esoteric dropout self-help author with loose-cannon potential in interviews. There is no need for dems to unfairly discredit or disadvantage her. She is one goop away from paltrowing.
Her self-help background and esotericism in pre-covid times, I could've squeezed myself into tolerating for the sake of her policies, but what is beyond infuriating and discerning about this particular fuckup is: People in that room that she was invited to in Israel have given their life trying their best to collectively come up with a peace deal to end an extremely long, historical and ongoing conflict that costs lives and communities. And her reaction is "you know in Avatar..." Like, is she high? Clinically daft? Mocking? What the actual fuck.
Can you find for me a single instance between either of her campaigns or in any of her books where she's talked about crystals or auras?
I find it appalling that a moderator would say such a thing.
I'l even steel man your argument for a second. What's worse: talking about auras or having the ability to reduce the price of all drugs and choosing not to do so, having the ability to fix so many broken families by descheduling marijuana but choosing not to do so, or having the biggest microphone in the world to say how unconscionable it is that we do not have a universal healthcare system and choosing not to do so?
It's been four years and her fans still are upset about how she did on the debate stage. It's comedy gold!
There's checking the boxes on policy positions, and then there's actually getting them implemented - that's the hard part. Marianne Williamson hasn't yet succeeded in even getting elected to any public office - not POTUS, not to Congress, not even to a school board.
Her campaign is just a vanity campaign that helps her sell books.
And RFK Jr's campaign is a right wing ratfuck.
While we agree Biden has issues, seeing only RKJR and someone who without looking her up again just triggered "crazy!" In my head, I simply wondered why there wasn't any progressive candidates listed at all. Marianne has some rep issues to work on. This is from someone who has been out of touch for a bit with politics as in people running, bu5 definitely with leftwing viewpoints. I wouldn't make a final decision this early, I'd research more before actually voting. But faced with a sudden poll, I don't like a single person I recognize, and I don't recognize far more.
Only one candidate has committed to:
It's all laid out in a policy page that's more detailed than even Bernie's ever was.
Meanwhile Biden's website just says 'lets finish the job'??
She's also is a crazy person who thinks crystals heal you and essential oils are medicine so I think I'll pass on that type of candidate
These are all nice ideals to work towards, but any single one of them would take the full 4 year term to flesh out in any capacity. Its nice to have a list of things you want, its an entirely different beast getting enough bipartisan support to make them reality. I do not see most of these things ever having a real chance of happening except maybe the legalize marijuana one.
Sorry bruh, I can’t vote for anyone who doesn’t promise sunshine & chipmunks.