163
After seeing him on The Daily Show last night, Pete Buttigieg seems like a good pick. He has the added bonus of not requiring a special election or interim replacement.
He’s also only 42, will be a great experienced young pick to rub in what an inexperienced idiot Vance is.
I disagree. I think Vance has lots of experience with being an idiot.
You talk good
Thanks, Kevin!
Don't forget the double male SOs: First Gentleman and Second Gentleman.
Compared to the Biden v Trump choices and even the Trump-Pence v Clinton-Kaine election …
Harris-Buttigieg feels like the Star Trek ticket.
It really felt like he was there because he will be the pick, didn’t it?
He reeks of corporate shill with his management consultant background. Some people change when they get into the oval office, hope he does but I would rather Kamala picks someone else.
Reuters Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [High] (Click to view Full Report)
Reuters is rated with High Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check.
Bias: Least Biased
Factual Reporting: Very High
Country: United Kingdom
Full Report: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/reuters/
Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
Please consider supporting them by donating.
Footer
Media Bias Fact Check is a fact-checking website that rates the bias and credibility of news sources. They are known for their comprehensive and detailed reports.
Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.
Jesus fuck somebody shut this bot up
Just block it if it bothers you.
Thank you I just did that.
For real tho
this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2024
163 points (97.7% liked)
politics
18821 readers
4990 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.
- 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.
- 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