this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2025
45 points (100.0% liked)

politics

24736 readers
4009 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 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.
  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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. 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.
  4. 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 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

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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 2 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] anon6789@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

For anyone else that doesn't know this guy, here are the significant wiki bits:

Of the major candidates in the 2024 United States presidential election he said (before Joe Biden withdrew): "I think they're both too old. I think they're both incompetent. There's a good chance I won't vote for president." He later said he does intend to vote for one of the two major-party candidates.

Osborn has been registered as nonpartisan since registering to vote in 2004. Although Democrats chose not to run a candidate in the Senate election, Osborn declined their endorsement. The state Democratic Party considered running a write-in candidate, accusing Osborn of misleading them about his intentions, but Osborn said he had always been clear that he would not accept endorsements from any political party. Osborn wanted to form an independent caucus in the Senate rather than caucus with either party. He has called the current system a "two-party doom loop". The Reform Party of the United States endorsed him in September 2024. Senate Democrats did not engage with or help Osborn's campaign.

Osborn's policy positions included raising the national minimum wage; lowering the tax rate for small businesses and overtime work; increasing border security and building the Mexico–United States border wall to stop illegal immigration; reforming the immigration system and exploring ways to legalize some long-term undocumented workers; ensuring resources for law enforcement and first responders; legalizing and taxing marijuana; improving railroad safety; guaranteeing access to abortion within the limits set by Roe v. Wade and opposing a national abortion ban; facilitating union organizing; and protecting gun rights. Osborn supported a "libertarian approach" to hot-button issues and said that government should be kept out of private lives. He supported the right-to-repair of consumer goods such as cars and electronics, raising the cap on Social Security contributions for those with higher incomes and moving the full retirement age for Social Security benefits back to 65.

Osborn supported protecting gun rights and the Second Amendment, while also supporting gun safety education in schools.

Here's his current platform page where you can get more stances and details.

Doesn't seem too bad, all considered. I'd take him over my senators (Fetterman (D) / McCormick (R)) in PA.

I like he specifically calls out fiscal support for small farms/ranches, not the conglomerates. I dislike his strong support of military/police funding and his vagueness about "border security" isn't reassuring. But for a strongly held Republican farming state, this guy is probably the best realistic type of candidate to bring in someone different.

This is good, right?