509
A former Miss America is running for Congress as a pro-choice – and anti-Trump – Republican in North Dakota
(www.independent.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 27 May 2024
509 points (100.0% liked)
politics
22705 readers
3635 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Good for her. She's facing a steep uphill battle because she's not the GOP's preferred candidate. But the party needs more smart, moderate, clear-thinking representatives like her. Hopefully with this campaign she will be an example for others.
Oh they'll make an example of her. I'm sure the GOP want all the newcomers to know just what happens if you don't toe the line.
Im wondering why she doesn’t run as a Democrat but trying to pull the nuthouse closer to centre is a good thing too.
I’d actually argue this is better than just running as a Dem. As a Dem its just noise. But as Rep she stands to get some exposure and getting the base there to actually have a conversation about these important issues.
The political reality in ND is that having the (D) is the end of the road for you. Since neither party actually represents a specific policy platform, I guess it's 6 of 1 in an environment like that.
After all, what are modern Republicans even about? Obviously they want to deny global warming, police uteruses, kill queer people, theocratize the government... but what policies do they actually care about that aren't equally present in the Democratic caucus?
what are modern Republicans even about?
Cruelty. You can run circles around pretty much any issue pointing out examples of their hypocrisy and inconsistency, but they're pretty reliable with harming their community.
Once you acknowledge that the cruelty is the point, their bullshit starts to make a lot more sense.
They want to deny police uteruses? 🤔
Not even metaphorically. They want to deny all uteruses. Police or otherwise lol.
To run as a Democrat in ND is to automatically lose. The portion of the electorate that will refuse to look beyond the team sports identity is so huge, if you actually want to participate, you have to technically be a member of the correct "team".
I am amazed at how broadly your comment could be applied to nearly all political scenarios. There are three independents or non-blue/red in all of both houses of congress. And one of them is Simena who got elected as a Dem I believe.
Who cares she still a republican and therefore sucks.
Don’t you want people who would change the Republican Party so they suck less? Or are you an accelerationist?
I've still yet to see an example of this hypothetical person you're alluding to, who is genuinely working towards this change in the gop? It is really only oppositionist and temporary.
Liz cheney, for example, seemed to be something approaching this during impeachment, but she was just fighting for her political life and saw her only angle. And of course, in the same breath she'll say that "liberals are aborting babies after they are born".
I want two, pro-choice parties. I want two anti-trump parties. I want two pro-gun parties.
When the shit that the parties differ on is shit I don't care about, mission accomplished.
There should be no pro gun parties.
Agreed.
There should also be no violent crime. No assault, rape, murder. No beatings, stabbings. No kidnappings, armed robberies, burglaries, arsons. No suppressiin of dissidents. No invasions or genocides.
And when we finally achieve all of those, I fully agree: there should be no guns.
Until that day, every political party should be pro-gun.
Lol no. You won't be getting a reduction in crime without a reduction in firearms.
How does that work?
I mean, the overwhelming majority of violent crimes are committed without the perpetrator being armed with a gun.
Are you under the impression that the mere existence of guns leads people who don't have them to commit violent crimes? What is the mechanism by which guns drive violent criminals without guns to violently crime?
There are more mass shootings in the US every week than there were in the whole of Europe in the last decade.
Goalposts: moved.
So mass shootings are not a crime. I see...
The fact that Ukraine is in Europe tells me that is untrue. Or did you forget that I included suppression of political dissidents, invasions, and genocide among my reasons for an armed populace?
Wut?
This is the feel good news I needed in my day.
The qualifications you need as a politician these days
We are not utopians. We know that an unskilled labourer or a cook cannot immediately get on with the job of state administration. In this we agree with the Cadets, with Breshkovskaya, and with Tsereteli. We differ, however, from these citizens in that we demand an immediate break with the prejudiced view that only the rich, or officials chosen from rich families, are capable of administering the state, of performing the ordinary, everyday work of administration. We demand that training in the work of state administration be conducted by class-conscious workers and soldiers and that this training be begun at once, i.e., that a beginning be made at once in training all the working people, all the poor, for this work.
- alleged mushroom.
FLazy: No public nudes.
She would be the repugs pelosi
I don’t even get the comparison. Are you calling Pelosi hot or something?
No. She was also a pageant participant
All I’m getting when I try to google that is this sort of thing: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/nancy-pelosi-miss-lube-rack-1959/
What are you referring to?
Maybe thats where i saw it. Thanks for clearing it up