politics
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
view the rest of the comments
He will? Couldn't those claims just also be bullshit that no one buys into? Or even cares about in the first place? Why do they just accept the Republican attack as valid and important?
Anybody who asks this seriously, point them at the Minnesota state budget. Walz pulled Minnesota out of a deficit and into a serious surplus.
And the weed taxes haven't even started rolling in.
Yes, how oh how will the working class republican voters be able to swallow the cost of their paid family and sick leave and their children's free school meals being paid for by checks notes taxes for the super rich?
Independent, undecided voters are pretty stupid and believe the last thing they hear more often than not. See 2016 election and the final major hit to Hilary in the polls because Comey's last minute FBI report about reopening her investigation that the Republicans spun.
If the Democrat isn't out front and center showing off their accomplishments AND showing how cost effective they were, undecided voters will not research any deeper than the headlines and happily believe what GOP talking heads say if the other side doesn't refute them loudly and with conviction.
Media reporting Republican hits as if they're inherently meaningful is the only reason anyone would even make that connection in the first place.
Not all Democratic programs have any reason to worry about cost. "We'll give you free healthcare"? Sure, ask if it's worth the cost. (It is.) "We'll put menstrual products in school bathrooms"? No, not really a serious question. The framing that every little bit of Democratic government spending needs to be carefully considered isn't an inherent feature of US politics, it's one generated by corporate media giving undue credence to fake Republican concerns about it. Notably demonstrated by how quickly those concerns evaporate when the spending is business subsidies, security theater, or tax breaks for the rich.
They're important because like most elections this one will be decided by "independents" who are extremely gullible.
It's a circular justification. They're important aspects to consider because news stories say they're important aspects to consider. If they didn't, would anyone think "do period products in schools come at too high a cost"? It's not the sort of thing that jumps out to me as a major expense in a state budget.