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
Marcus Flowers ran against her in 2022, and really had two things working against him in Georgia - he's black and a Democrat. He's a veteran, smart, committed to doing the right thing, ran a clean campaign on policy, and worked hard. Meanwhile, she trolled, filmed videos of herself wasting time at his campaign office while he worked, etc, etc, etc. And all of that happened while she was removed from all of her committee assignments which meant that she couldn't even do anything to support her district for 90% of her first term.
They gerrymandered her district as much as they could by reaching down to Cobb County suburbs to pull as much away from Atlanta as they could afford to, and Marcus lost by a lot. I'm not entirely sure we're not stuck with her for a very long time, unless she loses a primary, which I don't see happening with the Republicans in their current state.
So we need to fix the gerrymandering and pump shit ton more money in him our another progressive (I guess a white one) since apparently you're saying Georgia to racist to elect a black man?
I'm not saying it's too racist to elect a black man. What I'm saying is that he was a solid enough candidate across the board that the only 2 major downsides that I can see were, primarily, he was a Democrat (biggest hurdle) and black. Here's an interview with Marcus, and while you can see some of his positions aren't going to entice Republicans, hes pretty much as moderate a Democrat as one can be in Georgia and still have a chance at winning.
He had a solid ground game in the area. I don't live far from that district and his name was everywhere, and for a long time. Lots of ads, lots of campaign material, lots of meet and greets in the area. I probably had name recognition of him at least 8-12 months before the election, if not earlier. So, I don't know how much more money could be spent on a house district in Georgia for it to make sense pulling that much funding away from other candidates elsewhere. The gerrymandering might help, but I don't think that solution is within a decade's timespan. The Rs don't need more republicans around Atlanta, because they're not going to swing Fulton anyway. So, they're better off keeping the outer districts super safe R districts and letting Fulton go to the Dems.
Unfortunately, it would probably be a better investment of campaign cash to support a less crazy Republican in the primaries, if the desire was to get rid of MTG, and I HATE the idea of trying to save the Republican party from itself.
The "as moderate of a democrat as one can be and still have a chance of winning. That's the part that always drives me crazy and wonders what would happen if we ran say a full on AoC/Sanders democrat in some of those areas. IE they are working to appeal to the people that won't vote for them under any circumstance, a Manchin couldn't win because putting a D next to the name is an automatic loss for the majority of voters.
The key there IMO is the only way to win is to actually inspire the people that don't vote to come out. The people that are not even slightly impressed with the republicans. Maybe there aren't any there, or maybe there are tons that just haven't had a candidate to vote for.
Now as far as supporting the less crazy than MTG, honestly I don't see a good reason to. Would you rather a composed polite person vote to gut healthcare, or a total psycho that embarases everyone to vote to gut healthcare. At the end of the day her policies are the same as most moderate republicans, with the exception of getting on the news and saying the quiet parts of the plan on speaker. IMO if the seat is going to vote against anything we want, and for everything we don't want no matter what... then just ignore it and focus on winning seats that will. There's 434 other places to focus our attention on,
That specific district. Georgia as a whole no. That district is gerrymandered to hell and going to be an uphill battle for any Democrat.