this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2024
74 points (81.4% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2540 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 41 points 2 months ago (1 children)

We've only had 46 Presidents in the history of the country, chances are history will be defied every election in one way or another.

[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 34 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

And if Trump wins, it would be the first time since 1892 that a non-incumbent former president was elected.

History can’t help but defy itself, on a daily basis.

[–] ianhclark510@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 months ago

Hey, the Whig party could reform and field a candidate

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 31 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Harris's election means there is a woman US President. I think that would "defy" history a little bit more, don't you?

[–] abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Harris would make history in multiple ways - first woman president, first president of Indian subcontinent heritage, second sitting VP to get elected president, etc. All music to my ears.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Then Republicans get to say, daily, it means sexism is dead. 😣

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Historically, Obama was the first minority to lead a major nation. But, the US has become way behind when it comes to gender. Many major nations have had women leaders. As Gerry Ford once said, "if we get a woman President, men better watch out". And he's right, that's 51% of the population.

So, at least as it pertains to the Presidency, Republicans would be right.

[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 30 points 2 months ago

yea, that's the metric that would make it special

Ooh OOH I wanna play too:

Donald Trump’s reelection would defy history. Zero former presidents who overtly tried to stage a coup after losing an election have been elected president over the entire history of the America’s existence.

Fr tho what sort of asinine false equivalence is this

[–] echo@lemmings.world 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Sensationalist headline since it was just 36 years ago that this happened...

[–] shoobeedoobee@lemm.ee 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Or, the first Felon Criminal Traitor Who attempted a coup on the United States of America. Definitely a first. She would be the first female president and also save us from a SCUMBAG.

[–] CitizenKong@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Or, the darkest timeline: Tulsi Gabbard becomes VP after Trump drops Vance and wins, he croaks shortly after and the first female US president ironically oversees the destruction of female rights in the US.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 2 months ago
[–] InternetUser2012 5 points 2 months ago

How many vice presidents ran for election while their president was finishing up his first term?

[–] shartworx@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah, you know, by... uh... happening again.

[–] shartworx@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You mean like...uh...defying historical precedent.

[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

Yeah, exactly! Since history started in 1837, the year after it happened the first time. :)

[–] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -3 points 2 months ago

ABC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for ABC News:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/kamala-harris-election-defy-history-1-sitting-vp-113203569
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support