290
If Texans could grow a pair and actually start voting. Team red is no longer in the majority, I'm sure of it. The only thing holding the state back is voter apathy.
The only thing holding the state back is voter apathy.
Don't forget the rampant voter suppression.
Republicans reduced the number of voting locations in cities ridiculously over the past decade.
Exactly
That and they purposely make it difficult to vote down here to dissuade people even more from voting. I do my part every time to try to get these pieces of garbage out, and somehow it just stays the same. It's so frustrating.
I’m a leftist in a red area. I waited 5 minutes to vote. There were dozens of voting booths, just as many volunteer workers, and it’s a relatively unpopulated area. The only reason I even had to wait was because two or three people ahead of me there was an argument about needing ID. There were also three or four voting locations within a 15 minute drive.
My buddy lives downtown. The entire city only had a few voting locations. It was a two hour wait, for like six voting booths. It was also outside of downtown proper, and was a 30 minute walk away from the nearest rail line.
They know that people won’t want to wait longer than their lunch break. They know that people in the city don’t have cars, and will rely on the train to get where they’re going. Yeah, voter suppression is in full swing.
It's really not that difficult. You've usually got at least a week of early voting available.
It's very different depending on where you live. It's easy for me to vote too, but that doesn't make ye problems elsewhere imaginary.
Don't forget all the fifth-columnists who keep on trying to convince young people that voting can't change anything. They're desperate to push that ideal, and why not? It's worked for decades.
bOTh siDeS
How people can see laws like this and then scoff at hearing "the cruelty is the point" is beyond me.
Because they have not experienced the cruelty of what they are supporting. . . yet. The moment they do, they'll cry and whine that it's affecting them.
See Florida stopping permanent alimony and the blow back from Republicans that are shocked it's affecting them.
I just left two massive comments over on that thread explaining why the Florida law is problematic despite parts of it sounding common sensical.
I've been online way too much over the past couple days, and I haven't even come across any posts about that. Was that here on the fediverse? If so, apparently I need to find some more communities.
It's on !politics
Thanks.
Quickly adding that !politics is a different place than /m/politics, which is on kbin.social. /m/politics is not very active, and I recently created a post to generate interest in finding moderators because there are 2 major alt-right assholes over there who are posting frequently and are like 30% of all the threads created there.
The funny thing is that alt-right assholes is virulently anti-Trump and pro-DeSantis. It's hilarious seeing them tie themselves up in knots trying to justify why Trump's flavour of alt-right bullshit is bad but DeSantis' nearly identical flavour is good.
I don't know if you saw my comments on one of their posts yesterday, but I refuse to be drawn into a conversation with him. I'm glad there are others in the community already trying to combat the bigotry, but I'm sad their wasting their time on it at all. He is obviously not trying to persuade anyone there, so debating him is not possible.
Sorry, I actually stopped following the kbin.social politics magazine a few days ago since I noticed the one here got more traffic. I just remember that guy posting a bunch of DeSantis spam before I left and assumed that he was still at it.
Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using an URL instead of its name, which doesn't work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: !politics@lemmy.world
I could probably manage to be a temporary moderator with how much I'm online lately. I certainly like to report alt right assholes, so blocking them or removing their content isn't far off.
Don't know that I can say I can do it long-term, however. Especially if it becomes very big.
Edit: I myself am on kbin.social, but I subscribe to duplicate magazines/communities on other instances.
I'm realizing that I myself am probably going to end up being a moderator ... Ugh
I used to mod on reddit back in like 2012 and I knew how much time it took and I got way too consumed with it, but I think the priority isn't that moderators are vigilant 24 hours a day, but that users who harm the community are actively removed within a reasonable amount of time. Also the sub I used to mod went from like 6k to 10k users while I was there. There are maybe 25 people max on !politics 🤣🤣
Go leave a comment on the thread and I'll sort of wrap it up tonight with a proposal for 3 of us to approach Ernest about adding us as mods.
Yeah, I've been a moderator on small subs. I am not able to commit to something very large, but I'm happy to help out and am online frequently.
Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using an URL instead of its name, which doesn't work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: !politics@lemmy.world
GOP, the party of death and destruction . Trying to take us back to a 3rd world country
From the title alone you can tell this article is going to be sensationalist because the law doesn't "ban" water breaks. That's not even a mistake it is an intentional lie to make it sound worse.
Maybe you'd like to explain then.
"Once HB 2127 goes into effect in September, local ordinances mandating water breaks for workers outdoors in cities across the state, which the Observer writes contributed to a "significant decrease in annual heat-related illnesses and heat deaths," will be overturned and localities will be barred from passing new ones."
I mean, teeechnically he's still right. It doesn't ban water breaks, it bans mandating water breaks. Companies are still free to give people breaks, but not because they're legally required to. All that being said... for all intents and purposes, it's a water break ban.
I think they are meaning that it removes the requirement to give water breaks, doesn't ban them, but leaves if they are actually allowed to the employer (of which could now penalize the employee if they wanted)
and we all know in capitalism employers always act in the best interest of their employees and never abuse them or anything.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2023
290 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19107 readers
2825 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS