this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2024
253 points (94.7% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2113 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Why are people continuing to say this? The VP has no say over POTUS. They are the tie-breaking vote in the Senate, and count the electoral ballots in an election. That’s it.

[–] seathru@lemmy.sdf.org 15 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They're second in line. It's a liability.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world -4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

It was a liability when the President was 81. I’m not so sure we should be focusing on vetting the VP for POTUS otherwise.

[–] seathru@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

IMO we should always be vetting the VP for POTUS. Seems silly not to. Old age isn't the only risk.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

As a backup, sure, but not a likely candidate. They are typically appointed to balance out the ticket. The more left Harris brings her platform, the more likely her nomination will be to her right.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 5 points 3 months ago

If you think the VP's positions on things should be irrelevant to the left because Harris isn't going to die, why would their positions be any comfort to the right as a balance to the ticket? Either they're irrelevant and no one should care, or they aren't and anyone caring is doing so for good reason.

And this is all indulging in the fantasy that vice presidents aren't likely future presidential candidates.

If the next president is a black woman, her life will constantly be in danger from the Trump cultists or other far right extremists. Or she could have an aneurysm randomly one day. People die all the time from a wide variety of causes that aren't old age.

The choice of VP is always important.