this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2023
677 points (95.6% liked)

politics

19089 readers
4102 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
 

Young voters overwhelmingly say they would support President Biden over former President Trump in a hypothetical head-to-head match-up if the 2024 presidential election were held today, according to a poll released Wednesday.

In the Economist/YouGov poll — conducted via web-based interviews Dec. 16-18 — more than half (53 percent) of registered voters under 30 said they would support Biden, and less than a quarter (24 percent) said they would support Trump.

Another 10 percent said they would support another candidate, 4 percent said they were not sure, and 9 percent said they wouldn’t vote.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jeffw@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

9% said they wouldn’t vote, but how many actually won’t bother going to the polls?

It’s true that abortion drove out young voters, but I’m interested to see how long that bump goes on for

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 8 points 10 months ago

I believe we'll just get them in the mail here. Should be standard everywhere tbh

[–] Lasherz12@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Won't bother implies that it's an easy thing to do, but this isn't true of many underprivileged people. Next election will only be worse as restricting people's waterbottle access and eliminating polling stations had just begun during the midterms and hadn't been tested on the biggest scale elections yet.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It’s true that abortion drove out young voters, but I’m interested to see how long that bump goes on for

I'd guess until it becomes clear that Democrats don't intend to fix the problem.

[–] jeffw@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Except they have been, on a state by state basis, which is really the only legal way besides amending the US Constitution, which won’t happen on this issue.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

So abortion bans are going to remain a Red State Problem forever. Got it.

[–] jeffw@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Can’t tell if that’s sarcasm or not? But pretty much

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Cool. I'll just file "10 year olds being forced to bear their rapists' offspring" with all the other Red State Problems that the national party has no plan or desire to fix, ever.

[–] jeffw@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I’d love to hear your ideas to fix it when it’s unconstitutional to do so. Short of amending the constitution, what are the options?

For the record, no party has proposed a viable solution, regardless of how mainstream that party is

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I’d love to hear your ideas to fix it when it’s unconstitutional to do so.

Well, once we have a majority of any size, we kill the filibuster. We use our majority to supersede the judiciary act of 1869 and increase the size of the Supreme Court. We then put additional justices on the supreme court and repeal Dobbs, thereby reinstating Roe.

Then we codify Roe so Republicans will have a harder time getting rid of it. Then we have a popular accomplishment to run on, a majority not hamstrung by the Jim Crow Filibuster, and a Supreme Court that isn't ruling in bad faith against the American people.

Or we continue to timidly do nothing, or worse, blame the victims because they live in red states and therefore need to suffer for committing the sin of being outnumbered.

[–] jeffw@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Ah, court packing by one side. What could go wrong when the other side regains control?

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Ah, court packing by Republicans. Let's sit back and do nothing when it happens.

In any event, I answered your question. You wanted to know how to get Roe back without a constitutional amendment. It's a more feasible idea than giving up forever on republicans' victims in red states because fixing things is work.

[–] jeffw@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Sorry, ig I was hoping for a realistic idea. We could also murder every GOP member of congress. Plenty of implausible ideas out there

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

You'll dismiss all ideas but "give up" as unrealistic.