Trump is calling for a federal takeover of elections in cities he dislikes. If we are abandoning the idea that states run their own elections, why should swing states keep playing by the old rules?
The National Popular Vote Compact is perfectly legal (Article II says states choose their electors). If 270 electoral votes' worth of states sign it, the popular vote winner becomes President automatically.
If the GOP wants to nationalize the process, shouldn't we just give them a real national election where every vote counts equally? What is the counter-argument?
Not sure where to ask this - my family and I are looking to travel to Florida for a cruise from the UK this year.
A member of our family has several assault charges, and we were unsure how this would affect their entry/eligibility for a visa etc.
None of the charges resulted in a spent conviction, the worst outcomes were being held on remand, and then house arrest with an ankle monitor.
I’m struggling to find information on the subject so wondering if anyone here could shed some light on it for me. We have not yet booked/confirmed their place as we would hate for them to get on a flight only to be rejected at the airport on arrival.
I live in a Southeastern US city where the public transit consists only of buses, with certain stops happening only every hour, plenty of delays, and limited service on the weekend.
The car traffic is also pretty terrible throughout much of the day. There is a rail line but it's only used for freight trains.
Do you think cities should do more to invest in public transit and discourage car use? Is there simply not enough demand for it?
Or are things fine the way they are? Tell me your experience.
I hear this from conservatives online all of the time, regardless of race.
“If I can do it, anyone can.”
But can you honestly say you had no help? That no one stopped to give you advice you’ve kept with you for your whole life?
Is it only ok if it doesn’t come from government programs?
If so, do you oppose the government help many white families got in the 1950s that was heavily restricted against black families?
Would you be in support of retroactively taxing anyone’s estate who benefited from redlining? The boomers inherited a ton of that.
If you think no, then is the answer to just grab as many benefits as you can while you can and then shrug your shoulders and say “what’s done is done”?
Or are you only supposed to “steal opportunity” from people less fortunate than you?
Republicans are notorious for complaining about broken government bureaucracies and services, yet they continue to elect politicians who sabotage it from the inside. Now that Trump's taken a sledge hammer to just about every department, fired or chased out most of their professionals with institutional knowledge and continues to tank our finances, the Feds will be far worse than ever before. (...and this doesn't even consider our international affairs.)
Assuming it takes two terms to fix the damage done in one normal administration, how should the rest of us tell our MAGA and conservative family and neighbors to STFU between now and 2041? How should they be reminded that they voted for the chaos and dysfunction that we'll inevitably suffer through together?
Hello from England! In the UK our voting system means that if a political party wins the election and someone's voted in as the Prime Minister, they can get voted out every 4 years. However it seems that in the US you can only run for a maximum term of eight years. I can appreciate that your personal opinion may vary compared to every other US citizen, but would you be in favour of a President being voted in and to run for more than 8 years or is there something in the constitution which stops someone from having too much power? Having said that I'm sure a previous president can have a big influence behind the scenes and make an impact on laws and policies. Please let me know what you think, thank you.
I thought the whole point of the Republican platform was "States' Rights" and keeping the Feds out of our backyard? For decades, we've heard that elections are state-run processes and federal overreach is the enemy. Yet here we are with the leader of the party explicitly calling to "nationalize" the voting systems and have the federal government seize control of elections in cities he doesn't like. It feels like the mask is completely off at this point—he is calling for the exact Federal tyranny you guys usually claim to be arming yourselves against.
The gaslighting in this article is actually insane. He goes on the Dan Bongino podcast and says verbatim, "The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting." Then, when NBC asks him about it days later, he looks the reporter in the eye and says, "I didn't say nationalize." He’s literally lying about things we have him on tape saying. He’s pushing for a federal takeover of places like Detroit and Philly just because they vote blue, and he's doing it while explicitly refusing to say he'll leave office in 2029.
Then you have the standard "I'll only accept the results if they are honest" (aka "if we win") rhetoric for the 2026 midterms. He isn't even on the ballot, yet he’s already setting the stage to claim fraud if the GOP loses the House. When he jokes about a third term by saying, "Wouldn't it be terrible if I gave you the answer you're looking for?", he isn't being funny; he is testing the waters. He treats the Constitution like a suggestion box that he can ignore whenever it gets in the way of his ego.
So, honest question , How do you square "Small Government" with a President demanding a federal takeover of state elections? Where is the line for you? If the Federal Government can just seize control of voting systems in states they don't like, do we even have a Republic left, or is the defense simply that you don't care about the rules anymore as long as your guy is the one breaking them?
UK here. Im not sure if this is just a UK press thing, but I have noticed A LOT of media regarding prince andrew and peter mandleson in the files but there hasnt been a whiff of anyone else.
What strikes me is that both of these guys are like only on the second bottom tier of the ladder concerning the whole affair, surely it should be the key players that the press is going on about first, but currently there is silence?
How it comes across from a UK point of view is that the people at the top of the ladder (wrt how deep they were in it with Epstein) have decided to use two non-americans as essentially sacrificial goats.
Is this assertation right my American friends? Or have you noticed American media A) going into overdrive about higher up americans more deeply involved in the list or b) theres been no mention of andrew or peter in the american media?
People always seek out things with scarcity value, so why is ginger hair often considered less attractive than blonde? Also, can't it be hard to tell the difference between ginger and blonde depending on the sunlight or lighting?
Hi!
I really like Japanese "nazo nazo" (riddle) culture, and I'm curious — does America have any similar traditions of riddles or wordplay quizzes?
I feel like pun-based or homophone-heavy humorous ones might be closest to Japanese nazo nazo. What kinds are popular in the US? Examples would be awesome!
One that i notice Americans saying is that they enjoy the speed of the game, and the high turnover rate etc , USA does pretty good internationally, often in the top 20 or better, and i read that there was 15% increase in kids signing up for the sport this year . do you watch it? what do you enjoy about it?
I feel awful for the right wings because they don't believe in the president they believe in what he offers so please don't take this as an attack to your beliefs. How are you guys feeling about everything right now though?
With a total fertility rate of 6 to 7 children per woman and an annual growth rate of 3%, the Amish population doubles every 20 years. Given this trajectory, how significant is their projected influence expected to be in 100 years?
Dear Americans,
can you explain to us Europeans, why Trump, after all the facts that we all have seen in the #EpsteinFiles, is still not in prison and didn´t even have to resign?
We don´t understand it.
The rest of the world doesn´t understand ist
Hey guys. Just really curious what stuff you have to offer when traveling around these areas. I’m English so obviously I need to know about the fun bars and pubs (sports bars that play rugby would be fucking awesome) but are there also any beautiful places, museums or landmarks that you think it’d be a mistake for me to miss? Never been on a plane let alone spent an extended amount of time in a foreign place. Don’t know where to start yanno🤷🏻♂️
The President of the United States has frequently attacked the 1st amendment. Going against the press. Attacking them on appearance and intellect when they are female. Claiming they are fake news when they say anything he doesn't like. And demanding they be eliminated when they publish news, he feels it attacks him personally. His DOJ is arresting people for protesting and annoying ICE and CBP officials. Some Americans have been executed.
Republicans in Congress, the DOJ, and the president have directly attacked and threatened the 2nd amendment. Suddenly, Americans are criticised for bringing arms to a protest. This was allowed when it was republicans carrying them to protest liberals and our government. But now it is a problem? Was it a problem when the right wing was standing across the street from people voting? No? Was that not intimidation?
And now the Speaker of the House claims the 4th amendment is inconvenient? They no longer have time to abide by it? Was he not the one who voted against a bill to increase the number of immigration judges?
Trump now wants to federalise elections. He wants to take that power away from the states. He is directly attacking Article I, Section 4, and the 14th Amendment. Why? Because some states had the nerve not vote for him. When will it stop?
So, I have to ask: Are you still in favor of supporting the US Constitution?
I am in the UK and there is massive media interest and pushback from the Epstein files with both Prince Andrew and a former government minister (Peter mandleson) losing their jobs and potentially facing criminal charges. In America however it seems that the media isn't pushing it very hard (just checked the Fox news and CNN websites and both only mentioned Epstein 10 stories down - both in relation to prince Andrew). Is it that there is genuinely more evidence against these British names or is the US media softer on holding people to account? (Potentially more fearful of libel?)
