this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2024
748 points (99.5% liked)

politics

19156 readers
2610 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Donald Trump has exempted himself from key ethics guidelines required under the Presidential Transition Act, which he signed into law in 2020.

By rejecting federal funding for his transition team, Trump avoids donor limits and disclosure requirements, raising concerns about conflicts of interest and transparency.

Critics, including Senator Elizabeth Warren and government watchdogs, warn that Trump’s refusal to submit an ethics plan undermines accountability and could open the door to corruption.

This move marks a break from precedent and has sparked alarm over potential personal enrichment during his presidency.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 19 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

Warren is a good example of someone who does care and I can only recommend her books on the matter. She came from the same place as everyone else and managed to get where she has been for a good while now.

If she'd been president 2016 or any time after that things would've looked a lot different, probably globally, I can almost guarantee as much.

Edit: and by different I mean a lot fucking better, to be clear.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

You mean Bernie, not Warren. Plus Bernie was winning primaries and insanely more popular than Warren.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

If he's so popular why wasn't he elected after every primary

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Because you don't live in a democracy. And you don't get elected after every primary, primaries are held before election to see who is popular. Sanders approval rating is through the roof and has been consistently over the years, easily the most popular senator across the board.

Your answer is the DNC, ain't that complicated. Sanders won the votes of the people, but the liberals and dems pushed Hillary anyway in 2016, and lost.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 hours ago

Yeah, but she's not progressive enough for the leftists (plus they hate her for some perceived slight against Bernie), and too left for the moderates.