politics
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.
- 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.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
Looking at it objectively, he actually shouldn't be participating in the debates anyway. He has an insurmountable lead that's growing by the day, and his next challenger is struggling to hold on to double digits. He gains absolutely nothing by participating in the debates, and puts himself at risk by participating in a debate where literally every other candidate would be dogpiling on him hoping to trip him up.
Now granted, he wouldn't sign that loyalty pledge and may not even participate in the debates for his own self-serving reasons, but those reasons and legitimate political strategy just happen to align right now. Even if he didn't have his own self-serving reasons, most political advisors would be advising him to do the same thing anyway.
Furthermore- how can you go from debating and vilifying these people then pledging to vote for them?
Eh, that's been a part of the election cycle for as long as I can remember. Virtually every failed candidate ends up falling in line behind whoever the nominee is. The whole act politicians pull off during the primaries is just that -- an act. It's like professional wrestling -- they only hate each other when the story calls for it.