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
Betteridge's Law of Headlines says the answer is probably "no," but in this case, it's not out of the realm of possibility. However, it's likely much easier to maintain order over 100 people who get elected by statewide popular vote than 435 who have the direct benefit of gerrymandering.
Gerrymandering is, in my opinion, one of the most dangerous long-term problems facing the United States.
For sure. Everyone deserves fair representation in a vote, and gerrymandering is only harmful to that end. TBH, we need Congressional reform and better representation of the population (so specific states don't get heavier voting power) coupled with more popular votes, rather than representative voting.
Capping the size of the House was a mistake.
If only the ones capable of doing that weren't the same people that profit off of the way it is currently...
Not saying you're wrong, I very much agree. I guess I'm just jaded/pessimistic.
It's partly our own fault. We (as a society) got complacent or apathetic, and the capitalists and theofascists took advantage. Now, we have a long road ahead to correct it, but I think if we can elect enough progressive idealists, that's not a forgone conclusion.