13 votes

Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of August 26

Automatically posted
Tags: usa, politics, recurring.weekly

This thread is posted weekly - please try to post all relevant US political content in here, such as news, updates, opinion articles, etc. Extremely significant events may warrant a separate topic, but almost all should be posted in here.

This is an inherently political thread; please try to avoid antagonistic arguments and bickering matches. Comment threads that devolve into unproductive arguments may be removed so that the overall topic is able to continue.

15 comments

  1. [12]
    boxer_dogs_dance
    Link
    states are refusing to let RFK withdraw his name from their ballots

    states are refusing to let RFK withdraw his name from their ballots

    2 votes
    1. [11]
      DefinitelyNotAFae
      Link Parent
      I don't have BI access so here is similar coverage https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/rfk-jr-remain-on-ballot-michigan-wisconsin-rcna168506 Entertainingly (sort of) he's stuck off the...

      I don't have BI access so here is similar coverage
      https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/rfk-jr-remain-on-ballot-michigan-wisconsin-rcna168506

      Entertainingly (sort of) he's stuck off the ballot in NY where he wanted to be removed.

      2 votes
      1. [10]
        updawg
        Link Parent
        More coverage that I was coming to share here: https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4852718-michigan-wisconsin-decline-remove-robert-f-kennedy-jr-ballot/ Seems a bit odd and, frankly,...

        More coverage that I was coming to share here:
        https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4852718-michigan-wisconsin-decline-remove-robert-f-kennedy-jr-ballot/

        “Minor party candidates cannot withdraw, so his name will remain on the ballot in the November election,” Cheri Hardmon, senior press secretary for Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, told Axios in a statement Tuesday.

        Kennedy is slated to appear on the Michigan ballot as the nominee of the Natural Law Party.

        “The Natural Law Party held their convention to select electors for [Kennedy]. They cannot meet at this point to select new electors since it’s past the primary,” Hardmon added in the statement.

        Seems a bit odd and, frankly, undemocratic to limit it to minor party candidates not being able to be removed, but it seems being past primary/nomination season would apply to the big parties too? Either way, I strongly dislike the parties being legally enshrined in the election process.

        Wisconsin similarly decided Tuesday it was too late for a change. The Wisconsin Elections Commission, after first deadlocking on the issue, voted 5-1 to keep Kennedy’s name on the ballot. Officials pointed to the state law that says unless a candidate dies, they must remain on the ballot after filing for office, The Associated Press reported.

        “The statute literally says, ‘Any person who files nomination papers and qualifies to appear on the ballot may not decline nomination. The name of that person shall appear upon the ballot except in case of death of the person,'” Jacobs said, according to the news outlet, which cited an archived recording of the proceedings.

        “You’re giving me this touchy-feely: ‘I feel like this shouldn’t be the law.’ The law in this case is crystal clear,” Jacobs added. “I don’t disagree with you — it’s weird, but I don’t see we have any discretion here.”

        Good to know the law leaves zero leeway for subjectivity but someone still decided to vote the other way. 😒

        6 votes
        1. [9]
          DefinitelyNotAFae
          Link Parent
          Why RFK can't withdraw from some battleground state ballots Seems like it isn't unusual for states to have some different standards for the major vs minor parties. There are probably some...

          Why RFK can't withdraw from some battleground state ballots

          Seems like it isn't unusual for states to have some different standards for the major vs minor parties. There are probably some historical reasons why that was implemented whether it still should be.

          5 votes
          1. [8]
            skybrian
            Link Parent
            My guess: saves on printing costs when it probably wouldn’t change the outcome anyway.

            My guess: saves on printing costs when it probably wouldn’t change the outcome anyway.

            3 votes
            1. [7]
              DefinitelyNotAFae
              Link Parent
              I meant more that some party had tried something that fell into the "shenanigans" category resulting in regulation. But here's some fun case law on why it's legal. State Regulation of Major and...

              I meant more that some party had tried something that fell into the "shenanigans" category resulting in regulation.

              But here's some fun case law on why it's legal.
              State Regulation of Major and minor parties

              4 votes
              1. [6]
                updawg
                Link Parent
                It feels discriminatory to impose restrictions only on third parties.

                It feels discriminatory to impose restrictions only on third parties.

                1 vote
                1. [5]
                  DefinitelyNotAFae
                  Link Parent
                  Yeah, the court ruled you can do it but you can't be ridiculous about it. Not a lawyer

                  Yeah, the court ruled you can do it but you can't be ridiculous about it. Not a lawyer

                  2 votes
                  1. [4]
                    updawg
                    Link Parent
                    The way I read it, you can be pretty ridiculous but you can't do anything else. Like it has strong left and right bounds but no too far forward.

                    The way I read it, you can be pretty ridiculous but you can't do anything else. Like it has strong left and right bounds but no too far forward.

                    1. [3]
                      DefinitelyNotAFae
                      Link Parent
                      I'm not sure I follow, but broadly I got from it that the courts have said you can have extra restrictions but not ones that keep them off the ballot altogether

                      I'm not sure I follow, but broadly I got from it that the courts have said you can have extra restrictions but not ones that keep them off the ballot altogether

                      1. [2]
                        updawg
                        Link Parent
                        It's the next sentence after the one you highlighted:

                        It's the next sentence after the one you highlighted:

                        If a law substantially or severely burdens the rights of political parties and their members, it is nonetheless constitutional if it advances a compelling state interest and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest

                        1. DefinitelyNotAFae
                          Link Parent
                          Yeah I understand that, I didn't understand your phrasing.

                          Yeah I understand that, I didn't understand your phrasing.

  2. boxer_dogs_dance
    Link
    Creative Kamala poster Apologies for the reddit link but this one is new and not yet widespread. I saw it and I want one.

    Creative Kamala poster

    Apologies for the reddit link but this one is new and not yet widespread. I saw it and I want one.

    2 votes
  3. skybrian
    Link
    Here's a Twitter thread by Dan Lamothe, a Washington Post reporter who covered Afghanistan, providing some context about the Arlington Cemetery controversy. It seems there are families of soldiers...

    Here's a Twitter thread by Dan Lamothe, a Washington Post reporter who covered Afghanistan, providing some context about the Arlington Cemetery controversy.

    It seems there are families of soldiers killed during the withdrawal from Afghanistan who understandably blame the Biden administration for how they got killed. The Trump campaign is trying to make an issue of that and blame Harris for it. But he doesn't buy that:

    But as we’ve reported previously: While Harris asked questions during deliberations, few involved thought she had the ability to sway Biden from his thoughts on the subject. He was deeply entrenched, and it was his call.

    Harris was ‘last person in the room’ on Afghan exit, but her influence is unclear

    2 votes
  4. patience_limited
    Link
    GOP network props up liberal third-party candidates in key states, hoping to siphon off Harris votes This has been an increasingly popular right-wing strategy at all levels of U.S. politics. I...

    GOP network props up liberal third-party candidates in key states, hoping to siphon off Harris votes

    This has been an increasingly popular right-wing strategy at all levels of U.S. politics. I recall a particularly egregious case in Florida where a Republican candidate personally funded a "no party" campaign for a candidate with the same name as the Democratic Party candidate. He did manage to criminally violate election laws (even in Florida!).

    2 votes