The appearance at a health center will be the latest leg in a nationwide tour by Ms. Harris, who has emerged as the most outspoken defender of abortion rights in the administration. While White House officials say they have largely reached the limits of their power to protect abortion rights, the issue has emerged as a linchpin of their re-election strategy.
deleted by creator
It is not. There is a history of the Democrats including people who are anti-abortion within their tent.
deleted by creator
Broken Senate rules basically require 60% to bring something that isn’t budget-related to a vote.
deleted by creator
Because not voting is worse
deleted by creator
Voting 3rd party is better than not voting for sure
Not practically, especially when plurality takes all and there’s no ranked choice voting system. Say you had a candidate who was 95% perfect for you, another who was at 80%, and another who agreed with 10% of your beliefs. Now let’s say that only the latter two had a realistic shot. When you throw your vote away on someone who never had a chance, rather than the guy who came close and could’ve won, you may as well have voted for the guy you agreed with least.
Take a look at Hawaii’s special election in 2010. This district should have been a shoo-in for a Democrat running against a Republican. But when two Democrats run against a Republican? Their vote splits and the guy with 40% of the vote wins - even though one of the other two better lined up with 60% of the voters
Thanks for playing, though.
deleted by creator
Because unless most of the populous is going for the same alternative you are, voting for some other party mostly benefits the major party farthest from your views. It’s a consequence of FPTP, which always collapses into a two party system.