I just don't believe news outlets. I feel like they're all trying to embellish the truth or push some agenda.

At times my friends tell me something and I asked "Well where did you hear/learn that from?" and when they tell me my answer is almost always- "I don't believe them." or "I don't know about them."

It's gotten to the point that unless I see something with my own two eyes I simply don't think I'm qualified to make a judgement on it. But things happen all across the country and even world so it's not like I can literally 'see' it all. I also feel like every news source is looking for clicks more than they give a damn about reporting anything.

Would this be called a tie? Or would this go up to the house of reps to decide. And if the house decides in this case, why? Even if no candidate reaches over 270 shouldn't one candidate getting the most of the electoral votes (What I mean is, one candidate has the most electoral votes compared to the other 2) be enough to win?

As far as general political strategy or context is concerned, what's the case when a POTUS follows a four-year break for a second term?

So John Doe (R) loses to Jane Smith (D) after John served a term. Then, Jane Smith loses the next election and John Doe is back in the Whitehouse.

1. Has this ever happened before?

2. As to things POTUS does, should, shouldn't, can or or can't do because they are in a second term, which of these applies most to this current shift of power?

I am speaking of the situation Trump is in right now, but am not asking about Trump specifically. I am asking about in general. Like when poly sci teachers talk about different strategies and practices between first and second term presidents. Hence Jane and Jon.

Is the POTUS effectively back to a first term situation, a second term situation, or is this new territory?

Again, asking in general and I would have the same question it happened with Obama. So I'm not asking about the housing crisis or reproductive rights, nor am I ignoring these aspects, I just want to know the whole "an incumbant can't get away with X" or "they always Y during a second term," and how the four year gap affects this.

I do want opinions on if this situation would be different if it was a single party, but that seems even less likely.

I'm Canadian and when I heard it I just shook my head as it was right at the end of the election. Unintentional or otherwise.

I hate that we even have to write this, but if you use reddit's block feature, it screws up that person's ability to interact in any child of any of your comments. And its antithetical to our purpose here - we want to foster discussion and educate people and to just instead block someone defeats that whole purpose.

If we get reports and can prove you've blocked someone rather than replied to them, you will be banned.

And as a note, if you see a comment as [unavailable] that means you're probably blocked by that user. You can check by logging out completely or using another account. Please report to us if you believe you've been blocked and we will investigate.

If by some bizarre coincidence you've blocked them elsewhere and it impacts here, we can discuss. But if you're in the habit of blocking users, you're probably not going to fit in well here.

From my understanding they both seem to have very similar political goals. The both seem to believe appeasement to be an effective strategy, would that be a correct assumption, and if so, what other similarities are there?

Seems like it might be a topic worth knowing about at the current moment.

I have a hard time understanding why so many people hate Christianity/Catholicism and I would like to genuinely know why some people do.

I understand that the religion has caused many atrocities and been mismanaged, but simply studying history will show that it's not the only religion to do this.

I also understand about the thought that it subjugates women but there are other religions that mutilate the genitals of women and others that force women to wear burkas. Many have even been murdered if they are caught not wearing them correctly or if they're caught outside without a man or even if they're caught learning in school. I also know about the topic of abortion but numerous religions are against it in addition to Catholicism. Some religions believe that women are nothing but a baby machine and encourage men to have multiple wives and treat their women like meat.

It is also a fact that not only Christianity frowns upon gay marriage and some religions even murder gay people or force them to transition to the other gender so they wouldn't be considered "gay" anymore.

There's also the glaring issue of molestation and rape cases in the Catholic Church but there is much evidence to suggest that the same rates can be found in nearly every religion and that there is even higher rates when it comes to schools.

Finally the only reason I can think of for people hating this religion is due to religious trauma where people say they were kicked out and disowned by family when they didn't want to be the same religion. Also a lot of cases of religious abuse leads to this, I believe.But there are also countless stories where other religions do the same thing and in some cases, they do even worse than Catholics.

This is not to disrespect any other religions I am just genuinely curious to know why people have such distain for Catholics/Christians. Is it because people don't know that other religions do the same things and sometimes even worse? Is it because it isn't reported as much with other religions? Even with religious abuse it seems like there is a spotlight on Christianity and the stories of abuse from other religions are thrown to the wayside. To be clear, I am not making any excuses for the horrible things Christianity or Catholicism has done not for the horrible people in those religions.

It’s been a primary talking point for the past 2 days now. I’d like to be educated on the matter. I know aboue Roe v. Wade being overturned but that was 2 years ago. Genuinely curious what rights will Trump take from women.

Asking since all other demographics shifted towards Trump or stayed the same.

I'm 25 years old, I've never paid attention to politics, I don't know anything about the economy, I basically live under a rock. I think it's about time I start educating myself, but I have no idea where to start. Honestly I probably should've watched the debates this year but I wasn't interested. I'm not trying to get a biased education.. just wanna start with a general understanding of what things are, and how they work 😅

Something interesting about the election results this year.

In 2020 Biden received over 81 million votes. Harris has only received approximately 68 million votes.

Trump is close to what he received in 2020 (72.5m vs 74m)

Where are those 13 million votes? Did 13 million people just decide not to vote again?

I’ve taken a couple economics classes, but I don’t quite understand exactly how this plan would be put into action after almost 100 years of income taxes being the main source of revenue for the government. Would the tariffs equal the same amount as an income tax on 330 million people? Would tariffs cause huge price increases? Would tariffs save billionaires more money than incomes taxes on their employees?

Thanks for any responses!

I have a friend from South America who has been here (The US) for the past two years on a work visa. She recently had a court hearing where the judge told her she had to be married to her now finance before December 2025 (her next court hearing) if she doesn’t want to be deported. Will Trumps presidency affect this in any way, or should she not worry because she’s not actually here illegally and doing things the right way? Thanks for any feedback.

for context i’m not heavy into politics and this question is literally for curiosity purposes. all over my facebook today i have been seeing SOOO many posts containing phrases similar to “my rights as a women have been stripped away today” & “women are not even human being anymore they are property now that trump is in office”. IM CONFUSED because he isn’t even in office yet so like how are women’s rights stripped away all of a sudden today when he is not in office yet? also i’d like more context on why so many women feel the need to act so scared when he has no power currently. is he planning something i have not seen? if so what is it and is it valid? i just want to learn, plz help. - a woman :) (also i didn’t vote this year ik shame me i suck) ((delete if not allowed))

I noticed that in her 2024 presidential campaign, Kamala Harris talked a lot about broad issues like healthcare, and economic policy. But I didn’t hear much about specific, local infrastructure projects funded by recent federal acts—like the Fort Jenkins and Water Street bridge replacements in Pennsylvania or similar projects in other states.

Given that these kinds of projects have direct impacts on local communities (improving safety, creating jobs, boosting local economies), I would think highlighting them could help connect with voters by showing tangible results from signature policies from the Biden / Harris administration. Why might her campaign (or any national campaign) avoid promoting specific local projects? Is there a strategic reason for focusing on broader issues rather than pointing to real, visible projects on the ground? Or would mentioning these local wins be more effective in connecting with voters?

Curious to hear thoughts on why this approach might be missing from national campaign strategies.

Don't computers tabulate these things simultaneously? And how can we get the presidential results in the night of, but house results take days? How can presidential ballots be 95% reported, but House ballots only 50% reported in those same areas?

I'm looking at Arizona and Nevada.

And the senate and house races. It's not covid anymore. Why in the world are voted still being counted?

Good morning and welcome to Election Day in the US! As mentioned, all other questions will be paused for today and we will focus our attention here. Go vote!

This is not only a place for questions, but also general discussion. This is new for us but please follow the rules and let's enjoy! Go vote!

Polls Closing Times/States to Watch:

7 p.m. ET

• Georgia
• Indiana (Polls close at 6 p.m. ET in the 80 counties in Eastern time zone; find your polling location here)
• Kentucky (Polls close at 6 p.m. ET for the 79 counties in the eastern part of the state)
• South Carolina
• Vermont
• Virginia

7:30 p.m. ET

• North Carolina
• Ohio
• West Virginia

8 p.m. ET

• Alabama
• Connecticut
• Delaware
• District of Columbia
• Florida (Polls in Eastern time zone close at 7 p.m. ET; part of Panhandle are in Central time zone)
• Illinois
• Maine
• Maryland
• Massachusetts
• Mississippi
• Missouri
• New Hampshire (Polling hours vary by municipality and are listed by location here)
• New Jersey
• Oklahoma
• Pennsylvania (edit: Cambria county now closes at 10: p.m. ET - see update 1)
• Rhode Island
• Tennessee

8:30 p.m. ET

• Arkansas

9 p.m. ET

• Arizona
• Colorado
• Iowa
• Kansas (Polling locations close at 8 p.m. ET in all except four counties in the west)
• Louisiana
• Michigan (Polling locations close at 8 p.m. ET in all except four counties)
• Minnesota
• Nebraska
• New Mexico
• New York
• North Dakota (Polls close at 8 p.m. ET in all but eight counties)
• South Dakota (Polls close at 8 p.m. ET in the east)
• Texas (Polls close at 8 p.m. ET for most of the state except three counties in the west)
• Wisconsin
• Wyoming

10 p.m. ET

• Montana
• Nevada (The polling location at City Hall in West Wendover closes at 9 p.m. ET)
• Utah

11 p.m. ET

• California
• Idaho (Polling locations in the south close at 10 p.m. ET)
• Oregon (Polling locations in Malheur County close at 10 p.m. ET)
• Washington

12 a.m. ET

• Hawaii

1 a.m. ET

• Alaska (Polling locations close at 12 a.m. with the exception of Adak)

Go vote!

Update 1: Seems like PA is extending voting hours in one county due to a software glitch. I've updated the list above.

Update 2: Well, the work day is winding down (mostly because I'll just deal with the client stuff tomorrow) so I'll be pouring a nice glass of bourbon and hanging out here. Still have a few hours before the fun starts, so I think I'll watch the OG Transformers movie. You've got the touch, you've got the power! (And childhood trauma, as well!)

Update 3: Most of PA is about to close. Up until now its been nice starts. Let's jump into the red meat!

Last Update: Well, its been fun but we're going to sign off for the night/morning. We'll have another thread for the morning once we recover from this long night. We aren't getting any younger!

Doing ballot research and it explains the estimated financial impact/gains for each amendment. Why would granting abortion rights cause a loss to state revenue? Are they suggesting that aborted babies can't pay taxes later on? It doesn't mention Medicaid, are they planning on paying for abortions and contraceptive with taxes? Or is the state somehow profiting from people not aborting?
I'm still voting yes because I will not lose my wife if worse came to worse, but I'd like to know what the reasoning is.

https://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/petitions/2024BallotMeasures

"State governmental entities estimate no costs or savings, but unknown impact. Local governmental entities estimate costs of at least $51,000 annually in reduced tax revenues. Opponents estimate a potentially significant loss to state revenue."

I feel like I have a good understanding of foreign policy and some major situations globally, but an issue that continues to stump me is the complexity of the electoral college, past and current debates (locally, state, nationally) and American politics in general. How do people like Let's Talk Elections, and the guys from Pod Save America, know so much about these systems and how can I learn? I want to produce content to educate others on this.

Thanks!

Good morning! I hope everyone is having a good weekend. We wanted to give an update since the election is coming up rapidly (go vote!) and how we're going to handle it here at /r/ask_politics.

Questions can be submitted as normal up until the morning of Election Day, November 5. This means the same approval process is used - and as a reminder, reddit removes all posts and gives them to us in a queue to review and approve.

However, on Election Day we will suspend all posts and instead post a Discussion thread/announcement. This will be a place for free discussion, so long as everyone abides by the rules. We'll be making it a megathread of sorts too, with updates as we get things coming in, any breaking news, etc.

If nothing else, I think we can all come together and celebrate that, no matter the outcome, at least all the ads will stop. Now go vote!

Seriously. We don't care who you vote for, just go vote and make your voice heard! And come back on Tuesday and hang out with each other and talk the election returns. Its like the Superbowl for us political junkies.

Hi. Each source I've read about the process if no presidential candidate reaches 270 Electoral College votes makes it clear that the vote goes to the House and the vote is cast by state delegations rather than by each of the 435 House members.

There can be 50 votes cast. Republicans have majority control of 26 state delegations, Democrats have majority control of 22 delegations, while Minnesota and North Carolina are tied.

How does that state delegation vote happen?

1. Does "majority control of 26 state delegations" simply mean a majority of a state's elected House members are Republican?
2. Does each state House member get one vote, and the majority of that vote gets to cast their preferred vote in the House?
3. What happens if a state delegation can't reach a majority opinion?

Thank you.

I remember in the 2000s it was liberals criticizing Bush for the war in Iraq. Tons of celebrities and music artists came out against it etc

Now I see Trump is criticizing conservative war hawks and tonight he said “they’ll vote for your kids to fight but they won’t do it themselves.” (paraphrasing.) https://www.koin.com/news/trump-liz-cheney-might-not-be-a-war-hawk-if-she-had-guns-pointed-at-her/amp/

And I’d never vote for him but I agree with him on this topic. So do all his supporters. Aren’t these the same ppl who loved Bush 20 years ago? Overnight this flipped somehow?

Not familiar with Fusion voting in New York

for example, can someone vote for democratic candidate for president but republican state representative/lower court justices?

Do you have to stay in one partys line?

With the election in a week I've been doing research and am very confused, especially on the republican side, what's happening with abortion.

Trump seems to be very "abortion isn't a concern of mine" but it definitely is for JD Vance and other people in trumps squad. Yet, did trump overturn roe v wade?

I know kamala is very pro abortion (which is good imo) although I guess I don't get to the extent of what she will be able to do

In short, what will happen if either of these people get elected in terms of abortion?

Thank you for responding in advance

I'm mainly curious to see how the election turns out. Pennsylvania has an interesting mail-in ballot in person for early voting that also throws another variable into this. Right now in the key battleground state of Pennsylvania, Reps are doing better on early voting vs how they did in 2020. It's around 31% right now for R whereas the final early voting percent in 2020 was 23.7% for R. The race ended up being very close at 48% R vs 50% D after the election day counts. If there is indeed the same amount of rep voters on election day, then Trump definitely takes Pennsylvania. However, do you think more reps are just accepting the idea of mail-in ballots and therefore voting early? Or is there still a lot of hesitation on mail-in ballots here?

As this sub doesn't let me post images, i'll copypaste the text from Wikipedia:

In Brazil, the Centrão (lit. 'big centre') is a term for a large bloc of political parties that do not have a specific or consistent ideological orientation and whose aim is to maintain proximity to the executive branch in order to guarantee advantages and allow them to distribute privileges through clientelistic networks.[6] The Brazilian Democratic Movement (MDB) is one of the oldest and most notable "Centrão" and Big Tent parties in Brazil; despite being Brazil's largest party, both in number of members and number of officials elected, it has never elected a President, but has used its position as the largest party as a "bargaining chip" for privileges and advantages.[7] MDB was founded in 1965 at the start of the Brazilian military dictatorship as part of an enforced two-party system by the dictatorship, in which the only allowed parties were National Renewal Alliance Party (ARENA), a catch-all party representing the interests of the dictatorship, and MDB, formed to represent a wide-range moderate and less radical opposition to the dictatorship, without a clear program except the democratization of the country.[8] Other Big Tent centrão parties include the Progressists (PP), Brazilian Labour Party (PTB), We Can (PODE), Brazil Union (UB), Social Democratic Party (PSD), Social Christian Party (PSC), Act (AGIR), Patriot (PATRI), Forward (AVANTE), Solidarity (SD).[9]

In Brazilian politics, the centrão (lit. 'big centre' – Portuguese pronunciation: [se᷉'tɾɐ᷉w᷉]) refers to a group of political parties that do not have a specific or consistent ideological orientation and aim at ensuring proximity to the executive branch in order to guarantee advantages and allow them to distribute privileges through clientelistic networks. Despite its name, the centrão is not a centrist political group,[1] generally composed of parliamentarians from the "lower clergy [pt]"[2] and big tent parties,[3] who act according to their own interests, linked to cronyism and logrolling.[4][5]

An link to the Article if anyone's interested: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centr%C3%A3o

So, the existence of several big tent parties with no clear ideological stances relying on schemes with themseves happens in another countries? Can someone show me these??

I mean, obviously there is a different Democratic candidate, but I remember feeling so hopeful in 2016 that Clinton would win. IIRC many polls predicted her to win, and it seemed like she would. Obviously, the past 8 years have proven anything can really happen???

I'm mostly looking for reassurance in the differences of this election. I see a female Democratic candidate, polling well, and I'm feeling hopeful but that's how I felt in 2016. So how is this election different than in 2016?

It seems like a political issue that's just getting more traction in every major election around the world. British, Americans, Canadians along with some European countries all seem to have this massive electoral pressure to deal with growing immigration numbers.

Is this being felt in any other areas of the world? Is the East struggling with mass immigration?