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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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
It's not just that he's 74...
It's not just that he got diagnosed with terminal throat cancer, and told voters the day after the recent election.
It's that it hasn't been two years since he last violated (the already barely existent) rules against Congress doing a little insider trading.
https://www.rawstory.com/raw-investigates/gerry-connolly-stocks/
Like, did anyone think when Pelosi was weighing in on the oversight committee, that the person she was backing wasnt corrupt and would actually hold anyone from either party accountable?
Pelosi didn't care just because she hates everyone under retirement age. It's because she needed to know the person in charge of the oversight committee had no reason to hold anyone accountable.
Probably more about her suspiciously making 66% returns on her stock investments than anything
That's what I mean, she's corrupt as fuck.
Everyone got hung up on Pelosi just "disliking" AOC, but this would have allowed AOC to investigate Pelosi and other corrupt Dems.
So Pelosi made sure a corrupt Dem got it. That way the status quo is maintained: Dems only go after R, and R only goes after Dems. But neither ever make anything stick.
AOC would try to go after everyone corrupt, and the Republicans would go with it if the target was a Dem.
We'd weed out corruption from the Dem party which would increase turnout, and likely retain the seats.
But it would be bad for Pelosi, and she'll always put herself over party or country
That would have been awesome. Purge the Dems of the liberals for a left takeover.
A boy can dream.
It's not a Cali mindset or behavior.
You just see it from politicians in those deep blue areas, because they roll general campaign cash over to primaries.
How the fuck is anyone supposed to compete with Peloai in a primary without taking the same dirty money? Even then, they're literally decades behind on campaign fundraising.
So don't blame it on the Dems who live there, people like Pelosi are just attracted to those deep blue areas because it's "safe" in the general, and they can rig the primary.
You see the same from NY Dems and any other deep blue area
Just want to point out that most of the top traders are always Republicans but they're never talked about in this context and Pelosi sometimes doesn't even beat the S&P500.
She seems to beat it for the most part. There's a simulator that has a Pelosi ETF trading as "NANC":
https://simulator.tryshare.app/?tickers=NANC
Over the past 5 years, NANC has an annualized return of 15.2%, compared to 8.1% for SPY. I don't know if the simulator takes transaction costs into account or not, but I'd guess she still beats it on average. I would hope she does, given the legalized insider trading involved.
She beats it on average, I'm just pointing out that she's the one people keep talking about and I'm sure there's a bunch of Republicans that are very happy about that because it means no one is looking at them.
Second worst is not acceptable.
74? My brother in Quetzalcōātl, she's 84.
Connolly is 74
Ah, I thought they were referring to Pelosi. My bad.
'74-'75