• just_another_person@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    131
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    Good. More young, moderate, non-psychopaths need to be representative of their people. I may not agree with her other policy positions, but it’s at least good to see someone on the other side of the aisle who isn’t a religious nut or Trumpist.

  • ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Good for her. She’s facing a steep uphill battle because she’s not the GOP’s preferred candidate. But the party needs more smart, moderate, clear-thinking representatives like her. Hopefully with this campaign she will be an example for others.

    • meco03211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Oh they’ll make an example of her. I’m sure the GOP want all the newcomers to know just what happens if you don’t toe the line.

    • billwashere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      90
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’d actually argue this is better than just running as a Dem. As a Dem its just noise. But as Rep she stands to get some exposure and getting the base there to actually have a conversation about these important issues.

      • admiralteal@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        The political reality in ND is that having the (D) is the end of the road for you. Since neither party actually represents a specific policy platform, I guess it’s 6 of 1 in an environment like that.

        After all, what are modern Republicans even about? Obviously they want to deny global warming, police uteruses, kill queer people, theocratize the government… but what policies do they actually care about that aren’t equally present in the Democratic caucus?

        • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          what are modern Republicans even about?

          Cruelty. You can run circles around pretty much any issue pointing out examples of their hypocrisy and inconsistency, but they’re pretty reliable with harming their community.

          Once you acknowledge that the cruelty is the point, their bullshit starts to make a lot more sense.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      7 months ago

      To run as a Democrat in ND is to automatically lose. The portion of the electorate that will refuse to look beyond the team sports identity is so huge, if you actually want to participate, you have to technically be a member of the correct “team”.

      • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 months ago

        I am amazed at how broadly your comment could be applied to nearly all political scenarios. There are three independents or non-blue/red in all of both houses of congress. And one of them is Simena who got elected as a Dem I believe.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    7 months ago

    “I never wanted Miss America to be my peak in life,” Mund told The Independent. “I wanted it to be the springboard for whatever comes next.”

    Well, at least that’s a positive attitude. She didn’t wanna end up the high-school quarterback who peaked and relived stories of greatness like Al Bundy.

    • uis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      We are not utopians. We know that an unskilled labourer or a cook cannot immediately get on with the job of state administration. In this we agree with the Cadets, with Breshkovskaya, and with Tsereteli. We differ, however, from these citizens in that we demand an immediate break with the prejudiced view that only the rich, or officials chosen from rich families, are capable of administering the state, of performing the ordinary, everyday work of administration. We demand that training in the work of state administration be conducted by class-conscious workers and soldiers and that this training be begun at once, i.e., that a beginning be made at once in training all the working people, all the poor, for this work.

      - alleged mushroom.

      • Snapz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’ve still yet to see an example of this hypothetical person you’re alluding to, who is genuinely working towards this change in the gop? It is really only oppositionist and temporary.

        Liz cheney, for example, seemed to be something approaching this during impeachment, but she was just fighting for her political life and saw her only angle. And of course, in the same breath she’ll say that “liberals are aborting babies after they are born”.

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      I want two, pro-choice parties. I want two anti-trump parties. I want two pro-gun parties.

      When the shit that the parties differ on is shit I don’t care about, mission accomplished.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          Agreed.

          There should also be no violent crime. No assault, rape, murder. No beatings, stabbings. No kidnappings, armed robberies, burglaries, arsons. No suppressiin of dissidents. No invasions or genocides.

          And when we finally achieve all of those, I fully agree: there should be no guns.

          Until that day, every political party should be pro-gun.

          • Aux@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            Lol no. You won’t be getting a reduction in crime without a reduction in firearms.

            • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              How does that work?

              I mean, the overwhelming majority of violent crimes are committed without the perpetrator being armed with a gun.

              Are you under the impression that the mere existence of guns leads people who don’t have them to commit violent crimes? What is the mechanism by which guns drive violent criminals without guns to violently crime?

              • Aux@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                7 months ago

                There are more mass shootings in the US every week than there were in the whole of Europe in the last decade.

                • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  The fact that Ukraine is in Europe tells me that is untrue. Or did you forget that I included suppression of political dissidents, invasions, and genocide among my reasons for an armed populace?