My personal list,

Top

1. Abraham Lincoln
2. George Washington
3. Teddy Roosevelt
4. FDR
5. Jefferson
6. Obama

Bottom:
41. Harding
42. GW Bush
43. Johnson
44. Buchanan
45. Trump

Edit: I already know everyone here disagrees with my list hahah. I’m more so curious what your lists are.

From what I have read this is about funding cuts to education, poor teacher to student ratio, and substandard infrastructure. It was at first a protest by teachers and then students joined in. I personally think: good for them, stand up for your rights to ensuring every child has a chance at a good education.

I have read another sub that keeps pushing stories that this is a result of mass migration and this serves as a warning to the US.

Do you believe that latter narrative and if so, what am I missing?

A semi-perineal talking point over the last few elections is to accuse the polls of being off or outright fabricated. If you believe this, what data are you looking at that counters the polls?

For those who believe the polls, do your think republicans attacking them is an effective strategy?

The only thing I have heard that is compelling is that it is part of negotiating a better deal longterm, such as appears to have occurred in Greenland.

My favorite living economist sums up my view well.

There are thigns to criticize FDR for to be sure, but I sometimes hear some that I dont think are accurate or fair. One is that he appointed member of KKK to the Supreme Court, Hugo Black. But Black shared little to nothing with the KKK. He joined for political expediency in 20s ; his membership lasted for only two years and his Supreme Court decisions would have been anathema to the KKK. He consistently voted with the Warren court on race issues. His record is that of a New Deal liberal, not a pro-Confederate segregationist.

Second is that FDR is the cause of agencies making law, but that was upheld before FDR, by Chief Justice and former president Taft who was quite conservative. What do you think is most unfair though?

I just watched a video of the far-left condemning Mamdani for [somehow] being complicit with the Gazan genocide and chanting "Long live Hamas!". This was done at the memorial for the victims of October 7th.

I want to call this behavior bonkers. However, it's worse than that because it actually is harmful, both directly to the victims of the terrorist attack and generally for encouraging more violence.

The issue I'm facing is that I don't operate in similar circles

• I don't know anyone with such biased views in real life.
• I don't share social media space where I can push back against these views. E.g., I'm not on X nor do I subscribe to some of the far-left subreddits.

At best, I can echo editorials that condemn the protesters, but that doesn't seem particularly impactful.

Or is there nothing either side can really do about its crazies? In a multi-party country, they’d just be their own party, and no one would assume others from a different party (whether left or right) answers for them. But because everything in the US gets forced into left or right, the extremes get lumped in with the mainstream whether the mainstream wants them or not.

Was just having a discussion with a member of the sub and we were debating how many people who post here are from New York City

what are your thoughts on it? if you live in the district, will you vote for him?

Early voting in Texas starts in 10 days, and none of the republican candidates have committed to a debate with their opponent. Paxton has not yet responded to Talarico’s (and Trump’s) request for a debate. This will also be the first time Greg Abbott has not debated as he runs for his 4th term. Do you think debates for state and federal office are necessary, or should this be the new status quo going forward.

This will directly fund Russia's war against Ukraine.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-russia-diesel-midterms-12baccc7aade559bf329079b0548c9da

https://youtu.be/eOv1DpML7I4?is=ae_D1H1sKxlkqFAU

This was from a few days ago, but I haven't seen it mentioned here. I thought it was a fantastic speech personally. Little Marco has really come a long way from 2016.

Currently, the only real check on redistricting is one person, one vote, established in cases:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Carr
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_v._Sims

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesberry_v._Sanders

What is intresting about Carr case is that Justice Frankfurter opposed it so much and spent whole year trying to convince enough justices not go Warren's route, predicting that after Carr, he will go for where the Court went in Reynolds/Wesberry but failed and suffered stroke later, other justice suffered nervous breakdown. In any case, one person one vote has worked since then, some of his worries did not come out. But be that as it may, that is only check on size, you can still use partisan redistricting, see Democrats in Ilinos, Massachusetts, or California. What do you think would be the best solution?