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.
- 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.
- 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
When elections are every couple of years, it's easier to appoint someone in the interim instead of the logistics of having a new election for one individual seat.
Counter-point: elections shouldn't be so complicated that you can't perform a snap election on short notice. Other countries do it.
Do you have any idea just how much goes into an election? Those other countries also don't have the population we do. The candidates need time to make their case and if the next election cycle is only a few months out then there is no reason to not wait. Plenty of seats go empty, not all seats need filled asap.
"yeah but think of how much WORK that would be..."
You aren't wrong, I'm just saying it's a bad argument for those in charge.
It's not about work for the ones in charge. There is more to an election like giving the candidates time to make their case for being elected. When another full election is right around the corner it makes way more sense to wait. Depending on the seat and what that person does, we may not even need someone appointed, plenty of seats go empty for long lengths of time.
I do see where you're coming from, and to an extent I agree with you. Why bother with an election when the next one is 6 months away.
But when it's several YEARS, it becomes an issue. A lot can happen in 30 seconds, let alone a year or more.
In that case, it makes sense to require them to put any appointed positions up for election at the next regularly scheduled election. There's an election every two years at most. Many states have elections every year.
More like how expensive that is. Seems like a waste of money when the next election is often months away. And will happen either way.
I think a lot of countries with snap elections don't just do it for a single position, and it resets the whole parliamentary term.