Asklemmy

51689 readers

448 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

could any American explain to a foreigner how much freedom do federal legislators have to ignore their party, even to vote against it? (linux.community)

submitted 1 day ago by lenore582@linux.community to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

federal legislators includes representatives (HOR) and senators.

one could be tempted to think that on a fptp system the representative actually represents his district and not his party, something that should be clearer on a senatorial level.

However, there are no limits to political donations in the US afaik, which I guess means the rich and powerful ones can invest as much as they can to denigrate the other side, usually a democrat (correct me if wrong).

I don't know if there are like party federal committees that raise money nationally for or against abortion, death penalty, tariffs... and then each party decides how to allocate that money. I don't know if there are staffers in each party that decide which candidate is compliant enough to follow blindly what the federal committee decides and is not going to be a dangerous maverick because he actually has an independent moral compass.

Is it possible for local candidates to run against their own party and actually win? Like a republican that lost his party's nomination for a district, then becomes an independent and actually wins against his former party?

Or are HOR races much more local than I imagine and each representative campaigns exclusively on local issues, raises money only in the constituency to be invested exclusively in the district' election?

Do candidates have to give back the money that was given as a donation that wasn't actually used to try to win an election?

Can a politician actually pretend to raise money for a campaign and then simply pocket it?

I have the feeling that most members in the HOR are careerists that usually go with the motions and repeat the official position of their party and only selected individuals are brave or reckless enough to say out loud and clearly what they believe in (extreme example, Marjorie Taylor Greene). Most representatives, when pressed upon a problematic issue will first give you an elusive answer, then contact their party for instructions about what the correct answer is. This applies to both democrats and republicans.

I have no idea if federal senators are also mostly followers and not leaders.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 7 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

as a non-american you can be forgiven for not knowing that democrats have been doing this for the last half century.

there are technically several parties, but effectively only 2; republicans (like trump) and democrats. every time that there has been a political impass between the two parties for the last 50 years, the democrats have ignored their voters like this and sided with the republicans.

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 3 points 18 hours ago

the democrats have ignored their voters like this and sided with the republicans.

"ReAcHiNg AcRoSs ThE AiSLe"