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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
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
That's a funny way to say: associated herself strongly with the genocide president and said how we were going to have the most lethal military in the world.
But sure it was the laugh.
Edit: liberals so insanely scratched below.
If it was about genocide, trump wouldn't have won. She should have been better, no question. However, she was less leaning towards genocide in Gaza than he was. So if that was the decider it was vote her or third party or nobody, yet rump still got 70million odd votes.
That makes no sense. Polls confirm Republicans care far less about the genocide than independents and Democrats. You need to appeal to your base to win.
She literally promised no deviation from Biden's policies regarding Israel. Are you familiar with the story of the man with down syndrome who spoke his first and last words - "Habibi, please stop" - to a Zionazi attack dog who mauled him before they left him to die from his injuries, alone in his home? That's what Harris promised no deviation from. If you expect people to vote for that, your soul is compromised.
Yes, you need to appeal to your base to win. However, if voters are choosing between two candidates with almost identical positions on a topic, that's not the deciding topic in that election.
Maybe it should have been, but it wasn't. If those against genocide really cared about it as their single issuez they would have still voted Harris, who promised nonchangez as opposed to trump who said he'd let Israel do whatever they want.
It's a fallacious argument.
...Those are the same thing. Biden also let Israel do whatever they want.
I am against genocide so I do not vote for genocide. A truly mind-boggling approach.
But you still got genocide. Just now you have it with a side of fascist rule instead of without. Hope you're not melanated and near a border.
Oh no the inevitable consequences of liberalism
Sorry I didn't continue to vote for the neo-Weimar
By inaction you allowed a worse evil.
By allowing Democrats to get away with their "lesser evil" sales pitch, you guaranteed what you incorrectly perceive as my inaction.
Sorry, not inaction. Willful ignorance.
Ok: By allowing Democrats to get away with their “lesser evil” sales pitch, you guaranteed what you incorrectly perceive as my willful ignorance.
Nothing incorrectly perceived about it. You willfully choose to be ignorant. The world moves on with you whether you choose to participate in it or not.
You want to try to hide behind this singular position as if abstaining from voting solves or improves anything. It doesn't. You choose to live in a fantasy whereby your abstinence leaves you without blame. If anything, you and others like you become just as callused and evil as those in power. You all helped put them there because you all did nothing to stop it. You saw a bad option and a horrendous option and behaved childishly and gave up.
You don't care what actually happens to anyone. You don't actually care if anyone lives or dies, because if you did, you'd have done something to slow or stop the current administration/regime from gaining any power at all.
Sounds good, I'll continue "hiding" behind being unwilling to sign my name to endorse putting a genocidaire in charge of a massive military force
Good luck saving the world by voting for genocide, odd strategy but here's hoping