this post was submitted on 27 May 2024
134 points (98.6% liked)

politics

18866 readers
21 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This whole thing of "you need to lie about the facts to make one side look way better than they are or else you are campaigning for the other side" thing needs to go. It just needs to go. It isn't fooling anyone, and it just makes everyone doing it come across as idiots. Own your stance, be honest about what we can all see, and try to explain why you feel like you do from base reality. I know you've been told it makes you a traitor or whatever, but it simply doesn't. It makes you come across as a genuine person, and it makes the things you say have more weight.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Wow, that's a lot of words just to set up a simple strawman. The people denigrating Joe Biden and the Democratic party are campaigning for the other one, either deliberately as agitprop elements or in ignorance as useful idiots. That's not a novel principle, and it's not unique to this election cycle. I'm happy to engage in nuanced, fair, complex discourse about US politics with anyone who wants to have it, and I have criticisms of my party. But that discourse isn't happening here, and it's not happening with these people.

These people are waving lit matches in the forest of US democracy and then becoming indignant when anyone suggests that things are really dry right now. And your position seems to be that I should be honest about the fact that sometimes a little fire is valuable. I hope you can understand why I think maybe you're not being honest about your agenda.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

My agenda is to see more honest discussions. It is not a hidden agenda. I am very open about it. I, and many other people, honestly believe that Joe is doing a horrific job. I also honestly believe that Trump would do a horrific job. I am disgusted by the fact that nobody who could potentially make it into the White House has shown anything but complete and utter contempt for the innocent lives in Gaza.

I absolutely refuse to pretend that Biden is great for Gaza in some pathetic attempt to trick idiots who somehow haven't paid attention into thinking that Biden isn't floating in am Olympic sized pool of children's blood. I'm not saying Trump will do any better, and I'm not saying I will vote for Trump. All I am saying is that we will all be better off if vocal people like yourself were to at least try to have honest dialogs. No strawman, no hidden agenda, just plain, honest discussion. The thing that has offended you so deeply can be summed up in a single word. Honesty.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I’m happy to engage in nuanced, fair, complex discourse about US politics with anyone who wants to have it, and I have criticisms of my party.

Do tell. What criticisms do you have of the Democratic Party?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Nope. Check the thread, comrade. I'm just here to put a light on the bait--not to swallow it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

So willing to make claims, but way more willing to run away when called to stand up for them. If you start trying to make honest claims, then this wouldn't happen, instead you would be glad to back them up.

Edit: typo

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

"You don't have to attend every argument you're invited to."

So no, thanks. I don't owe you a defense, engagement, or an policy apologetics treatment of the current administration's governance for the last four years. There are plenty of places to find that information if you actually care to find it.

So far you've managed to call me an idiot, a liar, and a coward in all of about fifteen minutes. Why on earth would I believe you're capable of nuanced political discourse? We've nothing to discuss.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

I think nobody will be surprised to know that you are unable to point to any comment where I called you an idiot or a coward. I didn't explicitly call you a liar, but I did point out that you make dishonest claims, and I admit it is basically the same thing. Your claims that I called you an idiot and a coward are a wonderful example of you doing exactly that.

Believe it or not, you did show up to the argument, and instead of admitting that you lost it, you are trying to pretend you were never even here.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You could just say you have no criticism after all.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I could, but that wouldn't be true. I'll tell you the same thing I told the other sockpuppet: you're not entitled to an argument just because you ask for one.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Your accusations are false.