this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2024
-92 points (24.4% liked)

politics

19153 readers
3047 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

For the good of the republic and to demonstrate new leadership before the election

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -3 points 5 months ago (5 children)

I'm so close to blocking this community. Its Rule #5 states:

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.

Instead, it's basically a leftist version of a right-wing echo chamber where if you don't support your candidate hard enough then you get downvoted into oblivion. Which is meh personally, but on the wider scale also shuts down interesting conversations that could result, if people felt more free to actually articulate their positions, using coherent logical formulations mind you. And even that is fine I suppose, if that's what this community wants to be, then it is on me to seek out what I want elsewhere.

I may not agree with someone, but I will defend to the death their right to speak.

Anyway, sorry OP that your The Atlantic article - a liberal media source if I ever heard of one - is getting downvoted to oblivion in spite of the rules of this community specifically asking for the opposite behavior. Fwiw I cross posted it to another news community in case that helps.

[–] 555_2 22 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Right after posting this comment you commented that someone couldn’t say “horse shit”

What was that about defending the right to speak?

[–] eran_morad 12 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

It’s just dumbfucks unable to accept reality for what it is. Same as it ever was. FWIW, I don’t think Biden should step down (i.e., resign right now), and I’ll vote for whoever the D is, no matter what. But I also think Biden should fuck off into the sunset and endorse someone else. He has no business continuing on to a second term, even if he could win (and I don’t believe he can).

[–] die444die 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I mean, it could just be that people don’t like you and that’s why they’re downvoting you. You do come off a bit rude.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Oh yes, I earned these particular downvotes, to be sure.:-) But I was talking about OP.

It does make it hard to have intelligent discussions on Lemmy when we cannot handle anything other than strict agreement to whatever the crowd-think happens to fall upon that day.

[–] HomerianSymphony 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Democrats would rather go after The Atlantic, one of the most pro-Democrat media institutions in the country, rather than contemplate replacing Biden.

This won’t end well.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago

People kept telling me that Trump will win and I kept fighting it, but it seems that you cannot escape facts: conservatives pull together, when it counts, whereas liberals eat their own.

[–] anticolonialist -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Dont confuse shitlibs with leftists we are not the same thing.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

By that token though, are there any true leftists alive or dead that ever existed on planet earth? The issue with such an ideological purity test is that it keeps shifting around, forever trying to distinguish the pure and correct ones from those on the periphery who are somehow worse than those entirely outside bc these at least should have known better. I'm not even saying that you are wrong - obviously there's a spectrum and obviously some people are more along it than others, but I'm saying that that entire mode of thinking is problematic in the practical sense. Example: isn't my very own message hypocritically doing exactly this, and I would have done far better to have been more accepting of your words? 😜 So it's like the trolly problem: not meant to find a practical solution, just something to consider in case it's fun to do so.:-)

[–] anticolonialist -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

There is nothing purity about it. Liberals are more aligned with Republicans than they are leftists.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Sigh... fair point:-|. I hate that it's true, but...

(in my head, I like to think that "real liberals" simply have no representation in politics right now, or ever, but then the opposing argument to that is that the purpose of a system is what it manages to accomplish so... I cannot in good conscience continue to do that)

[–] anticolonialist -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

None of the working class has representation in government. Our government represents capital, bankers, and corporations. All of which have convinced voters there are only 2 options for which right wing corporate owned party they want to select.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Possibly the difference being which set of "traditional values" are being upheld. Still, this take ignores a lot of details, chiefly that the two are nowhere close to being equally so.

e.g. right now would it be fair to say that black people are roughly considered to be ~4/5ths of a person?

If so, conservatives want to return that to being perhaps 3/5ths, while liberals want that to remain 4/5ths, and leftists want that to be expanded to 5/5ths. Both only look right-wing with respect to the POV of being at the left, which we are currently not, since mainstream America is shifted so extremely right-wards.