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 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. 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.
- 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
I basically agree with you, but the subtext is a little different.
I don't think this photo is damning in any way. It looks like some kids having fun in a pretty typical way. It's pretty normal for kids to "joke," and play around with gender. But this dude had some fun as a teen and now he's trying his damnedest to ensure no one ever gets to express themselves in a way that is incongruous with their agab. It's worth pointing out that that's shitty for some specific reasons.
He's a piece of shit because his policies are terrible. Whether or not his current actions are congruent with his actions as a teen, which is true for most all of us, are two separate things.
I don't believe he's genuine, but if he is, like I am with my current beliefs, stupidity as kid shouldn't be held as some evidence against who he is now.
Don't get me wrong, when I first saw this my reaction was "he's the gift that keeps on giving" but after some introspection, the more I think about it, the less I like it.
See that's just it I don't think this picture shows that he was stupid as a kid I think it shows that he's unwilling to grant the freedom of self-expression and self-discovery that he went through to kids today.
It's not his participation in this picture that is damning in any way, It's who he is now that damns him.
The kid in this picture was doing normal kid shit, I can't even figure out why someone might be offended by it but I know a Republican WOULD immediately reach for their pearlsif they saw this picture thinking it was taken recently. They would call it wokeness, and attribute it to the deep state.
That's a good point. It's just kinda funny because my reaction to it is basically "wow. maybe he actually used to be a real human."
I think probably this just illustrates that he's not genuine. That said I like your reflection that past behaviour should not be used as evidence against who a person is currently. That's probably a good baseline, even if the past evidence could actually be viewed in a positive light.
Anyways. Thanks for the thoughtful exchange.