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.
- 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.
- 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
The anecdote of the recon girl in the suit is one of the most interesting that I've read in some time. Totally makes sense that they would do that.
How do folks feel about whether that low level of deceit is appropriate?
When I think about the costs, I think maybe a couple people spent a couple minutes of their time giving opinions they might not have if they had had all the information up front. But tiny hurt feelings seems the biggest downside, I guess, which shouldn’t be too problematic.
Of course if the staffer told the whole truth, an activist could feign support to secure an interaction where they shout down the candidate on their pet issue (“a TAN suit, Barrack?!”).
Personally, I don't see any deciet here.
Nobody claimed anything, someone just went around asking questions. Personally I wouldn't care if a red hat came into my Cafe and asked questions like that, and I would give my very strong opinions exactly as I would to anyone else. If they said a republican was about to come in for a PR stunt, I would ask to speak to the owner, and if they're actually cool with that the they have lost my business.
I still wouldn't feel like the person who came in was being in nay way subversive.
Honestly if I ran across one of their candidates alone in the middle of the night I might feel the urge to deck them whether I act on it or not, but that exact thing is the reason they should go without stating the reason for the questions and visit fist thing. What if someone were just psychotic and armed? They could quite easily pretend to be the world's largest supporter in order to get a seat at the next table over for a better shot, instead of the scout saying "that guy in the corner gave strange vibes, better put extra security over there or pass on this one"
Or someone might start throwing shoes...
Great point on safety. Was thinking kinda “lying through omission” but sold.