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
Again, who cares about a spoiler candidate?
103 comments for this article. Hmmm, I guess SOME people do care about a "spoiler candidate." Huh?
:)
Wow, a whole 17 upvotes. You must be so proud.
And over 100 comments! So I guess you were wrong, huh? Some people DO care. :)
You think a few snide remarks will silence us? It’s clear that people do care, no matter how much you try to dismiss us.
I’m damn proud to stand up against the negativity you’re trying to spread. You and others like you want to sow discontent, to bully and belittle those of us who refuse to fall in line with your chosen candidate.
But here’s the truth: we’re not backing down. We’re rising up against the duopoly that’s kept us chained, against those who would have us believe that our voices don’t matter because they don’t echo yours.
This is just the beginning. There will be more posts, more voices speaking out against the broken system you defend. And yes, more candidates will emerge, whether you like it or not. We have every right to our opinions, to our votes, just as much as you do.
So go ahead, keep being negative, keep throwing out your snide remarks like “Who cares about…”
We’re still here. And we’re not going anywhere. Your words haven’t stopped us, haven’t even slowed us down. This is just the start, and we’re only getting louder.
Wow, so brave.
You mean as compared to you saying, "who cares about a spoiler candidate?" And then finding out that there over a 100 comments on the article?
Yeah, definitely braver than that. :)
I'm sure. 4 days later and you're still griping about something as trivial and meaningless as comment counts and a comment that definitely hurt your feelings. Talk about weird.
Edit: 5 days later*
Nah. Actually someone else commented in this thread and I got an alert. As I was reading it, I noticed your old one and thought it would be fun to update you. Especially since your comment was meant to be smarmy and belittling.
So seeing just how wrong you were has been fun!
And again, it’s politcal news, and this is a political news Lemmy community.
Obviously some people care, because the article was written and read.
I didn't write the news, friend.
But you did post it, suggesting personal interest or perceived interest among readers here.
The article's existence doesn't grant it utility
And since it has at least 5 upvotes as of now and this thread has 65 comments in it, I guess that means some people were interested in it. Hmmmm...
I didn't say I agree with the top comment, I'm addressing the idea that this post was just among a firehose of completely arbitrary political articles, posted only for their existence.
I don't think that's true. I think you posted it because you are interested in 3rd party candidates. A fine and valid reason but let's not dance around it.
This is a political news community. I posted a political news article.
If you feel this breaks the community's guidelines for article posting, you can contact the mods. And if they agree that it breaks the community's rules they will remove it.
I posted it because it's political news. Or do you think that the only political news that should be posted is pro-democrat news? I'm confused about what you are trying to say.
No one, especially me, has said you broke any rules, or shouldn't have posted this or any other article.
I'm speaking to the motivation, which is a fine motivation to have. I don't think you post every single us politics article that is written, you have interests (which again is fine).
And that goes for the motivation of people posting the huge number of pro-democrat news articles. So I guess I'm not understanding your point.
I read an interesting news article, and posted it to a political news community.
I've read plenty of Harris articles too, but this sub is already filled with plenty of those. This is a diverse community, and I am adding to that diversity.
There's not secret plan or motivation on my part. I also post lots of non-political articles to other communities as well. Lemmy strives on people posting content. I did that.
Your original reply suggests impartial firehosing, which is obviously not true, as described here.
It's not nefarious or secret, it's just not what you originally said. You wanted different articles here and are doing it.
Dude, what are you going on about?
I posted a political news article to a political news community. What point are you even trying to make and why? Why does anybody post anything?
I thought the article was interesting, it matched the theme of the community, I posted it. I have never pretended otherwise.
Not only that, the original reply was to a guy saying no one was interested in it. And obviously the number of comments show otherwise.
I'm still now sure what you are implying. Why don't you just be clear and say what you mean?
I am not going to, and never planned to, vote for Cornel West. lol
You're interested in it!
You didn't post it as some impartial conveyor belt.
That's fine. It's just not what you said.
Well then tell me what I said that has ruffled your feathers so much. I said this is a political news article, and I posted it to a political news community. Which is true.