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
No, not true. They are saying that this time they knew to watch close, so the Democrats couldn't pull of the same fraud as 2020. They are indeed stating that it is "supisious" that 13 Million Democratic voices where nowhere to be seen this time around, taking that as proof they were right all along.
That's how this works. You take reality and then make it mean what you want it to mean. So that's their take in regards to voter fraud.
You really have to be a stupid person to be a Republican these days. Wild.
What's "fun" is when you realize an awful lot of people do this with an awful lot of topics all the fucking time. Probably including yourself.
Absolutely. I try to counter it by beeing aware and checking M opinions against facts where possible. But I am sure there are many topics where I don't fully succeed or I haven't caught myself doing it yet.
I would say everyone does it. Confirmation bias isn't something you can completely avoid. You can try to recognise it in yourself, but most of the time it's a lot more subtle. As simple as reading something you agree with and not going to check the source. We ALL do that.
Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug
It's an extremely common aspect of human psychology to make up a story to explain the results of an event or reasoning for your actions after the fact.
It's even been demonstrated in specific cases in studies of people who've received brain hemisphere bifurcation to prevent grand mal seizures.
The side of the brain responsible for speech is not shown information or things the individual must complete, then when asked why they performed such an action, the speech responsible side of the brain will spontaneously make up a resonable sounding story to explain it.
I highly recommend checking it out. It's an absolutely fascinating look into human psychology
I'm sure I do this same thing all the time subconsiously, and I've certainly noticed it in others.
Sounds like free-wil denial pseudo-science
To be fair, this research comes from a limited number of patients and is from the 1950s and 60s, a time not exactly known for its accurate assumptions in the field of neuroscience, lol.
Yeah, much like frontal lobotomy, severing the corpus collosum (sp?) was a popular treatment for a variety of mental issues for a time. But much like doing really elaborate twin studies on nature vs nurture it's really hard to do a lot in that area without violating ethical rules today.