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
Biden and Obama chain a presidential candidate to a chair for eight hours to prevent her from debating with them and the republicans but he is preserving democracy
https://www.democracynow.org/2012/10/17/green_partys_jill_stein_cheri_honkala
jill stein during the 2016 election summed it up better
During the campaign, Stein repeatedly said that there were no significant differences between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama. She said, "Romney is a wolf in a wolf's clothing, Obama is a wolf in a sheep's clothing, but they both essentially have the same agenda." She called both of them "Wall Street candidates" asking for "a mandate for four more years of corporate rule"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein
how is Biden not the same?
Biden and the DNC suck... I say that more than enough.
But they're still better than Jill Stein.
And it's weird to see someone talking about her like this.
And obviously they didn't chain her to a chair
not promoting Jill but what she said is on point
so they obviously didn't? you mean she was allowed onto the debate floor?
"DR. JILL STEIN: We were held at a facility, especially created for detaining protesters at the debates. It appeared to be a warehouse which had been specially equipped. It was obviously—you know, they were prepared to handle a lot of people. They had 13 officers there and three plainclothesmen. For most of the time, it was just Cheri Honkala and myself, yet they felt the need to keep us in tight plastic restraints, tightly secured to metal chairs."
https://www.democracynow.org/2012/10/17/green_partys_jill_stein_cheri_honkala
again how are democrats defending democray and how are the two parties not the same?
She was a Green Party candidate without the numbers to justify being in a debate...
You're mad she didn't have the support to get on the debate stage for the general, but that's not the fault of Biden or Obama or anyone from the DNC.
If you're complaint is she wasn't on the debate stage for the primary...
What the fuck?
She's not a Democrat, why would she be in the dem primary debate?
The more details you give, the less sense you make. Or are you honestly staying saying Barack Obama and Joe Biden physically chained her to a chair?
Actually, I really don't care what you're gonna say next
You're right, they should have been prosecuted for Trespassing instead of being let off easy like they were.
She didn't qualify for the debate. Why was she even there trying to get in? She knew the rules.
Jill Stein isn't a real candidate, fuck off with this bs
Blyat!
How many times do I have to see this fuckin "chained to a chair" bullshit copy pasted around here 😂
Jill Stein is a Russian agent. She deserves far worse for working for Putin.
Biden is an israeli agent. But that's not a conspiracy theory.
That is such a stupid comment post presidency. My insurance has to pay my medical costs if put in properly and are in network. My provider has to inform me if they are not in network. If everything else messes up my unpaid medical bills don't go onto my credit report so there is real incentive for providers and insurers to do their job. This would not be a thing under romney.
I read the links. I also went searching for more info on this. I don't see where Biden and Obama ordered her in particular to be chained to a chair. It's interesting framing though.
Much like Jeffery Epstein name drops the Trump references are omitted in right wing media I see the same is occurring with Trump here again when it comes to Jill Stein.
In the search for Biden ordering Jill Stein to be chained to a chair, I found there was mention that Stein hoped Trump would allow her onstage to debate in 2016 with Hillary calling back to when Regan did for a 3rd party candidate, well sort of.
The 3rd party candidate that ran against Regan that year was also not allowed in the main presidental debate due to a lack of numbers too, so towards the end of the election Regan did have an extra separate debate with this 3rd party candidate. I suspect it was a good PR move for Regan at the time. I don't see how this would not be a calculated move in a national election campaign.
So in the above post I don't also see mentioned is Trump's role in the 2016 election to not help Stein secure a place in the debate with Hillary. With hindsight of what happened this year with the GOP debates where Trump wasn't even apart of these debates, it turned out to be foolish to expect Trump to help Stein to get on stage back in 2016.
What's more interesting from the Wiki link posted above, Trump was involved in shutting down election recount efforts by Stein after the 2016 election with the issues brought up by computer scientists for 3 states. There would be later controversy over funding raised for the recount efforts. Where did the money go?
It's interesting to me as there has been more than a few reports over the years of fundraising issues for Trump and where did the money go? Why were funds spent on personal items and payoffs to Pornstars not to mention various legal fees?
I did find on Jill Stein's FB post about not being allowed into the debate, there was a FB commenter asking why should she be allowed in the national debate when the 15 percent theshold hasn't been met? That means Roseanne Barr should also be allowed into the debate along with a few others that were campaigning too with miniscule numbers.
None of these points will land with the right people but it is interesting the framing we all can look at things with. It really speaks to the limits of the human brain to process all of the modern inputs and the shear volume of noise we are exposed to on a daily basis these days. With our phones the constant drip is non stop and we can't fact check most of it in real time. I've spent over an hour reading and searching for more info on this one point alone.
It also highlights the role of social media algorithms to focus and feed more concentrated but slightly different and similar material to keep users engaged. It pushes conspiracy materials quite easily and much like financial scammers the media companies can't keep up with filtering it.
I know there's plenty of blame pointed at social media due further polarization of all sides but I don't think it's to serve one party over another. It's really about making more money for socal media no matter the party. Some are just better than others at weaponizing these tools for their cause like the 2016 election, the Jan 6th insurrection, Brexit, Vice Presidents chaining debate candidates to chairs.
We all get to yell fake news or alternative facts. Now we just get to believe whatever made up things we like now, especially if it's repeated enough by us or others on social media.
One thing is for certain. There's going to be more violence this next time around. Be it for a loss or a win for either side. There is so much more than the Jan 6 crowds stirred up now. It won't matter who's been arrested, convicted, etc as we see today it doesn't matter already. The world has become too complicated and confusing for many and there will be simplification attempts made to clear all of this up once and for all. It won't help wth the anxieties many have but that doesn't matter.
I just really hope this hunch is wrong.
Slava Ukrainian, Komrade
This is just a bad, superficial take.