362
Social Media's Cringiest Conservative Is Running for School Board -- As a Democrat
(www.rollingstone.com)
this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2024
362 points (97.4% liked)
politics
19243 readers
2961 users here now
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I've yet to hear exactly what was so controversial about my initial response to a comment that literally generalized child abuse across all of homeschooling... Again, where is your outrage over that? Where are you interrogating them for sources? I matched aggression at every point in these threads. Where you see those sources linked, I held a reasonable conversation with far less aggression -- did I not? You see it goes both ways.
Truly. I genuinely wish you could just reach your hand out and other users would reach a hand back out and we'd sing Kumbaya. In my experience that just doesn't work and you just get rolled over. I had to be assertive to dispel any notion of the original argument -- for which has not in conceivable way been addressed. In other words, this massive pivot to attack my character or how I said something is a clear deflection to the actual substance of the topic at hand.
I'll treat anyone with the utmost respect if they bestow the same to me. Otherwise, I'm dishing it right back at you. So to be clear, the insults directed at me have fundamentally dwarfed anything I've said beforehand.
Should be noted that the original user who made that comment finally responded and we generally saw eye-to-eye.
Fairest comment yet, and I recognize your attempt to rein the conversation back in — so thank you for that.
Well honestly, I think this is for better or worse just how I write. Feel free to look through my comment history but I didn't consciously go out of my way to write differently here any more than elsewhere except for maybe dot my i's and cross my t's a little more tightly, knowing that any low-hanging fruit I leave behind will be cannon-fodder for an attack against me (too dumb; too arrogant, etc.).
I enjoy a healthy written discussion. What really gets under my nerves are insincere double-standards when people are reading these threads.. When you write from a position of the minority, knowing what you're writing is unpopular but still have strong convictions about it, you recognize the uphill battle that is going against ingrained beliefs and bandwagon/ad-populum fallacies. I'm fully aware one should be on their best behavior when in these situations, but it can be difficult to maintain perfect composure when you're taking blows left and right and anonymous down-votes despite any substantive response to the points being presented. I just wish people cut me a little more slack when the user basically said I suffered child abuse and am committing child abuse to my kids without merit. I suspect most here wouldn't maintain composure either under such audacious claims.
I had the sources from the start but I figured (a) The initial user made an outlandish claim, didn't back it up, and nobody interrogated them for evidence, and (b) even when you provide sources against people who want to believe otherwise, they often just dismiss them outright or cherry-pick relentlessly. But duly noted that I should maybe just lead with that next time.