this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
382 points (98.2% liked)

politics

19243 readers
2883 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] themeatbridge -1 points 7 months ago (3 children)

I get that it's much easier to argue with things you've imagined, but I didn't say we can't, or shouldn't put him in jail. He should already be in jail. And he should stay there.

I'm saying we should be aware of his plan and prepared for the response. We should recognize that we don't have a functioning justice system, and that he has far too many followers to consider our country free or just. We should make the utmost haste with his trials, and ensure his punishment is swift and proportionate to his crimes. If we do that, he'll never see the light of day again, and we will all be able to focus on different threats to democracy.

[–] sylvanSimian 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

There isn't an argument. It's just a statement that I think you sound purposefully pathetic and that's an annoying sentiment to see online.

Ah yes, thank you for reminding us to be aware of Trump. If only we as a nation could just reach sufficient awareness of Trump

[–] themeatbridge -1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

If it's not an argument, why are you arguing? And why do you feel the need to misrepresent what I said?

Forgive me if I don't trust that there's a plan to counter what Trump wants, because failure to anticipate what Trump was going to do is exactly how he won in 2016.

[–] sylvanSimian 1 points 7 months ago

Lmao aight. It was an argument all along and you won by being successfully pitiful.