this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
165 points (94.1% liked)

politics

19143 readers
2496 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Boddhisatva 114 points 2 months ago (3 children)

“It is amazing to hear you talk about women of color as parroting talking points instead of us looking at basic math,” Rye said. “The one thing AOC has done that you haven’t is win some elections.”

Solid point. Also, the fact that a candidate for the Presidency doesn't even know how many members there are in the House of Representatives shows just how little attention she pays to the basic mechanics of our government.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod 49 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

As much as I’d love to have a legitimate third party to disappoint me, they’re not going to get anywhere if they can’t win outside of random local elections.

Show me a Green House rep, Senator, or Governor and then we’ll talk about how you’ll inevitably let me down after I vote for you. Until then I’m going to vote for the disappointments who can actually win office.

[–] Passerby6497 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

they’re not going to get anywhere if they can’t win outside of random local elections.

This point seems to be beyond the comprehension of some people (those who aren't bad faith trolls, anyway). I've had so many conversations with people, both online and in person, where they don't understand that a third party with no offices or political infrastructure cannot win and is just a spoiler party (and in the case of the green party, an obvious joke spoiler party).

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod 9 points 2 months ago

Exactly. I get that they can't win everywhere, and that there's actually quite a few of them in office all over, but if they can't put up credible opposition to the Democrats at a multi-state level how the hell are they going to get elected to a national position?

I'm gonna make a deal with the Green Party: If you can get a Senator elected, I'll vote for you for president.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 2 months ago

A speed bump normally doesn't concern itself with the rules of the road; just has to disrupt the flow of traffic in the intended way.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

I already didn't think much of her but this has me convinced that she is unserious.

[–] [email protected] 102 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] spankmonkey 58 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Putin’s Jizz Stein wants Nato disbanded

The only possible reason that someone would want NATO disbanded is because they are Russian shills. Russian aggression is the reason NATO exists.

[–] rayyy 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

they are Russian shills

Hey, the money is really, really good.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

I don't think troll farms get paid well, but I'm open to being personally proven wrong with a better offer.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

It's not that long ago that NATO was near it's end in fact, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/12/3/macron-stands-by-nato-brain-death-comment-in-clash-with-trump

Had Russia waited another decade or two, and it's conceivable that NATO would have been retired.

But no, they had to go and bring it back from it's deathbed: https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2023/7/11/offensive-defence-how-putin-saved-nato https://warroom.armywarcollege.edu/articles/ukraine-revived-nato/

Talk about unintended consequences.

[–] Fedizen 11 points 2 months ago

Piers Morgan asked her about this and she just sounds like an idiot. She apparently came to talk to Putin and got snubbed entirely.

[–] Buffalox 34 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Maybe she was schooled, but I bet she learned nothing.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago

Oh, she’s not an idiot. She didn’t need to learn anything. She knows what she’s doing. It’s intentional.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I am beginning to wonder if the person who keeps spamming this board with vapid third party posts and then refusing to ever engage in genuine non-adversarial discussion about them is deliberately trying to sour everyone here on third parties.

Like, a few months ago no one cared. Now though, EVERYONE is well armed with facts and opinionated as hell.

It’s probably the Streisand effect though! And it’s great to see.

[–] Carrolade 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm more inclined to think it's just a dedicated conservative troll that didn't really think things through. Everything about it is just too reactionary and knee-jerk.

I think the kids call it sea lioning? Where you use a facade of civility to break down a community with subtly divisive trolling.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago

I would call it a mix of sealioning and concern trolling. Also be mindful of direct accusations as this person also enjoys reporting people for the slightest perceived rules infractions.

[–] barsquid 14 points 2 months ago

I couldn't possibly make myself complicit in the acts of the bothsides duopoly. That's why I will instead vote how the furthest right party wants people to. Additionally, I am on here all day every day campaigning for others to do the same, and that doesn't make me complicit in any acts because reasons.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

I find Stein a bit grating, but I always finds greens hard to pin down politically. I'd much rather this air time have gone to someone like Claudia de la Cruz with something interesting to say and some principles to back it up