this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2024
-58 points (17.8% liked)

politics

19145 readers
3147 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
all 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago (2 children)

sometimes when you do things right, people wont think you did anything at all. this is just whining about not doing enough to court the right when shes already done more than necessary.

you cant fix ~~crazy~~ weird

[–] cheese_greater 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

There's like 5 different disparate groups she needs to unify. People need to take it the fuck easy, this shit is hard and complicated

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Imagine trying to get 330 million people to agree on something.

Of course it’s gonna be awful and most people won’t like it.

[–] GottaKnowYourCHKN 7 points 1 month ago

Even harder when you're a black woman trying to do it.

[–] just_another_person 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"The Strangely Transparent Goal of return2ozma"

[–] jordanlund 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

I don't agree with these folks, but I can kinda see where they are coming from. It's kinda tough to believe in the calls for a ceasefire while weapons are being delivered. They may imagine, by analogy, that this is like calling for a bank robber to stop robbing the bank while continuing to hand him extra guns and bullets. (Now, this analogy is actually not quite accurate, as Israel faces many threats, not just from Hamas/Gaza, and needs to be able to defend itself from actual foreign enemies, so there's actually a lot of nuance here.)

The more cynical and jaded may even see the ceasefire attempts as meaningless words for the purpose of political posturing, while the actions (like sending weapons) show the true intent. Again, I don't agree with these folks, but being able to understand and respond to the reasons why they are so doubtful of and disbelieving of Harris (and even of Biden) might be the key to winning over more Harris votes come November.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Lemmy can talk? Which one? Which instance?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Well, I guess all of them, if you have the right plugins, e.g. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/read-aloud/

[–] skeezix 3 points 1 month ago

As opposed to the full robust politics of Trump.

[–] MediaBiasFactChecker -3 points 1 month ago

Jacobin - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Jacobin:

MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://jacobin.com/2024/10/kamala-harris-election-campaign-strategy
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support