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
You mentioned that you did not "This was the first time in 20 years that I’ve cast my vote Alone." Unless I misunderstood that to mean you expect me to believe that despite them losing less than 10% of their voter base, 100% of people you knew didn't show up.
This is literally what you appear to be advocating for. Im utterly confused by this attempt to reframe things.
Calling Kamala Harris diet hitler is lunacy.
It seems you are clearly arguing in bad faith when you on one hand pretend that you voted for and supported Harris, yet on the other hand, say this.
These are not congruent thoughts.
One of these things must be a lie.
I mean look at this intensly obvious bad faith strawman argument: "and everyone else is “insane Leftists”.
What are you arguing against out of anything I've mentioned here.
Everything you say seems to be in bad faith.
You are arguing against a person who is not a part of the DNC, because you do not like the strategy of the DNC, as if its that persons fault. This is not a sane position to hold.
You once again, describe yourself in the same group that you say makes you sick.
It once again seems like you must be lying.
Fascinating. So any disagreement must be "in bad faith" to you?
The very platform your politicians advocate for is concessionary, and I'm tired of pretending otherwise. All of them. From Chuck Schumer conceding on the Shutdown, to Obama just adopting Romneycare as his own? The party exists to fold to Republicans.
Support? Now that's a strong word. Voted for, advocated for in conversation? Your black and white thinking is showing.
You support the platform of the DNC, the party insiders by proxy when you continue to support their bullshit even a year after the election. I do not care that you are just as powerless over their internal processes as I am. You continue to express your Stockholm Syndrome for their failing agenda, even as an actually viable alternative presents itself.
Break out. Turn off the MSNBC, leave the KHive, go try on Hasan Piker as an entry point for your therapy.
At this point there is clearly no good discussing anything with you when the very specific bad faith arguments you made have been pointed out precisely, but you choose to instead, again in bad faith, claim that its a meritless dismissal.
You also state you advocate for them though... where is your high horse unless you are lying.
Partially because you keep letting them do so with your rhetoric that utterly fails to understand how this works. They love switching back and forth for this reason. Without the flip flopping, they could be arm twisted into being more progressive, but you somehow wish so badly you could punish them for not doing as you please that youd rather see exactly what you claim to hate.
This is you being completely unable to see nuance.
You are, at this point, saying that you pretty much agree with what I am saying, but want to bash me for some made up beliefs you have where every person who believes the clear fact that of the 2 options democrats are the correct ones also completely supports how the DNC operates, which obviously is false.
What in the universe could this possibly mean. Are you suggesting that you will be supporting the republicans instead? Because it is one or the other, so this just goes back to your ridiculous assumption from above.
What viable alternative?
You speak in meandering riddles because ultimately your positions hold no merit. This is why all you can do is spout irrelevant rhetoric and specific criticisms against your views.
This says it all then doesn't it. You follow a pretend socialist influencer and think that means that you are are supirior to everyone else despite being unable to grasp the viewpoints of others nor state your own clearly.