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.
- 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.
- 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
For instance: I have been called this multiple times when I try to present a nuanced argument about the American electoral system to some people on this site about how AIPAC and the threat of their campaign money being deployed against Harris kinda ties her hands with regards to coming out strongly against the Gaza Genocide, and moreover that castigating Harris for that ambiguity is wrongheaded because she’s currently the VP and doesn’t have the ability to enact any policy on the matter at the moment.
Basically, it’s used by people pushing bad-faith arguments trying to sap support from the only viable candidate who’s NOT a fascist to try to create false equivalence about the political tribalism in the US. Which is deeply stupid, because I have big problems with a lot of the more capitalistic/corp-friendly positions the Democratic Party has. The only reason I’m not still a card-carrying member of the DSA is because their position on the Ukraine War is imbecilic in the extreme.
Ugh, I’m so mad about the DSA’s position on the Ukraine War. Like, wtf…? I’m with you on that.
Also on how, often here but not as bad as Reddit was, nuanced discussion can get swept away in the common fervor. I don’t think it’s as generally stupid or ill-willed, but it still happens sometimes.
Anyway, who cares what tankie jerks have to say? Just block em. They’re fucking bananas.
Yeah, it’s irritating, but it can be fun to rhetorically dismantle bad faith arguments from the same handful of people wherever you see them using said arguments, just in the interest of not letting them spew their idiocy unopposed. I’m not under any illusion that I’m changing their minds, but I do think I’m somewhat frustrating whatever agenda they’re trying to push, which is nice.