this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2024
141 points (77.0% liked)

politics

19088 readers
3630 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
 

You may have noticed a distinct lack of return2ozma. This is due to their admitting, in a public comment, that their engagement here is in bad faith:

I'm sure there will be questions, let me see if I can address the most obvious ones:

  1. Can I still post negative stuff about Biden?

Absolutely! We have zero interest in running an echo chamber. However, if ALL you're posting is negative, you may want to re-think your priorities. You get out of the world what you put into it and all that.

  1. Why now?

Presumption of innocence. It may be my own fault, but I do try to think the best of people, and even though they were posting negative articles, they weren't necessarily WRONG. Biden's poll numbers, particularly in minority demographics ARE in the shitter. They are starting to get better, but he still has a hell of a hill to climb.

  1. Why a 30 day temp ban and not a permanent ban?

The articles return2ozma shared weren't bad, faked, or from some wing-nut bias site like "beforeitsnews.com", they were legitimate articles from established and respected news agencies, pointing out the valid problems Biden faces.

The problem was ONLY posting the negatives, over and over and then openly admitting that dishonest enagement is their purpose.

Had they all been bullshit articles? It would not have taken anywhere near this much time to lay the ban and it would have been permanent.

30 days seems enough time for them to re-think their strategery and come back to engage honestly.

tl;dr - https://youtu.be/C6BYzLIqKB8#t=7s

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It is theoretically possible but not in fact the case at all. The War On Democracy always comes from the Republican Party

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

obama had a kill list and extrajudicially murdered us citizens. bill clinton signed the welfare reform and the crime bill and he signed off on moving the us embassy to jerusalem. under kennedy, we went into vietnam.

democrats don't value democracy. they do what the war machine wants, and sometimes that means having a war against democracy.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

obama had a kill list .

Yes. Osama Bin Laden.

bill clinton signed the welfare reform and the crime bill and he signed off on moving the us embassy to jerusalem. under kennedy, we went into vietnam.

WTF none of those have anything to do with democracy. Did you think "democracy" meant "do everything that you personally want"? Do you not get that you are not the only voter? LMFAO.

that means having a war against democracy.

How is going into Vietnam a war AGAINST democracy. Vietnam does not have a democracy, although South Vietnam had a democracy in 1975. And South Korea has a democracy today, because of the Korean War.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

none of those have anything to do with democracy

they were all antidemocratic. none of them supported justice. the North Vietnamese wanted communism. denying that using the war machine is antidemocratic.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

they were all antidemocratic. none of them supported justice.

Dude you are using "antidemocratic" to mean "anything I do not like" instead of "not what the voters wanted". It's kind of rude to pretend that you are the only voter who matters.

. the North Vietnamese wanted communism

How would you know? There was no election. That is like claiming the Italians wanted Fascism. And the reason for the war was to defend that other country of South Vietnam which definitely did not want communism.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

the supposed reason for the war was the gulf of tonkin, and the real motivation was dominoe theory. don't lie.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

So you now admit US involvement in the (2nd of 3) Vietnam wars was not to "spread democracy".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

that was my position the whole time: democrats are lying about supporting democracy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

And you've been wrong the whole time.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You were wrong about many different things

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

if that were true you could enumerate them

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Dude you are using “antidemocratic” to mean

something the majority did not choose.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Then all your examples are wrong.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

there is a cure for historical illiteracy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

one of us does.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

not just Osama. American citizens.