this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
398 points (93.1% liked)

politics

19080 readers
3538 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
 

"How has Stein fared as a leader? By AOC’s perfectly reasonable standard, she’s done abysmally. As of July 2024, a mere 143 officeholders in the United States are affiliated with the Green Party. None of them are in statewide or federal offices. In fact, no Green Party candidate has ever won federal office. And Stein’s reign has been a period of indisputable decline, during which time the party’s membership—which peaked in 2004 at 319,000 registered members—has fallen to 234,000 today.

This meager coalition can’t possibly kick-start a legitimate political movement, capable of organizing voters and advancing ideas outside of perennial electoral events. It’s just large enough, however, to spoil the work of those who put in this kind of work."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

This is fascism.

Anything can be fascism when taken completely out of meaning. Maybe if you completed the quote you'd have a little bit of context for the argument. I'm done with this discussion, it seems you are more than willing to twist my words to give artistic license to what you want me to say than to actually read what I wrote. Take it easy, stranger. Hope you are able to make thoughts and prayers work out for a better world, because that seems to be all you are capable of.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

Here's my other comment about what I think should be done for education. I have spoken with educators around the country about this idea and they tend to really like it, so long as they are paid for the work they do and they don't have more students to oversee directly.

https://lemmy.world/comment/12277181

I would like to not be hostile with you, although I can appreciate that I upset you. I would really be grateful if you would read about my educational idea above, because it's something we are both very passionate about and if you like it too, it's something you may enjoy talking to others about.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Okay, I hope this discussion has left you with at least some thoughts of your own regarding how you speak about voting. In today's climate where our civil rights are being eroded, it matters what people say and how they say it. No one wants to parrot old disenfranchisement dog whistles from ya know, the times when they denied black people the right to vote because they lacked an education white people found valid. And saying "basic education should be a requirement to vote," is LITERALLY a dog whistle from then. That's like saying gay people should wear a pink triangle and then acting confused when I take issue with that specific verbiage and idea. Please consider how propaganda affects all of us and we all may pick up problematic speech from time to time because we live in a dystopia. People who engage in problematic rhetoric also deserve a basic education in things like civil rights and hate speech right? Otherwise it's dangerous.

seems to be all you are capable of.

Lol, such a random stray out of no where. Also ableism agaiiiiin why

I really miss ~2016 Late Stage Capitalism on Reddit and I was hoping Lemmy would have some of those same people. I miss them.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Okay, I hope this discussion has left you with at least some thoughts of your own regarding how you speak about voting.

The same thoughts I came in with, that education is needed now more than ever.

In today’s climate where our civil rights are being eroded, it matters what people say and how they say it.

Which makes me wonder how you can be so smarmy with every sentence that you type. Your people skills leave much to be desired.

. No one wants to parrot old disenfranchisement dog whistles from ya know, the times when they denied black people the right to vote because they lacked an education.

Ahh, we're back to twisting my words. I'll repeat them, so we can ensure that the context lives on: "I’m not saying that we should take away the right to vote from the uneducated. I’m saying we should put more focus into education."

You know, for posterity, since your brand of journalism leans into the yellow end of the spectrum.

And saying “basic education should be a requirement to vote,” is LITERALLY a dog whistle from then.

It certainly is. Good thing I didn't say it. I said that we should make sure that we are educating people along with their rights. Giving people rights and hoping they know what to do with them is how we ended up with Trump in office.

That’s like saying gay people should wear a pink triangle and then acting confused when I take issue with that specific verbiage and idea.

Oh, let me see which logical fallacy this falls into. I'm thinking either Red Herring or Equivocation.

Please consider how propaganda affects all of us and we all may pick up problematic speech from time to time because we live in a dystopia.

You seem to be the one drawing false equivocation and shielding yourself behind an unrelated argument because you know that you have no ground to stand on. But, please, tell me how I'm anti-LGBTQ+, again. I'm sure the second time you say it, it will come true.

People who engage in problematic rhetoric also deserve a basic education in things like civil rights and hate speech right? Otherwise it’s dangerous.

Well, at least you seem to have a grasp on the lesson I am trying to teach you.

Lol, such a random stray out of no where. Also ableism agaiiiiin why

Is this red herring, again? I can't be sure, but I think you either don't understand what I said, or you don't understand ableism. Either way, that ain't me, chief.

I really miss ~2016 Late Stage Capitalism on Reddit and I was hoping Lemmy would have some of those same people. I miss them.

No one is stopping you from making a triumphant return to the cesspool you crawled out of. You can ride a donkey in while they fan you with palm fronds.

So, there now. I've responded to every insipid argument you've made, and nothing you've said can be taken out of context. You are not the person you seem to think you are. You manipulate and twist words to serve your own ends, and people like you are the reason we have a lot of the issues we do. I'm gonna go ahead and block you now, so feel free to have the last word, I won't try to stop you.

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

I just read this whole argument and you are correct. This person seems to think talking about third parties honestly might hurt people's feelings and that somehow takes their rights away. Ri-fuckin-diculous

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Which makes me wonder how you can be so smarmy with every sentence that you type. Your people skills leave much to be desired.

No self awareness on your projection here? Lol

You also said:

there is a baseline level of education that should be a requirement to vote.

I don’t want your vote to count alongside mine

Giving people rights and hoping they know what to do with them is how we ended up with Trump in office.

So you DO want to tell people who to vote for?

Ps Red Herring is a literary device. You mean strawman, I think.

Pss you may want to rethink your use of chief and yellow

Reddit and LSC was taken over by rightwingers, this is known. Can't go back bc everyone was banned for being leftwing. Literally, it was a scandal on a different small reddit that also got banned. Ironically, I was permabanned for advocating that people go vote. This was not a bannable position in 2016, when 60% of the sub was pro-Bernie.

Since you're blocking me anyway, I'm not going to take a lot of time with your comment. I will say that you misunderstood the example of a dogwhistle I was using regarding pink triangle - which I used because I thought you wouldn't be anti-queer and would notice it.

A good judge for ableism, I'd if you're saying something a Nazi would also say to justify gassing a prisoner. So lazy - yup. Incompetent -yup. Just has to be reactionary regarding someones abilities and hostile - hostility is an invitation to violence.

I’ve responded to every insipid argument you’ve made, and nothing you’ve said can be taken out of context. You are not the person you seem to think you are. You manipulate and twist words to serve your own ends, and people like you are the reason we have a lot of the issues we do. I’m gonna go ahead and block you now, so feel free to have the last word, I won’t try to stop you.

Here, try reading this again, the irony is really too funny:

Your people skills leave much to be desired.

Lol

Okay, block me, that was always allowed.