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
Oh, you're ready to watch it all burn down? That's just swell. You're not just going to sit on your ass and wait for someone else to burn it down, right? Because that would just be letting the worse candidate win so you can keep your hands 'clean' because you're in a position comfortable enough to sit on your hands and play the part of the moralist as others suffer, so long as you don't examine your own inaction too closely.
Right?
If all you do is vote once every other year, what right do you have to say that person should do more to support their ideas than you do for yours? People who say what you say also say stuff like "I dont like biden but . . ." And no one asks them to prove they tried to field a better candidate than Biden to prove it.
If you're voting for someone you consider the 'less evil' option but then do nothing to fix the evil you voted for, you're exactly the same as the person you criticized.
I'm not advocating a fucking civil war.
That doesn't make your statement less hypocritical. You didn't call them out for wanting a civil war, you called them out for only voting to achieve their goals.
... can you describe to me how someone, who advocates civic participation in democracy, a form of action to improve the world, calling out the hypocrisy of someone else, who advocates sitting around hoping things get worse, in the hopes that someone else will start a civil war, a form of action to improve the world, is, itself, hypocrisy?
Honestly probably not, you continue to show you have no interest in understanding any reasoning other than your own which you seem to think is the ONLY way to achieve just and desirable goals. It's right there in the first reply I gave you, but now you want to water it down with whose ambitions are just and whose are not. Theses have no bearing on what you choose to mock them for, which was their means of obtaining their goal. If you wanna mock them for being dumb and self destructive go ahead and do that, but you didn't do that you mocked the amount of effort they applied, then got mad when it was pointed out that it's just about the same amount of effort you apply.
Man, I'm not responsible for your lack of reading comprehension.
Re-read you own comment, not for any argument or point I'm making, but just for your own benefit, you could learn from yourself once you realize you're not above your own advice. If you wanna mock someone else's effort, best be sure you're actually doing something meaningful, because voting is not much harder than abstaining in protest. Both are interactions with the electoral system and both only impact the electoral system.
I am literally advocating for civic participation in the system as a means of change, and I engage in civic participation in the system.
They are literally advocating for civil war as a means of change, but refuse to engage in any behavior that would contribute to that goal.
That you can't see that one is hypocritical and one isn't says more about you than me.
Well again that's only if you're only thinking about your own perspective. If that person had your perspective, we wouldn't be here. Do you consider it bizarre for someone to believe that were already on the path to civil war, much the same way you believe you believe engaging with the electoral system will yield progress? It's not as if there are no signs of widening divisions in the country, authoritarian leaders trying to seize power, violent political rhetoric, militarized police forces, and dysfunctional governance.
Their comments are deleted now, so I can't even reference them but lets look at the democrats own messaging. When the dems say things like "vote like your democracy depends on it" it's not unreasonable for them to infer that staying home would then mean hastening of a civil war. So either them protesting the vote does indeed contribute to the goal of civil war, or this elections not as important as the messaging they're probably getting blasted with is making it seem.
I'm broke baby, broke and jobless for months now. Ain't shit about this comfortable.
Clearly comfortable enough to embrace it getting worse. Some of us will quite literally die without government-subsidized healthcare, or food assistance, or social security, all things on the GOP chopping block. You want to watch my grandparents die they're kicked out on the streets and unable to pay rent or food? Want to watch me vomit blood until I exsanguinate because the medication the government subsidizes is hundreds of dollars more a month than I make, period, much less can afford? You have fun with that. I sure as shit won't.
I'm not about to watch any of that. I'll be dead already, Pug.
So "fuck everyone else so long as I don't have to see it"?
Great. Very inspiring motto for revolution, comrade.
Climate change would like a word. So would the IPCC, they mentioned something about 2051 and uninhabitable areas.
What the fuck does that have to do with "Let's embrace making it worse"?
shrugs idk, it's past my bedtime. Great talk though, genuinely stimulating. Have a good night.