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
The Harris and Trump teams don't agree about whether mikes should be cut when their opponent is speaking.
You might think Team Harris wants the mikes cut. But actually, they want the mikes kept on throughout the debate. Team Trump wants them cut, because they are afraid Trump won't be able to control himself and end up looking bad. Which I think is hilarious.
Just fyi, it's "mic" when talking about microphones.
Phew, I was really worried someone was gonna cut poor mike.
The USA has a male circumcision rate of over 80%, so likelihood is that Mike is already cut.
Mutilation rate*
You know I was going to put that first but couldn't getting the spelling close enough for predictive text to pick up and didn't want to randomly say "genital mutilation" to my phone while sat on the bus.
Yeah, you want to be precise when talking about destroying naughty bits on mass transit.
As a bonus, my phone has VERY bad ideas for events 😂
I mean U.S. presidential debates don't need to be posh intellectual philosophy clubs, but cutting Mikes on the stage, that would be a bit too far.
(Also if your data is accurate they would probably run out of uncut Mikes really fast.)
Looks like around 8,000 Michael's were born in 2023, so probably about another 4,000 so far this year. I'll not sure at what age American's start mutilating their children's penises though, so I guess some of those might already be done.
They did… Mike’s not the VP candidate this time around. I was trying to figure out what he was going to be doing at the debate….
Aside from attracting flies, you mean.
"On Mike... The lovely Cher! You OK, Mike?"
Hot take: Harris' team wants open hot mics because there's a nonzero chance of catching Trump uttering the hard-R
I don’t think he’d lose a single voter, to be honest.
It was never about making him lose voters, his rabies-frothing brain dead fan base will never break. It was about making him look like the massive corrupt openly racist piece of shit that he is, so that everyone else with a brain will be motivated to actually get out and vote AGAINST him.
I think you're underestimating the growing disillusionment of MAGA voters. He lost, when he said he had it in the bag. He then flubbed a coup, which in the end only resulted in hundreds of MAGAts going to jail, with hardly a word of thanks or encouragement from him. Many of them have found themselves alienated from their families and wondering what it was for, because after eight years of Trump they haven't seen a single thing from him that he promised them.
The white supremacist douche brigades support him because he's all they've got, but everyone else is more wobbly than they have ever been. They fear "the libs", but with four years of Biden now and none of their fears realized in that time, the bite has gone out of even that particular dog.
Now is the time when we should be reaching out to them, encouraging them to come back into the fold of mainstream America. Let them realize that they've slipped to the fringes and are in danger of truly being left out.
I hope they know what they're doing . Trump voters don't expect Trump to present logical arguments and back them up. They expect him to shout nonsense, talk over his opponent, and then declare victory at the end because that's what their idea of "tough" is.
So I hope the Harris camp has thought this strategy all the way through. A debate "win" isn't determined by who presented the most logical arguments or the most coherent vision. The winner is determined by who gets a bump in the polls and ultimately gains voters afterwards, and potential Trump supporters aren't looking the same things as Democrats.
Harris isn't using the debate to win over Trump supporters. That ship has sailed. She is using the debate to win over swing voters and motivate her own supporters.
Polls show swing voters don't like it when Trump interrupts people, and it can motivate (ie enrage) her own supporters.
I hope this is true, but there are definitely many swing voters who consider Trump's bullshit to be how tough people behave , and it makes them more likely to vote for him. If that weren't the case I doubt he would have been elected.
I suspect ultimately Harris will agree to mute mics and just use Trump's reluctance to ridicule him.
I know there are probably some good reasons not to go there, but I'd really love to see the Harris campaign turn this into a "free speech" argument. The righties have spent a lot of time conditioning their supporters with "free speech" dog whistles.
thats what team Harris says, doesnt mean its true if you want to be neutral.
I am sure team Trump woukd say something like we dont want Harris intruptting Trump when its his turn.
I am pro Harris but I agree with muting mics
We have ample evidence of Donald not shutting the fuck up. It is true. Neutrality doesn't mean shoving aside the evidence of objective reality.
Then I have the perfect solution. Mute Harris but keep Trump's on. What could go wrong?
Is that argument that Harris will be stealing Trump's job? Of the two, only one of them is known for their inability to shut the fuck up.
Open mic is like handing Dementia DonOLD a rope that he will no doubt hang himself with. I'm all for it. The fact that his team doesn't want it makes me want it even more.