this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

politics

19086 readers
3984 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
 

Really you don't need to read more than one chart:

If you vote for anyone other than Harris, you're voting for Trump:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

certain lemmy users around these parts absolutely frothing at the mouth seeing this graph

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The argument is always that "A vote for Not X is a vote for Y", forgetting how many third party voters would simply skip the ballot line or refuse to vote at all if these options weren't available.

Calling Jill Stein and Chase Oliver "fascist enablers" for appearing on the ballot misses the entire reason they have a vote base at all.

[–] Brunbrun6766@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Fuck Jill Stein. Never forget the dinner she attended

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If people can tolerate Trump being on the Epstein flight logs and Harris taking enormous sums from the Crypto-Bros, I don't think Stein's dinner with the Russians is going to phase them.

But I guess you can always default to the Libertarians. Can't think of anything problematic about a bunch of Americans that idolize Milei.

[–] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And the enormous sums she taken from AIPAC, and refusing to prosecute one of the architects of the 2008 housing crisis, opposing body cams on cops, locking up parents of truant children, etc. etc.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Oh sure, but this is all far-right pro-Trump propaganda. Don't let it influence you in any way.

[–] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Facts are not propaganda, you may believe that everything you disagree with is propaganda. She has a well-documented history of an being authoritarian right-wing cop

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Facts are not propaganda

Ben Shapiro ass response.

Selective release of and focus on information is a classic propaganda technique.

[–] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 months ago

It is selective because those are pretty significant issues to be selective about. When she is in a position of authority like she was in California, she is very right-wing. She's very Draconian she's very authoritarian.

[–] meowMix2525@lemm.ee -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

also I believe that was sarcasm and they were agreeing with you.

edit: unless they weren't. I honestly don't know anymore lmao. cause they're right about propaganda but that doesn't mean it's cool to just disregard facts that make you feel less good about doing something. One should take in the whole picture.

[–] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 months ago

I don't bother trying to decipher sarcasm anymore when a majority of the bullshit isn't sarcasm.

[–] anticolonialist@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago

The enablers of fascism are the 2 capitalist owned parties

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

A similar article will be posted every time Monk posts one supporting a 3rd party spoiler from now on.

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Genuine question: why has he not been banned? To me he seems to repeatedly violate the rule about arguing in good faith, and - to be honest - his passive aggressive civility feels at times more hostile than straight up attacks.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

We've talked about it amongst ourselves with the mods and admins and have concluded that having a shitty opinion is not infringing.

They do post legitimate sources with legitimate opinions. They're BAD opinions, but you aren't going to get banned for having a bad opinion.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

It's not the opinion, it's the JAQ energy and baiting.

If they just posted articles, that's one thing.

They legitimately try to bait people into being heated about things. Afterwhich, they cry victim

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I don't much have an issue with the material they chose to post - the nature of a link aggregator will sort them to the bottom regardless due how how voting works and as you say, they're legitimate sources.

My issue is more regarding their conduct in the comment sections.

[–] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Their conduct is more cordial than the responses they get.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Have ya ever heard of Southern politeness? Cause ya can technically be cordial while being a complete shitbag, a good example being "bless your heart" more or less meaning go die in a hole.

[–] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml -2 points 2 months ago

Would you correlate to being a shitbag is someone that you happen to disagree with

[–] anticolonialist@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Spoiler implies we would vote for a Democrat if there were no 3rd party options. We would not. There's a larger chance you would vote for a republican than us voting Democrat

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

For you, personally, that may be true. Statistically speaking, in general, it's very much the opposite:

https://www.thirdway.org/memo/the-data-how-third-parties-could-be-spoilers-that-elect-trump

"Similarly, Third Way’s polling has found that Biden’s voters are 13 percentage points more likely to consider voting for a third party than Trump’s voters. While Biden has a higher ceiling, with his possible vote totals well north of 50%, Trump has a stronger floor: his voters are more loyal, so third parties are less likely to draw them away."

If you lean left, and you fail to vote for the Democratic candidate, you only help the Republican candidate.

[–] anticolonialist@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There's the confusion, we dont lean left, we are left. Democrat voters lean left then vote for non left leaning candidates. In rhetoric the DNC may sound like they lean left but in action they do not.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Compared to Trump, Nixon is to the left.

[–] anticolonialist@lemmy.world -3 points 1 month ago

By Obama's own admission, Nixon was to the left of Obama.