50
Democrats vote down resolution calling for arms embargo on Israel, recognizing Palestinian state
(www.timesofisrael.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2025
50 points (96.3% liked)
News
37727 readers
430 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Serious question, what is wrong with the headline? The article is only 4 paragraphs long and the headline basically sums what is written in the article. Id get it if you thought the article itself was shitty but I stared at the headline long enough without seeing anything wrong so I gotta ask, what am I missing?
A headline is supposed to convey a simple straight forward summary of the article, without any question or confusion about the content.
This headline is anything but straight forward .... it can mean multiple things to multiple different groups of people ... and the writer and news agency can feign ignorance and call it all a misunderstanding if anyone reading it questions the headline.
A sign of a bad news agency or an unreliable source is when they produce headlines that beg more questions about the presentation, journalist, writer, or news agency than the actual article they shared.
I thought it was straightforward.
Democrats voted on a resolution for an arms embargo, and the vote failed.
My first assumption was that it was only the Democrats voting, which seems to have been the case, as it was a DNC internal vote. If there were more than democrats voting on it, then to say that it was the democrats who were voting would seem to me to be unnecessary or misleading.
They certainly could have mentioned the DNC in the title to make it more more clear, though.
That's actually less straightforward
Yeah I still don't understand the people having a problem with this?
What things? How are you reading it that's what I'm not understanding either. You say it can convey multiple things but I'm not seeing it.
The main problem with the headline is: which Democrats where? Which country? Is this an important bill with grave consequences or an opinion poll?
Come on now. For which Democrats and which country don't be naive. Intellectual dishonesty is never been helpful for anyone ever and you should stop practicing it. As for the other two questions that's not necessary for a title that's what the article is for. That's the context you're supposed to get from reading articles not skimming titles.
Those are answered in the article.
Look, "Times of Israel" is not a source that I know or trust. So I'm not going to waste my time clicking through and reading the article, unless I'm convinced this is a really noteworthy story that's worth reading.
So in that sense, the headline writers have failed to convert me into a reader. Because I can't tell if this is the entire House Democratic caucus; or if it's the Democratic party convention of Putnam Co., GA; or if it's democratic reformers in monarchical Saudi Arabia.