1008
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 Feb 2024
1008 points (96.8% liked)
politics
19135 readers
1199 users here now
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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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. 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.
- 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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Maybe I’m a naive idealist, but, in the age of social media I actually tend to disagree. If there’s ever a time that a 3rd party could be plausible, it’s now. Everyone hates both sides, social media and the internet gives anyone a platform.
The notion that you cannot vote for anyone else is and has been pedaled by both sides for too long. It’s tired and false.
I don’t see either party being willing to pass something that in-essence, weakens their stance, so voting reform is likely dead.
Idk, this country is fucked. Like I can even easily go counter myself as I type this. You’re probably right. I just don’t want to believe it. I’ll likely be voting democrat anyway, simply cause my soul knows you’re right. Fuck.
I'm all for having choices outside of our de-facto two party system, but the reality is that the more progressive candidates we have, the more it splits the progressive vote. Our adversaries know this, as part of the Russian election interference involved social media posts encouraging progressives to vote for Green Party candidate Jill Stein. Stein claims she had no involvement, but there have been accusations that she has ties to Russia, particularly stemming from this gala she attended. A senate investigation found no wrongdoing on her part, however.
there is no evidence she was aware. this is slander.
Which part of my comment could be considered slander? I thought I was presenting the facts as they are, and even mentioned that she denied any knowledge of the Russian election interference done to promote her campaign and split the progressive vote.
you said there is evidence she was aware. that's not true.
Fair enough. I've updated my comment.