267
US House votes to force weapons shipments to Israel, rebuking Biden
(www.reuters.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 17 May 2024
267 points (96.8% liked)
News
35714 readers
843 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Feels like they should be adding critical contextual information like this to the titles. I know the headline writers hate the idea of people just reading the headline to get informed (because clicks are needed for ads), but people do get informed that way. It's a very different story if "Congress rebukes Biden on Israel" than "Republicans rebuke Biden on Israel", and I expect "US House" translates into an average reader's mind much more as "Congress" than "Republicans".
Which is why we need tests before voting. The average American is too ill informed to be trusted with voting.
The Republicans have brought in all sorts of other hurdlers for voting but oddly nothing that would test the intelligence of their electorates.
I can't imagine how such tests would be fair and not abused. It might make for a more effective electorate if there weren't so many poorly informed votes in the mix, but making that happen is almost certain to lead to abuse and very unlikely to produce the desired result.
Lead to abuse agreed, but why do you think it's very unlikely to produce the desired result?
Two reasons:
Fair enough, I think I agree anyway, but the idea of an unbiased test that filters out ignorant people is appealing.
Frankly, democracy in it's current form is struggling, so it seems like we need to make some serious adjustments.
Civics test, not political test.
How does a civics test prove competency to vote. And do you bar someone from voting for not knowing what the three branches of government are? What's the correct answer to "are we a democracy"? Is there a reason a single-issue voter shouldn't be able to vote if they don't know things irrelevant to their single issue?
Yes.
Matter of opinion.
No.
A civics test would confirm you understand how government functions. Not that you have the right opinions.
My proposal was sardonic. The right has tried to revive anti-voter measures but none that would reduce the ability of their halfwit supporters to cast their ballots.
Yeah they had those in the South in the 50’s and 60’s. It, uh, wasn’t a good thing.
Yes. That's the joke. They can't do it now because their constituents are morons.
Their constituents were morons back in the day too, they just made either separate tests or tests that for cultural reasons were easier for the "right people" to pass. Lots of them would have failed the literacy tests too, so they made alternate options that only white people would qualify for.