this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2024
646 points (94.2% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2545 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
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] normalexit@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

At first I assumed since this is a Republican that it would be about reducing abortions in case they had an incest exception.

Turns out they don't have such an exception, so he must have a really hot first cousin that is otherwise dtf.

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 3 points 10 months ago

Sometimes, a picture and a headline is all you need.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Hey... uh... Nick? Something you want to tell us?

[–] eran_morad@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Dude’s probably fucking his young male cousin.

[–] SpezBroughtMeHere@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I love how everyone that speaks logically and factually about this has to first overtly announce and apologize that they aren't supporting this candidate. Like, is everyone here so opposed to actual facts if it looks like there is even one iota of support for the 'other team'? Even when that's clearly not the case. Please, someone else has to see the stupidity.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

My experience on lemmy is that the facts are secondary. It's a slight exaggeration, but if you don't support someone, you have to oppose everything they do or you are some big supporter of them. If you point out some criticism of them is not based in fact, it's "why would you defend them?"

It's much easier if the world is black and white and you're in a bubble that agrees with that. And so they'll attack anything that upsets this uniform simplicity.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

This doesn't happen just on Lemmy. This happens on all social media. Everyone has their own little bubbles these days, and you must be 100% dedicated to the cause. Even the mere suggestion that the other side may have a point on anything is considered weakness and will get you labelled as a traitor to the cause. This is not only the state of politics these days, but the state of any topic of controversy: Sex, politics, religion, women's rights, LGBT rights, anything. You either must be 100% for or 100% against. Try to find a middle ground and you're just likely to find yourself ostracized by both sides.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago

While I agree, it seems especially pronounced here.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] theodewere@kbin.social 2 points 10 months ago

i see a lot of headlines about Republicans needing laws governing sex or sexuality.. why are you all so hung up on that shit, you fucking morons?

[–] NaNABCV@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

He looks like its already legal

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›