politics
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
view the rest of the comments
Feel like your response to my, admittedly facetious, comment is overly aggressive. Obviously tactics need to be geared towards the voters in a given area/election, but the original joke I responded to is that this seems like an obvious tactic that is not utilised nearly enough, and I agree with and was building on that.
none of mamdanis campaign catered to right wing ideas.
No, the comment I replied to suggested acknowledging and addressing voters' concerns, I sarcastically suggested the opposite.
Yeah, I read it as like:
"Huh, building our homes out of heavier, tougher bricks is a great way to prevent our houses from burning down."
"Ah, I see! So we should build our houses out of twice as much wood!"
Kinda related to the trope "comically missing the point", which, as you say, was the intent.
The unfortunate trouble with written communication, where you can't pick up on tone as easily. I'm not a fan of using /s, as I think it takes away from the comment, but I can see how it can be helpful to avoid misunderstandings.
Sadly, I don't think that's very obvious to many people around these parts. It's full of uncompromising ideologues, the sort that put us in this mess in the first place.
I'm not downplaying Mamdani's win. They will surely downplay the victory in Virginia.
I'm being heavily downvoted for making an objectively sensible statement based on the available evidence. We need to STOP dividing the party.
No, you're being rude and antagonistic to your supposed allies.
And you're the one here dividing them. People are happy someone won the election, and saying this helps future elections, and you seem offended people are happy about this.
No, people are happy we won THIS election, and so am I. I'm also happy we won in VA. Are you? Or do you deny that the centrist approach can ever work?
All the "establishment Dems" bullshit is how we have Trump again.
Probably. I didn't pay attention to VA, just my state ballot and NYC.
Correct, they lost to the biggest moron twice.
I might hazard to guess that some of the down votes are because of the aggressive tone you took, it doesn't exactly invite a friendly discussion. I appreciate that politics are a charged subject at the best of times, but I think the anger needs to be channelled more effectively, maybe now more than ever. Which is to say that I fully agree with your statement about needing to avoid division.
No, it the content. People in here will downplay VA when both are important wins. I don't take this cutthroat view, I'm happy to get wins where we can. I'm tire of people here refusing to acknowledge that more than their tactic can work.
Hard disagree, I've not seen a single person disagreeing with your points, only with the way you've raised them. Nor have I seen anyone express displeasure about the VA results, despite you talking about how 'they' are downplaying it.
In the interest of not stoking more argument, I would urge you to take a moment to read and parse the responses you've got here, and see if they natch up with what you think people are saying to you.
Good for you, I HAVE seen those things. What was your point?
I have a number of responses that are single word insults, positive "karma" for those. What do you say about that?
I've already have had a number of people try to downplay it. Just look the amount of Mamdani posts on Lemmy vs those of VA. On top of that, I'm told she only one there because her opponent was crazy. Diminishing her accomplishment. These people don't want to admit that a varied approach is necessary. They want their way or nothing.
Yeah, they are. You can choose not to believe me, I don't care. I know I'm not lying.
I think it's probably contextual, the single word insults might fit better with the thread they're in. But here, you've waded into a thread on a specific subject to insult and berate people for (supposedly) not being excited enough about a different subject. And then respond to anyone trying to give you feedback by accusing them of not being excited enough about that other subject despite them saying nothing about it.
Nope, not everyone downvoted because of the content. I enjoy down voting people who sound like assholes. And you fit the bill.
I expect people to downvote me when I talk like an asshole too. Which probably happens more often than I'd like to internalize.
I'm not saying EVERYONE did for that reason.
Your theory is completely wrong though. I have several responses to my comments that are just insults, not even a point being made. Single word responses that are insults. Guess what? They all have a ton of upvotes. Pretty much blows that theory out of the water.
It's the content. People here want to pretend like ONLY Mamdani won. Because the VA victory goes against their narrative. They refuse to objectively evaluate reality. They'd probably rather we'd lost in VA.
I didn't theorize anything though. I told you why I, personally, hit that downvote button. And I have definitely been downvoted for being an asshole here. I know I deserve it sometimes.
As for people not wanting to talk about VA. I have no opinion on that. I only have a few friends in VA and none of them are the type to tell me how they feel about a local election.
I expect people to vote based on agreement or disagreement. And I'm not going coddle anybody, it IS fucking simplistic and it hurts the causes they supposedly dearly support.