690
Four Democrats Pass Bill Making It Harder for Married Women to Vote
(newrepublic.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 12 Apr 2025
690 points (100.0% liked)
politics
24898 readers
2538 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
You mean like how you go around telling people they don't blame Republicans if they point out something Democrats do?
I'm not telling you who you are, you are telling me who you are. Tell me how my hypothetical is not appropriate?
That's not how debating works. You don't take my analogy and say "that's meritless." You prove it to be meritless.
See let me spell it out for you like it's a standardized test.
In my analogy:
Burglar :: Republican
Cops :: Democrats
Dog :: My trust
Shooting :: voting against my interest
Is that clearer for you?
Reasoning was provided, you seem to be incapable of processing analogies and reasoning. You just did the same thing again. Why is it meritless? Because it's meritless. You have none of the requirements necessary to even hold a discussion. All you do is circular nonsense.
Here, let me ask you a very simple question and go from there.
What is the job of a congressmen? In the simplest terms you can think of.
Yeah, that's about what I expected. Discussion and understanding between two parties is a two way street. You've provided vague refutations with no specifics. Claimed assumptions without stating what those are. I don't even know what point you're trying to make aside from telling people they are wrong for feeling a certain way about something.
I was expecting you to not answer a single question I asked earnestly with any detail or specificity.
Oh forgive me for participating in a public conversation, I didn't realize I hacked into your DM's between you and that fellow. Thanks for moving the goal posts though. Maybe you should have just said that in your first reply.
You're totally right though, I'm the defensive one. Your not displaying classic projection or anything of that sort. Yet you keep responding here despite STILL refusing to answer a single question that's been asked of you.
Here's what it felt like conversing with you thus far.
"You're wrong."
"Why?"
"Because you're wrong, stop talking to meeeee!"
"Can I have some reasons why you think I'm wrong?"
"Because you're wrong! What part didn't you understand?!"
"Can you give me specifics?"
"Reeeeee! I'm not talking to you!"
But you are. You're just not saying anything.
Interesting, now you knew right away all sorts of things. And yet here you are still yapping away. So what does that mean, you're some kinda masochist? Who is trolling who? All I asked of you was to tell me what assumptions I made in my analogy and you've exerted tremendous effort to not answer. And you keep bringing up that you weren't talking to me. That's not how this format of public discourse works. Are you new to public forums or something? Plenty of people jump in at various points in a thread and it creates many forks. I can draw you a diagram if that would help you.