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
I hate this graphic. Read top to bottom, "have the day you Voted for" which is obviously incorrect as you would only capitalize the first word of the statement, so it's bottom to top/left to right, thus "Voted for day you have the" which is also clearly not correct. Even if you ignore the capitalization error, the statement is just shit. I get what it's trying to convey, but it sucks ass at doing so. It's a roundabout way of saying "you reap what you sow" but the creator got all "Live, Laugh, Love" (or I guess "live, laugh, Love") about it and thought they were creative and smart.
I bitched about this like 6 months ago the last time I saw it, and I'll bitch every time I see it. It's awful on all levels. Mirror the rainbow, flip the text so it reads left to right + top to bottom, and they really need a sharper phrase in general.
Dude, it’s just a graphic I got from somewhere else, and I throw it on posts where it seems to apply.
I get what bothers you, but I think you’re caring wayyyy too much about a little comment graphic to type all that out! I’ve posted it a bunch of times, and everyone seems to understand the meaning just fine in spite of the odd capitalization.
Maybe, but it's a slippery slope where logical and quality arguments - even if it's a simple image - lose their impact. The quality of an argument becomes diminished, and by letting that happen, you open yourself and your argument to criticism.
This isn't a 'you' thing, I get that, but it is a fine, real-world example of it happening. If the creator of the image can't be bothered to step back and see the obvious flaws, it has lost its merit before it's even started, only being carrier by the people who are okay with spreading it without seeing the problems it has.
Would you put any trust into a professional of any field who cannot create an argument, be it text or image, that has such glaring issues? And you know the audience that this is trying to poke fun at will rip it to bits worse than I have. It has no impact, other than in echo chambers, where people overlook the obvious.
shrug