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
You just can't help yourself can you? A year of having a wildly mistaken understanding of the political calculus around Joe Biden and what it takes for Democrats to win, putting out a view point and a particular rhetoric that was objectively helping Trump to victory; then the most minor of admonitions on your part that you were wildly in the wrong. But obviously zero introspection on your part as to why you were in the wrong. Have you considered why you were so wildly in the wrong as long as you were, to the point of basically costing the Democrats the ability to win any house of power in 2024?
We're talking about AOC and the DSA, and I'm making some specific points about how to wield political power and what it takes to stay "in" power when the "team" you are on would rather not have you. You, like some one who has no fucking clue what they are talking about, decide to make it personal and just go on the attack. Brother. You have the political calculus of a naked mole rat. Like, the beliefs you have around politics aren't useful for predicting what will happen.
You and many others here seem have attached your identity to a specific political team. And when that team gets criticized, you imagine yourself to be personally under attack. You (and many others here) can't separate your identities. Maybe its because you are older, and haven't spent the time to self-actualize and have that independent identity; maybe you are younger and haven't had the opportunity. Maybe you have no real experience in politics or campaigning or institution building. Maybe you've never read on or studied power, how it manifests, and how it is wielded to great or little effect. Regardless, you obviously have significant work to do to train your understanding of the world to the point where the beliefs and things you think predict future states of the world, which, in my personal belief system, is the entire point.
I put probably close to 3000 volunteer hours into squad/ squad adjacent campaigns. I've run political organizations, for years. I've worked directly with politicians as an outside organization. If you, as a political organization, can't withhold your endorsement/ power: you have none. And when you are charged with managing/ growing/ building a movement; building power is your entire job. If AOC isn't going to be on the right side of DSA, and they endorse her anyways, the DSA loses all power in the relationship and suffers (likely falls apart) as an organization.
This is literally the identical rhetoric you used for almost a year to argue that we shouldn't question Biden's fitness for office.
See, what someone with an informed political calculus would have done, would have been to support criticism of the incumbent and demand a proper competitive primary 10 months ago while we still had lots and lots of time and bandwidth for it.
If your views only make sense looking backwards, your views don't make sense.
You should really consider listening to those whose views predict future states of the world, and weighting their opinions more highly than your own, until you've adjusted your calculus sufficiently such that your views predict future states of the world.
Basically, you were wrong, are wrong, and will continue to be wrong until you begin to adjust your thinking.
Its so much more than that. Its that you had a wildly wrong opinion, an opinion that functionally hurt our ability to stop Trump. You had all the information you needed to make the right assessment, but your entire goal with your rhetoric was to shut down any kind of conversation that would allow for that right assessment to be made. It was fucking disgusting and it still is.
What it means, is that if your views only predict previous states of the universe but don't generalize to new states of the universe, we should ignore you.
Its that your model of the universe is wrong and you dont seem to care. You only care if it predicts in reverse, which is functionally useless.
Its about weighting. You take in many many opinions and you weight those where the prior maps more correctly to the posterior, then take the average. Weights can be positive or negative, and might be useful in either case. Its why I stick with dunces like you. I can apply a negative multiplier to your expressed opinions about what will happen and it better informs my prediction of future states.
I can basically take your view, look at whatever the opposite of it is, and use that to predict the future.
Amen
Yes, you did. Repeatedly and loudly, while calling everyone who was absolutely right fascists.
Just like you're doing now.
Becasue “someone with an informed political calculus would have chosen to not vote at all, right?
How can you say shit like this, and then suggest that not voting will bring change?
The perfect example of talking a lot and saying nothing.