this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
633 points (100.0% liked)

politics

22535 readers
4307 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It's their own words my dude. Fucking blue maga.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 7 months ago (2 children)

No, I’m not being blindly loyal. I’m understanding that it’s (frankly kinda idiotic) political posturing. It’s politics. It’s de rigueur.

And moreover, you’re taking the fact that the platform is highlighting the feckless inconsistency and ineptitude of the Trump administration and the guy himself as a “we can do better” statement, while I see it as much more of a “huh, thought you said you’d be ‘strong on defense’, but that didn’t pan out” - I.e., largely pointing out hypocrisy, as well as the fact that he manifestly does not give a shit about the welfare and health of people in the military.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I see it as much more of a “huh, thought you said you’d be ‘strong on defense’, but that didn’t pan out”

This is the official party platform of the democratic party. This is where they write and then vote on what their party plans to do, not some media piece to dunk on Trump. This is about what they want to do once they're in office. It's their action plan, it's not meant to rally voters by comparing their candidate to Trump.

Read the paragraphs before that, the section that starts with

Through aggressive diplomacy backed by U.S. military power, the Administration has worked alongside our allies and partners to deter and defend against Iran and its terrorist surrogates.

They're proudly displaying their aid in genocide and how they are bombing the middle east and promising more. It's also telling that they are constantly comparing Bidens presidency to Trumps. They absolute plan to stay the course they just switched out the front.

Compare it with their 2020 platform:

Democrats will call off the Trump Administration’s race to war with Iran and prioritize nuclear diplomacy, de-escalation, and regional dialogue. Democrats believe the United States should not impose regime change on other countries and reject that as the goal of U.S. policy toward Iran. We believe the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) remains the best means to verifiably cut off all of Iran’s pathways to a nuclear bomb. The Trump Administration’s unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA isolated us from our allies and opened the door for Iran to resume its march toward a nuclear weapons capacity that the JCPOA had stopped. That’s why returning to mutual compliance with the agreement is so urgent. The nuclear deal was always meant to be the beginning, not the end, of our diplomacy with Iran. Democrats support a comprehensive diplomatic effort to extend constraints on Iran’s nuclear program and address Iran’s other threatening activities, including its regional aggression, ballistic missile program, and domestic repression

This is a clear shift in rhetoric towards Neocon Warhawk.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I guess they are too close to see it.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Do you? Do you really hope that the commentor above yelled at a child to "literally fuck its own face"?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It would be the consequence of your wish.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Ok. I'll pretend that you're not just being a weird pendant about shit that could not be less important...

Yeah dude, that's exactly what I meant when I said that. That was the point of my comment. It wasn't meant to be taken as a rhetorical device to make an obvious point. It was specifically about yelling at children. Go fuck yourself

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah dude keep just keep insulting me and then still try to take the high road lol

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

I don't remember ever behaving in any way that would imply that I was taking a high road.