this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
371 points (100.0% liked)

politics

22365 readers
3656 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 100 points 6 months ago (59 children)

People not voting for Harris because of Gaza need to avoid watching the debate, otherwise they’ll change their minds. No matter how bad things are, they can get worse.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 6 months ago (10 children)

Why is it always 'voters need to lower their standards', and never 'candidates need to be decent human beings'?

[–] [email protected] 90 points 6 months ago (6 children)

Because we have an unjust voting system, and petulantly refusing to vote can and will get people killed, and rights stripped from millions.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 55 points 6 months ago

Because having a tantrum because reality does not conform to your sense of fairness not only accomplishes fuck-all, but actively makes things worse.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Because when you let perfect become the enemy of good, you end up with neither.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 6 months ago

instead of whining about voting for somebody you don't absolutely love all aspects of, why don't you use your time advocating to change the voting system so that you can vote for somebody else meaningfully.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (58 replies)
[–] [email protected] 73 points 6 months ago (5 children)

Fox News poll, right after the debate.

Boomertown.

[–] [email protected] 42 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Fox is conservative STATE propaganda. No different to Russian or North Korean state propaganda. Regardless of the blatant bias, there is literally nothing stopping them from manufacturing this "poll" out of thin air.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 6 months ago (6 children)

Fox isn’t state media. I dislike the mendacious fuckers as much as the next guy but let’s try and stick to facts.

The US has very few state media organizations. Voice of America is one. Radio Free Europe is another.

Fox is an independent organization, if they were state media the Biden admin would have control of their news. That obviously isn’t the case.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Good news is 8% managed to get their head out of their ass. Who is answering that poll besides hardcore conservatives?

[–] [email protected] 44 points 6 months ago

Russian Bots

[–] [email protected] 20 points 6 months ago

The comment about Haitian immigrants eating cats definitely clenched it for me.

My ass cheeks that is. As I was dying laughing.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 51 points 6 months ago

It will change a lot.

This will dramatically increase the number of Republicans who will tell everyone they're not voting for him, and then vote for him.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 6 months ago (6 children)

A few Republicans I know said they were going to vote libertarian or just not vote after watching the debate so she did pretty fucking well.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Despite how much they go on about how nuanced and special their views are, libertarians will find a way to vote GOP like they always do.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 6 months ago (3 children)

I'm sure they said that.

I like to lie about things I'm ashamed of too.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 37 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (8 children)

Did she? I listened to the debate and she sounded mid for most of it. She spent more time attacking Trump than she did answering the questions she was asked.

Sure, she fared better than her predecessor, but "not shitting her pants" is a low bar. Trump was definitely worse than her, but again, if the bar is "don't act butthurt when your opponent says your rallies are boring", then congrats, I guess.

Reading comments from both sides, it seems that the left sees her not being geriatric as a win; and the right thinks that Trump was unjustly treated (targeted questions, live fact-checking, etc...), which is absurd considering that (a) they also asked Harris difficult questions (fracking and Israel, for example, which she did have a hard time answering), and (b) he was given free reign to talk out of order more times than I can count.

I think Harris "won" because Trump sucked. He sidestepped questions regarding an abortion ban ("I haven't talked with JD about it" fucking lol) and Ukraine ("Do you want Ukraine to win the war?" "I want the war stopped" TWICE in a row, followed by "I know Putin really well" and a rant about the awesomeness of Victor Orban); he repeatedly told lies (post-birth abortion and pets-eating immigrants being the highlight) which were promptly caught by the live fact-checker, and even showed weakness and undecisiveness ("do you have a plan?" "I have concepts of a plan").

But those are blunders that Trump committed, not something that Harris should take credit for. Nothing I heard screamed of "masterclass" debate, and I doubt that it will give her an edge in the upcoming elections or sway electors one way or the other. After all, the people who lived under four years of Trump's presidency and watched January 6th unfold live, and still call themselves "undecided" are pretty much lying to themselves at this point.

[–] [email protected] 64 points 6 months ago (8 children)

Enlightened centrist bullshit

[–] [email protected] 22 points 6 months ago

Yes, that whole paragraph sounded like "She won" in an awful lot of frustrated and apologetic words

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 47 points 6 months ago

She spent more time attacking Trump than she did answering the questions she was asked.

But those are blunders that Trump committed, not something that Harris should take credit for.

I don't think it's generous to conclude that many of those blunders can in fact be credited to Harris deliberately striking his ego.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 6 months ago

Those still undecided aren't going to change their vote because of actual policy. But some don't want to be associated with losers - and showing just how much of a loser Trump is might make them at least not vote for him.

That's a strategy.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 6 months ago

Tell yourself if it's more important to make Trump look like an idiot or to say actual policy right now. We're all voting for Kamala we just need the idiots to not vote for Trump

[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 months ago

I think she actually attacked him less than she should have. Trump said he didn't know who the President is anymore. That seemed like a perfect opportunity to call out how much his age is affecting his judgement and clearly everyone else can tell you who the President is.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 months ago

it seems that the left sees her not being geriatric as a win

Who on the left?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 6 months ago

Some Republican politicians will switch perhaps.

load more comments
view more: next ›