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
Biden's best move on climate was a subtle one that went almost unnoticed. The Democrats quietly slipped language into the inflation reduction act that reclassified CO2 as a pollutant, thus restoring the ability for the EPA to regulate it that has been stripped by the Supreme Court. That's Republican level hardball that we almost never see from the Democrats.
An agency that has almost zero power to do fuck all about it? (Compliments of Koch funding Republicans)
Again, it’s just enough to keep most people saying “he’s working on it” but isn’t actually enough to stop the republicans from fucking us over.
They had almost zero power. That is no longer true, and you have no idea what you are talking about. Furthermore, I don't think you even care.
oh, yes. I'm the one whose ignorant
not the guy using ad hominem attacks with zero evidence I'm wrong.
Do you believe the EPA is powerless?
Most regulatory agencies in the us are captured by the industries they regulate.
They’ve been largely ineffectual since bush junior.
Keep in mind almost all of them rely heavily on self reporting (“no benzene leaks here! Trust me bro!”). As long as they’re not setting lakes on fire or giving kids cancer at high enough rates doctors and civil liberties groups start taking notice, they’re going to get off with paying less than compliance would set them back.
This is an inevitable consequence of money in politics. And blaming while it absolutely isn’t fair to blame Biden for things republicans shit on….
… if you can’t be part of the solution, then, you bejng in office is part of the problem.
proceeds to blame Biden anyway
Your take is very lacking in nuance.
Perhaps a better way to say it, is that it isn’t that Biden is to blame for republicans being shit humans and the stuff they do.
He isn’t actively destroying America, no. As a country, we need more than he’s capable (or unwilling,) to provide. Intentionally or not, he and the other centrists are blocking progressives from fighting for what we do need. And by obstructing people that are capable… he’s becoming part of the problem.
Look at civil liberties and voting rights. Republicans are running roughshod over the American people. At the rate we’re going it doesn’t matter how unpopular Biden is… everywhere is going to be so gerrymandered that republicans win.
Or look at the documents case. It took over two and a half for them to get most the documents back- and they’re still missing a binder that was full of the “most sensitive intel on Russia”.
While the DoJ is nominally independent, one phone call. That’s all it would have taken.
“You have a week to get those documents back or I have your resignation. Get. It. Done.” Is entirely in his purview.
LOL, read my post again. My entire point was that Biden used a clever ploy to give control back to the EPA after the SC killed it. Making CO2 a pollutant bypasses that ruling.
I joked elsewhere that I would like to mess around with a little AI moderation bot that tries to go beyond "is this racism" and into whether something is actually a productive part of the conversation.
I actually started messing around with such a thing tonight, no real idea whether it'll come to anything. But I thought you should know that it particularly liked this comment. "A clarification of their previous point in a concise and clear manner. It refrains from personal attacks, engages with the substance of the discussion, and ... maintains a respectful tone and effectively contributes to the discourse."
I've been so far resisting the incredibly childish urge to tell people I've been disagreeing with that the bot thinks they are wrong. What's the point. I will however tell you that it roasted FuglyDuck for his accusation of ad hominem being, itself, ad hominem (spending half his message saying he's not the guy who is X Y Z, instead of just talking about the subject matter).
You made a bot that tells you you're good at arguing and other people are bad and wrong? Very normal and productive behaviour. Not a tool to reinforce your beliefs.
You sound like Donald Trump getting all upset on Truth Social that someone's subjecting his actions to legal scrutiny, when he should be able to go around being bullshit and lying and it's some incredible breach of justice if someone tries to tell him that he shouldn't.
Yeah but what does your bot think?
Sounds like an actually useful bot!