this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
742 points (90.6% liked)

politics

19241 readers
2259 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] -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

What the fuck is a no-name candidate?

The fact that you don't know what this very common phrase means suggests you're either a foreign actor or you're so politically uninformed that you shouldn't be having opinions on things.

The fee was paid, the data was withheld, and the party wouldn’t even refund the money.

Gonna need a source for that one my friend. That's a pretty extreme claim.

Remember when Bloomberg wanted to enter the 2020 race late? He didn’t meet the requirements and had almost no popular support, so they changed the requirements.

Ditto. Source please. Not a word of this is mentioned on Wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Bloomberg_2020_presidential_campaign

Bloomberg's name didn't even appear on the New Hampshire ballot. He intentionally skipped those primaries. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/08/us/politics/michael-bloomberg-president.html

leaked (or hacked) DNC emails

Again suggesting you're a troll or agent. Only Republicans and Putin agents get so hung up on buttery males.

You're making a bunch of outrageous claims about DNC corruption, but I'm not seeing any of it substantiated by a quick google search...except for things Trump has said.

Curious.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Russian trolls are indeed a problem but this tendency of establishment liberals to throw around accusations whenever someone disagrees with them is a poor strategy to combat it. Their whole strategy revolves around sewing dysfunction in the body politic, and there is no better way to achieve it than to short circuit dialog this way. No, I am not a Russian troll but, if even if I were, calling me one just furthers their goals. This is a manifestation of one of the most critical failings of the liberal establishment in dealing with the Russian threat.

The fact that you don’t know what this very common phrase means suggests

I should have known better than to leave room for misinterpretation in a discussion with someone who longs to misinterpret. Imagine a discussion with a Republican where I responded to a comment on the boarder with the question "what the fuck is an illegal"? Would you assume that I don't understand to whom they refer, or that I find the term misleading. Being "illegal" is an identity imposed by a broken system in the same way that being "no-name" is. The reason candidates have "no-name" is that they don't get press, and they don't get press because the neo-liberal consensus in mainstream media and both parties wants to keep them obscure. This goes back to the incestuous relationship between the elites in both parties and mainstream media.

Bloomberg missed the deadline to be on the New Hampshire ballot. As I said before, I am talking about candidates that met all of the requirements for ballot access, and were still denied. The rule changes I was referring to with Bloomberg were about access to the Democratic debates, not ballots.

Source please.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/01/31/nevada-debate-dnc-drops-donor-threshold-making-way-bloomberg/4624996002/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/2015/12/18/bernie-sanders-campaign-disciplined-accessing-clinton-data/77539432/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0lcBidnb34

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXOtNJtjoow

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

No, I am not a Russian troll but, if even if I were, calling me one just furthers their goals. This is a manifestation of one of the most critical failings of the liberal establishment in dealing with the Russian threat.

The only way to combat Russian trolls is to not call them out? Come on, man, that was a more cogent string of words than the average provacateur but the reasoning behind it is still absolutely bonkers...unless you're trying to help the trolls.

and they don’t get press because the neo-liberal consensus in mainstream media and both parties wants to keep them obscure

Conspiracy. Wake up, sheeple!

The rule changes I was referring to with Bloomberg were about access to the Democratic debates, not ballots.

Curious how you never specified that before lol

Much like you never specified that your claims of the DNC shenanigans were from Bermie's run almost 10 years ago (and for context (which you also didn't mention) was a disciplinary measure for Sanders staffers stealing data from Clinton).

You are rapidly losing my trust.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The only way to combat Russian trolls is to not call them out?

That's not what I said. Calling them out plays into their hands, but not doing so isn't itself a strategy any more than not jumping on your opponent's sword is a strategy. The actual strategy is to engage in good faith - even if you don't think others do. Who knows, you might learn something.

Conspiracy. Wake up, sheeple!

Your reading comprehension needs practice. I said consensus, not conspiracy. Anyways, you know perfectly well that this exists between the RNC and Fox News, but it's suddenly a "conspiracy theory" when it's your guys. The press is supposed to be adversarial, but when did you last see a tough interview? It's in small part a transactional thing, but it's mostly just a culture perpetuating itself as cultures do. If you don't realize this, your media literacy is adolescent at best.

Curious how you never specified that before lol

Curious how you keep using the word curious. What are you implying, and how is that not a distinction without a difference? It's still the DNC changing the rules in midstream to favor a big donor.

Much like you never specified that your claims of the DNC shenanigans were from Bermie's run almost 10 years ago

I referred to that instance earlier, so I provided that link. Did you think I was talking about Bernie's 2024 run? That's not a thing. I also provided links relevant to only the 2024 primary.

You are rapidly losing my trust.

Uh, OK?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

That didn't happen.

And if it did, it wasn't that bad.

And if it was, that's not a big deal. <--- you are here

And if it is, that's not my fault.

And if it was, I didn't mean it.

And if I did, you deserved it.