1
Historians meet Biden for a White House lunch, urge him to speak out more forcefully
(www.politico.com)
this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19097 readers
3040 users here now
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
In a certain kind of way, NOT voting for the party you support in a two-party run-off does amount to a fractional vote in favour of your opponent.
I can't draw a 2x2 table here, but I'll try to describe it. In the population of voters, you have 20 supporters of party A and 20 supporters of party B. So, there is 50% support for each party in the population of 40 potential voters. During the actual vote, 10 people in party A vote and 15 people in party B vote. The vote spread is 5 votes in favour of party B. Using proportions, that's 40% for party A and 60% for party B. Using these proportions on the original 40 people, this is the equivalent of a 16 people voting for party A and 24 people voting for party B, even though there are only 20 actual supporters of party B in the population! So, differential voting rates result in a higher proportion of votes going to the party with the higher voting rate, which means that staying home is not neutral. It is effectively a fractional vote for the other guy, where that fraction is a function of the differential voting rate among the two parties' supporters.
Of course, if enough left-wing supporters stay home, it might go so far as to lead to a win for the radical right under Trump. If that happens, all those on the left who refused to show support for Biden will be just as guilty as the MAGA idiots.
I’ll give you that that is a fair point, but the impact of my action doesn’t outweigh my conviction.
Hopefully more people aren’t like me I guess?
There is no way Israel would’ve had the balls to go as hard as they did. If they did not have us sitting there to make sure no one else got involved.
We supported the bully, or at least someone it turns out it was just as bad as the fucking other guy, and then we continue to do it after we saw all the dead children.
I’ve said it before I’ll say it again, I understand where they’re coming from but they’re still wrong, they’re still the bad guys in this, it just turns out there’s no good guys, but they keep calling themselves the good guys.