386
'No daylight’: Biden refused to let Harris break with him on policy issues during campaign, new book alleges
(www.independent.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
386 points (93.9% liked)
politics
21975 readers
4318 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I am wondering if the mods of [email protected] and [email protected] regret censoring the people who rightfully said these things and it would cost us the election. Like there's mods in here who go "yeah that sucks, I knew it." but also just defended Biden/Harris and removed good faith users who posted citations that even their beloved Media Bias Bot said was a good source.
They did it, banned the people who said it, and then people went "where are all those critics now? i guess putin turned them off! hurr hurr haw haw!"
Genuinely wonder if they question their choices of just doing this for free with literally zero benefit to their website and the country as a whole.
Probably still thinking "This is just a Russian disinfo campaign to smeer the libs!"
No, they dig their head in the sand and continue to play stupid. If they ever actually acknowledged reality they'd feel bad, so that's not gonna happen
Just posting to remind/inform new users there's been repeated drama with .world policies and mod/admin team in that past. It caused a lot of people to spread to smaller, more varied instances. Which is actually a good thing.
I just started and still don't understand this lemmy. I thought one of the perks was being able to interact on any server despite which one holds your account.
You can, as long as the hosting server welcomes your interaction. They also have the freedom to NOT allow you (Or anyone else) submit content.
The way it works is communities are hosted on the instances and when moderators do things in communities that makes people mad those people can only go to that community's instance administrators.
And then people get really angry at instance operators and admins with differing policies and rules about content and moderation.
So those conflicts can and do drive some culture wars. (Ex: Blahaj has little tolerance for gatekeepers, .ml has no patience for american liberal politics, .world is particular about zionism, and so on.)
But otherwise except for instances that defederate from each other the perk is absolutely that instances don't really matter for registering and posting as a user.
At most just check the instance rules before posting and you'll probably be just fine on Lemmy.
Yeah that's true more or less. Some instances block others for ideological or technical reasons. Sometimes posts/comments take time to propagate across the network. But in general yeah you can see everything on all the other instances regardless where your home account is. You could even spin up your own instance and see everything, all the back-end traffic and raw data, if you wanted.
That's really interesting. Are the people/entities who own individual servers (or even certain servers) known to the general public? I love the idea of social media not being centralized in the hands of billionaires, but I worry about trusting all of the same information to someone whose identity I don't know at all. Flip a coin, they're probably Russian or Chinese.
Basically I'm just asking about how/why we trust the owners of these servers. I still have a lot to learn about this technology.
Most of them are pretty visible and interact in their communities and I'm sure their contact info would be relatively easy to find.
But yeah I don't think there are any rules demanding they be public and you definitely should not trust them by default. They're people just like anyone else and can have their own agendas and ulterior motives.