this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2024
1209 points (96.3% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2571 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) went after former President Trump for his legal woes in an interview on MSNBC Saturday.

“I’ll take the individual who’s 81 over the guy who has 91 felony counts,” Swalwell said, making a reference to President Biden’s age in an interview on MSNBC’s “The Katie Phang Show” on Saturday.

“It’s not about two individuals,” Swalwell continued, speaking about the 2024 election. “It’s about the idea of competence versus chaos, or even greater, freedom versus fascism. If we make it about those ideas, and what they mean in our daily lives, we’re gonna win.”

Swalwell’s comments come after Trump was ordered to pay almost $355 million in penalties in a civil fraud case and amid increased scrutiny faced by the president on his age and memory in the wake of a special counsel report on Biden’s handling of classified documents. The report noted that Biden had problems with memory and recall.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nudding@lemmy.world -2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I'm not here to help you morally justify your vote. You'll have to live with your choice for the rest of your life.

Surely you have other options besides genocide abroad and genocide domestic.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Surely you have other options besides genocide abroad and genocide domestic.

Again, please name the candidate that has a chance of winning.

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I guess it's time to rise up and say no more genocide.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's not a name. How am I supposed to know who to vote for if it shouldn't be Trump or Biden if you can't even give me a name?

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

So because you can't give me a name for who to vote for, I support genocide?

It sounds like you're saying I will support genocide no matter who I vote for.

So should I just not vote?

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I would be more upset with my government than holding my nose and voting. But I'm pretty far left. You do what you have to do to sleep soundly at night.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Maybe if you told me what I should be doing, I could do it. You just keep berating me instead. I mean from what I can tell, no matter what I say or do, you'll accuse me of supporting genocide. No matter who I vote for or whether I vote at all, I support genocide. I apparently support genocide because I exist.

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Anything other than organizing against your government is supporting a genocide I'm afraid. Protest, riot, demand change.

[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Could you be a little more specific?

Because "either you support genocide by existing or solidarity" doesn't really make much sense to me.

[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

i was expressing solidarity with nudding.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Solidarity with their implication that I support genocide by existing?

[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

solidarity with the sentiment that we need to organize, protest, riot, and demand change.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Well you sure as hell could have been more clear about that.

[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 0 points 9 months ago

i wasn't talking to you.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

Please present your evidence that I have done none of these things. You must have evidence, right? Since I definitely support genocide?