298
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2023
298 points (94.1% liked)
politics
18075 readers
3150 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.
- 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!
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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
Looking at this comment thread, everyone seems pretty quick to completely write off someone they generally agree with simply because they don’t agree with that person on one or two other issues.
Yeah, I don’t agree with his stance on the Israeli / Hamas war, but that doesn’t mean that I don’t want to encourage people to support destigmatizing very a common mental health issue that 1 out of 10 people have.
Hell, I have loved ones that I generally agree with politically that think Hamas’ atrocities and crimes justify going even lower in response. I don’t agree with them about that issue, but I’m not going to go nuclear on them about it. I’m still going to bond with them over common ground.
The man has turned his back on the progressives that elected him. It's not just Israel. https://nypost.com/2023/12/15/news/fetterman-insists-hes-not-a-progressive-despite-frequently-calling-himself-one/
When you’re citing the nypost about dems, you’re really really reaching to stir shit up. The post is an even more out there Murdoch rag.
Liberal infighting only benefits the rich and republicans and they love to incite it.
The site sucks but it's true. Bro ran on progressive issues then outright said "jk I'm not a progressive." fuck em. 🤷
I could have cited another source but this one had many more examples than others I glanced at. I'd rather avoid the post but Fetterman is kinda shitty for a lot more reasons than Israel. I'm annoyed that everyone is acting like it's the one reason people are upset with him.
Dude either faked being progressive for the votes or he bailed on his ideals for one reason or another. Either way, he's a dick. I'd still prefer him over Oz or virtually any Republican willing to tow the party line though.
It's the biggest problem in today's politics. People are willing to vote against their interests because of single issues.
You have one candidate that meets 90/100 criteria but because they aren't absolutely perfect they instead don't vote for them again or they vote for the next guy who instead only meets 80 of the 100 criteria just out of spite for the first guy not being perfect.
Then they get mad at that guy and vote for the next guy who only meets 75 of the 100. So on and so forth until the unicorn of a candidate which meets 90 of 100 finally pops up again like 40 years later.
This is Lemmy though. The hive-mind is far worse here than it ever was on Reddit.
Hive mind is when people disagree with me
Me: Watching the negative votes steadily tick down for someone daring to criticize the existence of a Lemming hivemind ^^^
People get downvotes for "criticizing the hivemind" because its a dumbass thing to claim and cry about. It was just as dumb a thing to blame on reddit, and it makes you sound like some loser who was kicked off 4chan.
Exactly. Like pretty much all of Lemmy.
Goodbye
Every site with an upvote/downvote system will be a hivemind to an extent. You only think it's more of a hivemind here because reddit aligns more with your beliefs.
Nah, Lemmy seems to have both a much more specific and narrow range of acceptable beliefs as well as much less tolerance for the sharing of any view even a little outside that range.
At least in my experience. Wouldn't want to presume to speak for anyone else.
I was never a reddit user but I have browsed some subreddits from time to time. On economic matters, people seem to overwhelmingly be drinking the neoliberal kool-aid, at least on the economic-focused subreddits. On politics, it seems mainly democrat central and anyone either to the left or right of that gets attacked. Reddit has the advantage of having way more users, but the biases are still there.