politics
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! 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.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
I understand that, but the point I'm trying to make is that the "Vote for Biden if you don't want Trump!" argument is bad, and if you really want to convince people to vote for Biden, why not appeal to the good things he's done and could do, rather than just a fear of the bad things a Republican administration would do? We're all tired of hearing 'You have to vote for bad if you don't want worse!'. It worked in 2020 because everyone was reeling from the Trump administration already, but it's been 4 years, it's not as fresh in everyone's mind, and I really don't think it's going to be as effective this year. Even with it being fresh in everyone's mind, it was still a scarily close race.
I feel like Biden has put together a competent administration and has accomplished some positive things for people. They could do better at messaging about that.
However, my comments are based on this one issue which other people brought up, not me. It’s simply a fact that any Republican admin would be worse about war and human rights, because they always have been.
I just gave you a few examples of why that's a false dilemma.
It's only bad if you don't understand Duvinger's Law or how the DNC's bylaws work.
Voting is a chess move, not a love letter. The sooner you learn that, the happier you will be.
I think you're taking my posts out of context. They're direct replies to someone making the argument, 'Vote for Biden because otherwise you get Trump!', and I'm pointing out that the argument is bad, then you're replying to me telling me the argument is bad. Yes, I understand that - that's why I posted the reply.
Chess is a representation of a monarchy in which everyone but the king is ultimately expendable.
Completely irrelevant.
Chess is a logic game.
Say the pawns that don't think they're expendable.