this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2024
590 points (89.0% liked)

politics

18720 readers
3403 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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
 

While rebutting another post here on Lemmy, I ran into this. This says exactly what I want to say.

I am not a friend of Biden's Administration. I think they drug their feet over a variety of things ranging from holding Trump and his goons accountable for January 6th through rulemaking on issues like OTC Birth Control and abortion rights, and yes, I think he's too quick to please big business. But then I remember what the alternative is, and ... well, disappointed in Biden or not, I'm voting for him. Because my wife is a Black bisexual goth woman, four strikes under Team Pepe's tent. And I have my own strikes for marrying her as a White dude, and respecting her right to not have kids since she doesn't want them is another strike against me. And I care about my Non-Christian, Gay, Transgender, and Minority friends, and will never willingly subject them to Team Pepe.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sndmn@lemmy.ca 15 points 4 months ago (1 children)

A rabid racoon would make a better president than Cheeto Benito..

[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 4 months ago (2 children)
[–] hglman@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 months ago
[–] bloodfart@lemmy.ml -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That’s true, but tbh I would do that for Biden too…

[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I don't argue with people who deny Genocide because their worldview requires them to ignore reality.

For anyone wondering: I was curious as to what their exact motivation was, and I found them claiming that the Holdomor didn't happen. .ml user don't be a pro-genocide tankie challenge:

[–] bloodfart@lemmy.ml -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If you’re talking about me, after the Soviet Union fell and historians got access to the archives it became irrefutable that there was no intentional genocidal famine. That’s what holodomor is, intentional genocide through famine.

I never would say there was no famine or massive amount of death, but holodomor means a very specific thing that has been disproven.

[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] bloodfart@lemmy.ml -1 points 4 months ago

Since you asked: Davies & Wheatcroft: Years of Hunger.

If you want to learn more about Robert Conquest, the anticommunist granted access to the Soviet archives who changed his tune about the famine afterwards, he has several books published but be warned: he thinks communism and Naziism are “twins”.

His correspondence with Stephen Wheatcroft where he talks about the experience is published in years of hunger I think. My copy’s not at hand r/n.