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.
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
view the rest of the comments
At the same time, his leaving was also a success story in itself. He had all the money he ever needed in life, he was at the top of his game except just was exhausted working that continual grind, and was feeling his age so unlike e.g. any member of Congress, decided to voluntarily relinquish his power in order to create room for new people to step up, while he went on to blaze entirely new pioneer territory outside of mainstream TV, which was quite a risk even for someone like him. Wow... what a class act! 😍
Just that the new people that should have stepped up where mere shadows of Jon, unfortunately
John Oliver stepped up, although not on the Daily Show itself. I'm always excited to have something new ruined for me every week.
Afaict he is the last "investigative journalist" left in America, though he is biased himself, yet who else comes close that amount of depth?
There are loads of investigative journalists they just don't have the audience size these satirists have.
Propublica does insane work. PBS Frontline as well. Amanapour. Many stories break from the likes of WaPo as well.
Yeah, and CGP Grey, Ian Danskin's Innuendo Studios, I enjoy the Crash Course series though more classes than topical, and Kurzgesagt is amazing though has their own type of bias.
But if I want to know something about e.g. Boeing or train derailments or a deep dive into student loans, or something I did not even know that I wanted to know about e.g. the current status of ethical farming wrt chocolate, or food delivery apps, he has it all covered. So it is not only the depth that is fascinating, but the width and breadth of coverage as well (both wrt a single video and moreover the number of those total).
Unfortunately it mixes in opinion and interpretation directly integrated alongside the delivery of the facts. So it is funny (juvenile), informative (truly!), and overbearing all at once, and seems designed to leave you feeling more informed than you actually are upon watching.:-(
Still, they offer so very many videos on so very many topics, and I have never seen anything these days that comes close - e.g. their Boeing video describes more in 10 of its 30 minutes than a typical TV "documentary" these days (at least, of the type my mother watches), and then it goes on to cover essentially what a full length feature film documentary would cover, all in something digestible while eating a lunch (or two). And I respect that so much - that takes effort and skill that is hard to match.