this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2024
146 points (98.0% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2165 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BlueLineBae@midwest.social 66 points 3 months ago (1 children)

JD Vance puts his cast iron in the dishwasher pass it on

[–] RangerJosie@sffa.community 30 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Jorkin Dapenis Vance uses sugar substitute in his sweet tea. Pass it on.

[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 17 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Jelly Donut Vance puts the toilet paper on the far side of the holder, and doesn't have pets. Pass it on.

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Jorts Dangler Vance has a secret humiliation fetish, pass it on.

[–] Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Jerkin' Dongs Vance applied the eyeliner to his butthole first, then his eyes, p[ass it on.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 15 points 3 months ago (1 children)

James David’s face when you call him Jorkin Dapenis

[–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 3 months ago

Just A. Dipshit Vance after getting bedbugs from that couch sitting on the corner.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 25 points 3 months ago (1 children)

“Who gets the extra votes if there’s an odd number of kids and/or the parents are estranged or have opposing views?”

That’s the beauty. The husband, as the head of the family, gets the children’s votes—and his wife’s as well. Also, from now on, her name is “Mrs. “ followed by his name.

I’m sure Vance meant to explain this detail but somehow got sidetracked.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I’m sure Vance meant to explain this detail but somehow got sidetracked.

There was a stuffed loveseat nearby.

I’m sure you meant, “A yet to be stuffed loveseat nearby”

[–] jumjummy@lemmy.world 24 points 3 months ago

If we’re going through with this fictitious scenario, using the same logic of childless adults not having the same investment in the future, everyone over the age of 70 should no longer be able to vote for the same reasons.

Something tells me that would help Democrats even more.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Children should be allowed to vote. Kids would show up in droves. They'd get their parents voting. I'd love seeing politicians that were forced to pander to young people. There's no downside.

[–] Wirlocke@lemmy.blahaj.zone 60 points 3 months ago (40 children)

People like Mr.Beast gain their massive success from producing overstimulating content that attracts a forever young audience that doesn't recognize the basic manipulation and scams that he employs.

This is what politics would turn into if we earnestly let kids vote. Manipulating child audiences is practically a science now.

Even discounting that, in 2016 when I was 16 I was a "both sides are bad" centrist type. I simply didn't have the roots to consider how things like basic public policies would affect me personally. You need some grounded experience in order to realize that the things on screen will affect you and your community directly.

load more comments (40 replies)
[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 19 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Most adults barely have a clue about the issues they're voting on, let alone kids. And many topics that are voted on aren't really appropriate for children to be discussing. Plus, would you really want our schools to become 6 hours of propaganda for whatever political party is in charge?

Children would be voting virtually at random, to the point where elections would essentially be decided by random chance.

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago (4 children)

I’d say the vast majority of things we vote on in politics can be discussed with children. Kids who are talked to like adults mature far more gracefully than those who are artificially shielded from anything mildly uncomfortable.

Politicians should have to explain directly to kids why their family is deep in medical debt. Or why they can’t have certain books in their library. Or why we should bomb children in other countries.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] nokturne213@sopuli.xyz 5 points 3 months ago

What topics are we voting that are not appropriate for children? I went to the polls with my dad almost every time he voted starting at age 6 and he talked with me about most of it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

What age and why?

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Every minute Vance is spouting dumb shit rather than policy is a good minute for Harris-Walz.

[–] OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 months ago

That's the neat thing. The policy is also dumb shit.

[–] lolola@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 3 months ago

The answer is still no.

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 months ago
[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago

This is great reporting and all, but don't show this to a White Supremacist because they're going to run the complete opposite direction with this data.

load more comments
view more: next ›