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
She said that it was wrong and illegal and that she didn't agree with it, in the very video you sent!
When asked if she felt it was wrong, she said, "Absolutely, yes. It was wrong, it was a criminal act, it's a violation of international law."
You have a habit of leaving out important information, here let me get it for you:
"Absolutely, yes. It was wrong, it was a criminal.act, it's a violation of international law. At the same time, this war has been ginned up by the US and NATO expansion towards Russian Territory."
She's defending Putin's actions, clearly.
I don't see it that way. She said "“Absolutely, yes. It was wrong, it was a criminal act, it’s a violation of international law." How do you see that as she is defending his actions?
Her saying that the US and NATO sucks doesn't support war.
I'm not voting for her, so I don't care. But you're wrong.
She didn't say NATO and the US suck, she said they started it. You are either willfully misinterpreting this or are so disenfranchised from our current political climate that you're ignoring serious red flags.
She specifically said she this it's wrong what Putin is doing, and this it's against international law. You are either willfully misinterpreting this or are so disenfranchised from our current political climate that you’re ignoring serious red flags.
She's just pulling a "I'm not racist, but..."
You dont say all that shit and then be like, b-but they started it! After having din-din with daddy Pootin.
If you feel any of the content in the article is inaccurate, please feel free to contact the news org that wrote the article.
No, I'm contacting the person spreading it on the Fediverse, you.
So you don't think certain types of news stories should be shared on the Fediverse then? So are you promoting censorship? Because you seem upset that I am posting news articles about third parties, but you are fine with the 1,000s of articles that are pro-Harris. Right?
So you would prefer I only post news that YOU agree with. Correct?
No, I think they should be shared without bias and you have a terrible track record just from the comments and posts I've seen of your's. You're the type of user to make an entire post about another user and then cut the parts out of your own wrongdoing, I saw that. So yeah, I have a problem with the way YOU present information to be biased towards your own opinion. You aren't presenting information with the intent of sharing knowledge, you share things in a manipulative way that doesnt show the full details of the people you support.
Any bias you have is on you. I just shared an article. I didn't write it.
Examples? My post history is public. The entire post history of this community is public. And the modlog is public as well. I haven't hid anything from anyone.
Then block me. All I do is post the news, I don't write it. How you view it or the bias you inject into it is your problem, not mine. I literally posted a disclaimer when I posted the article, just so the talk wouldn't fall into just talking about me. Not my problem if people can't read the disclaimer.
If you believe any part of the article is inaccurate, I encourage you to reach out to the news organization that published it. If you think the article doesn't align with the community guidelines, feel free to contact the moderators. Thank you!
While I personally disagree with this stance in this particular case, I think it's reasonable to say on the one hand, A did wrong and A was bad, while also pointing out that it takes two to tango and that maybe there were some things that B could have done better.
So to recap, I agree with Stein on A ("It was wrong, it was a criminal act, it’s a violation of international law.") but disagree with Stein on B ("this war has been ginned up by the US and NATO expansion towards Russian Territory.")
In fact, I'm quite bothered here as Ukraine joining NATO doesn't involve Russian Territory unless Ukraine itself is Russian Territory, which I simply cannot agree with.
Thanks for your reasonable response. You make great points.
This genuinely surprises me. You hype up Stein a ton on Lemmy. Pretty much every pro-Stein post I see on here is posted by you. And you defend her doggedly in the comments. That seems like a lot of effort and emotional investment for a candidate you won't be voting for.
I'm not hyping her up. I'm posting news articles. I'm actually voting Socialist Workers Party. I like Stein, but I'm not voting for her.
If you feel any of the content in the article is inaccurate, please feel free to contact the news org that wrote the article.