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
Look just say as an idiot, it's way shorter. As an idiot, loud shouty man seemed stronger? If you have no life experience, sure. Loud shouty men look out of control with their emotions, weak, and easily manipulated...which is exactly how Trump seemed to anyone who wasn't an idiot.
Spittle isn't data.
Look, she didn't do perfectly, but she also was alloted much less time and the breaks for commercials(?!) seemed to always screw her over. You're never going to respond to every point in an angry gish gallop and she did about as good as anyone could in my opinion.
I mean, for fuck's sake, as the article says, he lost the exchange on the Afghanistan withdrawal.
But I don't mean idiot, I meant what I said. If anything ignorant would be more concise and keep my meaning. If for some reason you don't pay attention to politics but still find yourself watching the debate Trump seemed to have a lot of responses to criticism and "answers" to problems even if they were all lies.
The end was absolutely infuriating, of course Trump gets the last word... "Why haven't you done any of what you said you want to do already?"
... because we have a fucking Republican Congress! Again any ignorant person wouldn't recognize that and would accept what he said as truth. It makes sense in a way, if you're in power now then why aren't you doing something? That one is not Kamalas fault though, that's ABC always letting Trump have the last word... :/
At times, I thought Trump made arguments like this because he thought it was a good tactic, but ultimately I think he just forgets that Congress is a part of the process at times.
His closing statement was babbling and bordered on incoherent, so I was fine with him having the "last word".
He also kind of complemented her plans in it. "We're going to do all of these wonderful things".
Overall, operation let him talk was a very bigly success IMO.