this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
352 points (94.7% liked)

politics

19047 readers
4058 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.
  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
 

He then ends up suggesting the reason they don't like Harris is because she's a woman -

“Because part of it makes me think – and I’m speaking to men directly – part of it makes me think that, well, you just aren’t feeling the idea of having a woman as president, and you’re coming up with other alternatives and other reasons for that.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

My guy, how do you post links to the fucking Heritage Foundation and the Carnegie Endowment with a straight face?

Environmental Radicalism. In a similar vein, Executive Order 14008 claims that America must achieve “significant short-term global reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and net-zero global emissions by mid-century or before.” This approach to “climate change” and “environmental justice” will impose tens of trillions of dollars in costs on the economy, with much of the burden falling on the poor, farmers, and small businesses, lowering the standard of living for all Americans, with negligible environmental benefits.

Debasing Science. Not every government-spanning initiative by the Biden Administration has required an executive order. A memorandum from the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the White House Council on Environmental Quality in November 2022 called on the federal government to use Indigenous Knowledge (IK), which is associated with tribal communities and cultures

This isn't evidence, its a right-wing screed.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

Pretty sure they used an llm and didn't bother to review it

Edit: like I did in response, but at least mine is customized to my style and positions, and cites better sources