this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
1148 points (96.6% liked)

politics

19144 readers
1992 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 47 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

If I had a platform that millions of people listened to (which I don't), and strongly held beliefs about how the country could be made better for everyone (which I do), why wouldn't I use my platform to share those beliefs? How could I not?

No one MUST obey what either of them says, just like no one would be compelled to obey me in my hypothetical. But I don't really have a problem with any person using whatever platform they've found themselves with to express their own beliefs and desires. I don't think people lose the right to free expression just because they are rich and/or famous and/or powerful.

Edit: And if you piss a lot of people off and lose all your advertisers because your opinions are repugnant and awful - well hey, that's the choice you made.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Ironically, Taylor Swift was, up to this point, trying very hard NOT to use her platform. Just read her post. She's BEGGING the reader not to blindly follow her in voting, and do their own research and make their own choice. She'd said she'd wait until after her tour to endorse a candidate (which would have been after the election 🤣 ), but she says in her post that the AI DeepFake Endorsement she 'made' of Trump compelled her to give up her secret ballot and outright state she's voting for Harris.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Great point and apologies for glossing over that. I guess my reply just blurred into my general opinion about people dismissing or being grumpy about "celebrity" endorsements or political statements.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

I hear ya. Yeah, I do agree with 'you shouldn't make a political opinion based on what a celebrity does,' but the reality is that people might waiver until they hear someone they like and trust (like a celebrity) makes a decision. Sad fact of life in this popularity contest we call a political system. ;)

[–] booly 7 points 2 months ago

why wouldn't I use my platform to share those beliefs?

I think it's perfectly valid to say "the system that gave me this platform is unfair and I shouldn't have benefited from it to the degree that I have, but I have the platform now so I'm going to use it for good."