this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2024
370 points (96.2% liked)

politics

19090 readers
4210 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
[–] [email protected] 101 points 6 months ago (14 children)

I think that Biden has done a better job of working the hill to get the stuff he wants than Obama ever did

[–] [email protected] 51 points 6 months ago

Hear hear.

Most underrated President of all time. My expectations weren't high, but I have to admit, he's absolutely blown me away with how effective he's been.

Given the shit he was handed from the previous admin, with a divided Congress, etc. he's absolutely crushing it. Imagine what he could do with a Congress behind him and a supreme Court that wasn't broken.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 6 months ago (2 children)

That's great, but he needs to now self-promote and market himself, or we'll be stuck with another Trump term (and possibly the end of democracy in America).

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

So your saying a guy who has 40 years of experience in lawmaking is good at lawmaking?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Uh... No? My words were pretty clear, I don't think they needed to be reframed.

EDIT: I think you meant to reply to the parent comment.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It would also help if he stops SUPPORTING THE FUCKING ISRAELI GENOCIDE.

[–] BakedGoods 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Plenty of cultists of both sides in the US. The Jewish cultists just happen to be more powerful.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 6 months ago (3 children)

He snuck a win past the GOP!

Article immediately references Aid for Israel and the TikTok ban.

I'm not sure those are wins.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

Right, the biggest wins really are the changes we've seen come out of the FTC & FCC

[–] Habahnow 5 points 6 months ago (4 children)

The TikTok ban is a bad thing? Israel for sure is, but considering the current situation in congress, getting the Ukraine funding passes along with other legislature is amazing.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

It's a win for whoever is invested in the company that buys them

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I just think the tik tok ban is pointless, they can buy our data from Facebook anyway. I don't disagree with it per se, I just think it's a waste of time.

[–] Habahnow 3 points 6 months ago

They could buy data from Facebook, except that Facebook has limitation on what data they provide, not to mention Facebook doesn't have an incentive to negatively affect the US (doesn't mean their incentive to extract profit doesn't lead to them damaging the US in other ways ) unlike companies that are owned by China. Facebook doesn't want to end up banned in the US, nor considered a political ally to another country, and especially not China. With TikTok, China can directly influence what kind of information they extract, and what kind of information comes out from the app. Through Facebook there's significantly more hurdles.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I have to disagree, I actually haven't seen any evidence presented showing the Chinese government is meddling through TikTok, at least not to any higher degree than the US government meddles in US-operated social media.

A Tiktok ban comes off as red scare-style overreaction that risks losing the support of a lot of young Americans who already see the US federal government as a surveillance state. This certainly does not do anything to quell those sentiments.

[–] Habahnow 6 points 6 months ago (7 children)

I'm not aware of any either. But we know that TikTok is still partially owned by the Chinese government, unlike Facebook or other social medias. Why would we put ourselves into a situation where an adversary has their software installed into millions of devices in the US, with the ability to influence what those same users see and hear, as well as having the ability to extract information through the application? Not to mention, China wouldn't allow the same in their country (hell they don't allow any companies to operate there without partial China ownership and influence). We know that the US government doesn't trust Chinese hardware (Huawei) within the country, why would Chinese software be any different?

Honestly, I feel the whole world is treating China way too nice when you consider how much they screw over everybody else in trade. China wants to be able to freely access other countries markets, while completely limiting and discouraging any other country's companies from accessing theirs. If China wants to play that game, then they should be getting an equivalent response: No free trade, no easy access to our markets.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, it’s kind of a distraction. Sure, it’s probably bad that the Chinese government has a source for so much personal data for so many people, but it’s also bad that Facebook does, and many more. The real problem is the lack of privacy rights, controls, remedies, regardless of whom collects it

Even back 30 years ago, I knew someone who wanted to build a dating app. Even back then, he didn’t care about income from the users. Even that long ago, the market for detailed personal data was the profit center

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

it's both: it's personal data AND a platform to feed targeted content. The US enjoys being able to deliver content/suppress content on US-based social media, but I imagine they don't have as much (or any) ability to control content on TikTok.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It also doesn't hurt that Democrats in Congress have held unprecedentedly united

"unprecedentedly" is one of those words that just shouldn't be. Just because it's a word doesn't mean it makes a good sub header.

'it also doesn't hurt that Democrats have maintained a united front of unprecedented durability' or '...unprecedented strength' seems less clumsy if you really need to drive home how...unprecedented it is.

Anyway, well done Joe, you already got my vote but by all means keep dropping those table scraps. They are tasty.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think it's a perfectly cromulent word

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

uncromulentedly so !

[–] [email protected] 21 points 6 months ago (1 children)

For a moment, I thought republicans wouldn’t stand behind a loser.

[–] [email protected] 45 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)

I haven’t seen a Republican stand for anything.

edit: I see your replies, and I get your point, but I don’t think that’s what “stand for” means. They slink around and deceive to get their way, hardly ever owning their actions or their goals. And they definitely stand against plenty of things: democracy, human rights, and integrity to name a few.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 6 months ago

They stand for the death of women and the sexual assault of children. That’s as much as I’ve seen though.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago

They stand for insurrection and Russia.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago

They stand for whatever they think will get them money and power at any given moment.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago

No, no, I can see them standing up for ask sorts of policies that destroy themselves for the enrichment of their masters.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 6 months ago

The GOP infighting has escalated in the wake of the House's months-long tantrum led by the far-right extremists who seemed to truly believe that they could hold their breath until they turned blue and they would eventually get everything they wanted.

Which they would have gotten almost everything they wanted except for the approval of Don Poorleone.

... And despite all the drama, the Biden White House ended up getting most of what it wanted without having to give up much of anything in return, at least in part because the Republicans wouldn't take yes for an answer when concessions were offered.

I'm glad the Democrats have gotten bored of not governing that they actually got the resolve to come together and do something rather than cave to Republican obstruction.

[–] 31337 1 points 6 months ago

This reminds me of that Zizek joke:

Content Warning: Joke that contains description of rapehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkptPb0gS_Y

load more comments
view more: next ›