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
By that token, more people didnt vote for Trump. That means he lost because 2/3 of people didnt vote for him.
not really how popular votes work
Exactly my point. Thank you for agreeing that your argument was silly.
I see what you're trying to do, and you're failing. it's not the same logic.
It literally is. Your argument is that people who didnt vote for Trump wanted him to be president. All people who didnt vote for Kamala are somehow pro-Trump. If that wasn't your intent, you need to work on how you phrase things.
All I did was say precisely what you said lol just the other way around. Thats because people who didnt vote... did not vote! Ascribing a desired candidate to people who didnt participate is ... not how it works!
Everyone that doesnt go to subway hates subs so they absolutely must like burgers! See? Silly.
A lot of people felt disenfranchised and abstained due to a sense of moral superiority to be sure. That doesn't mean they voted for Trump or felt like Trump was the superior candidate. People who dont pay attention to politics didnt vote for or against either candidate, people who didnt vote also didnt vote for or against either candidate.
I'm not reading past your second sentence because you showed that your reading comprehension is garbage
Cant defend your opinion, thats okay. Have a good time.
I don't need or want to defend my opinion against somebody who can't read.
If someone doesnt understand you, you insult them lol
yet more proving that you can't read, there were no insults from me
Not an insult!
How kind, another neighbourly comment
Glad these arent insults, phew. Your reading comprehension is awe inspiring. Its a good thing you didnt insult me as a part of saying you didnt insult me.
Your argument was that:
People who dont vote didnt voice an opinion and we have no ability to read minds. If you cant read minds you cant make claims as to how others will vote.
Unable to vote is not voicing their opinion, just like deciding not to vote. We cant decide how big either group within this unknown quantity would behave. Deciding not to vote due to a lack of information, constantly changing polling locations, and a billion other arguments for or against whatever you're trying to say. Those are 2 small seeming but incalculably large or small amounts to try and staple an opinion to, especially because... they didnt voice their opinion for whatever reason.
You're a genius but you wont elaborate, your argument or explanation is just insulting people instead. Substantiate your idea, communicate better. Its not hard. Why do you think you can read minds (lol), and how do you know how they were going to vote?
If all those people were known to be okay with or voted for Trump, we could say one way or another. We cant say that without also saying some conservatives didnt vote, so they mustve been cool with Kamala, despite her being so hated in MAGA. Its a coin, there are two sides. Claiming one side is heavier without seeing the coin or knowing what kind of coin it is, is a little insane. A loud small group on the internet was mad about Palestine to the extent they said they wouldnt vote, and some people voted third party. There could be 10 or 10000 or 10000000. We dont know. The people who voted 3rd party fall into the "okay with a Trump victory" camp. They voiced an opinion and it wasnt the best method of not having Trump become president. They can definitely fit into your description. People who have an unknown opinion have an unknown opinion.
My point: If you can read minds, get a job where thats utilized. Cuz its a unique and amazing ability. People overseas, in the military who werent able to vote, those are unknown quantities, people working, but it isnt just people who couldnt vote and wouldve voted the way you want. Thats people popping up with your opinion out of nowhere, but not people who disagree. You just assume more people are Pro-Kamala, or Anti-Trump. Some people are so disconnected with the news that they dont know who the president is. Yeah, they exist, and we also dont know how big that group is, or how they would vote.
An Australian system would solve this confusion. Because then we wouldnt be trying to read minds. Compulsory ranked choice voting. We would know more accurately how people feel, though we also dont know if those people put any bearing on political positions.
And insulting instead of defending. Nice.