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
"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."
Posted exact title: check. Added relevant context: check. Editorialized in the body: check.
Edit: it's not very popular anyway. Pretty sure I did not successfully get my point across and now the post just feels inappropes.
The brackets are editorial comment, not context. 😉
Context would be like if it didn't explicitly say "Maine" so you put up "Will [Maine] Voters..."
Hey now, I did not alter the title. And that's what is clearly cited in the 1st rule. Altering. I added editorial context; the whole point of my post was to editorialize the title, and article contents. It was silly, I guess.
Anyways, I enjoyed this little exchange of ours. I'm gonna alter my title, just in case this develops.
"The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users." Same as it always has been.
You added your own editorial commentary in the headline which we do not allow. Thank you for removing it!
It IS allowed in the body or a top level comment, just not in the headline.
Well you should make it a rule then. I'm pretty sure you just enjoy gaslighting. Or you could remove the article for my aforementioned reason: the whole reason behind posting it is editorial/critical: please remove it for that!
It's rule #1 written in plain English.
The vast majority of other submitters comprehend this quite easily, the multiple people reporting your post sure did!
Again it is literally not what you are continually stating in your comments: "editorializing the title" and even then I clearly posted the title and my particular bullshit afterwards. Rewrite the rule more carefully, or continue having this argument almost every single day with various parties (seems a common occurrence from my passive observation). Need not discuss it more; I've already altered my post to appease you. Just wish you'd understand your obvious and blatant error (and so do others).
"it should ONLY be to add context or be more descriptive"
Your addition was your personal editorial opinion and as such was not allowed.
So far, you are the only person not comprehending the difference so I'll give you more examples:
Adding context: When a person is named in the headline, but it's not clear who they are:
https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/02/politics/jimmy-gomez-house-ethics-investigation
"Exclusive: House Ethics Committee investigating Rep. Jimmy Gomez over sexual misconduct allegations, sources say"
You could say:
"Exclusive: House Ethics Committee investigating Rep. Jimmy Gomez [D-CA34] over sexual misconduct allegations, sources say"
You can't say:
"Exclusive: House Ethics Committee investigating [piece of shit cheater] Rep. Jimmy Gomez over sexual misconduct allegations, sources say"
More descriptive:
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2026/06/02/house-speaker-lisa-demuth-to-run-in-gop-primary-for-governor
"House Speaker Lisa Demuth to run in GOP primary for governor"
You could say:
"[Minnesota State] House Speaker Lisa Demuth to run in GOP primary for governor"
You can't say:
"[Handmaid's Tale fan] House Speaker Lisa Demuth to run in GOP primary for governor"
What you inserted in brackets wasn't objective. It was you personally pontificating on the subject and as such was NOT allowed.