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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
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
Well here he is applying nuance. He can vote that way thanks to the realities of California. He is trusting the audience to understand that nuance of that stance.
It's a tricky one, since on the one hand he may be overestimating the electorate, but on the other folks inclined to listen to him may internalize the nuance and not get alienated by assumptions that he is selling out. I'm leaning towards the latter since he at least is calling people to vote instead of some blindly anti electoral take, which is fairly prominent in the online discourse.
I’ll be honest, most of the people I see critiquing elections or candidates like Kamala have nuance to their views. Which makes sense, because it takes reflection and thought to break with the normal for most people.
On the other hand, I see tons of binary “any criticism is anti-electoralism and literally fascist” takes online that totally lack nuance. Which also makes sense, because when confronted with a break in normality, most people tend to react emotionally, not logically.
I dont see that at all. Every kamala hater ive seen have nothing but genocide on their minds.
Lol just a couple posts down from yours
https://lemmy.world/comment/26225449
Sure, that’s a hard line for many people who vote with their conscious, and probably most protest voters agonized over the decision, knowing that in our system it could help Trump (although, as it turns out, even if every single third party vote went to Kamala, it still would not have been enough for her to win — protest voters are a tiny demographic).
That’s still more nuanced than “Blue no matter who” or “nothing but genocide on their minds.” (As if genocide isn’t a huge fucking thing that should break every politician who supports it, but that’s a separate argument.)
Yes and no? There's a lot of chuds who listen to RATM and somehow don't get their message; but they're not necessarily listening to Tom Morello, and very likely may not even know his name (or Zack, or Tim, or Brad). The people who listen to RATM and know who Tom Morello is, are far more likely to understand the nuance here.