this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2026
297 points (99.0% liked)

politics

27262 readers
3191 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CaliforniaSober@lemmy.ca -1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

How does a rhetorical question help your statement? How does a rhetorical q asked in bad faith make anything better?

What are you really getting at?

[–] adb@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Just to be sure that we are on the same page:

  • we have op (return2ozma) posting a news article.
  • the title of the post is the title of the article, which is pretty good practice when relaying a news article on social media.
  • the title of the post quotes a question asked by B. Sanders.
  • what you know of op makesyou claim that he asks the question in bad faith.
  • I remark op isn’t the one asking the question.
  • I add that it’s a rhetorical question.

Now to answer your last comment, what I was getting at with my second point, and which is maybe not that all pertinent in hindsight, is that it’s kind of hard to make out from a rhetorical question alone what the author ‘s stance might actually be exactly. Maybe Sanders thinks that the extent of Musk’s donations might suggest the US not being a true democracy, maybe he thinks that this is in contradiction with an otherwise healthy democracy, maybe he thinks there’s nothing democratic about the current US political system ; or any shade between these. All in all, the conclusion is left to the reader.

In light of all this, the fact that op could be a bad actor is not very pertinent : it’s not his words, and even if it was, the nature of the question and its effect on the reader is quite open ended and IMO not as manipulative as « bad faith » would imply.

Edit: the important point being that op is not the author of the question. The rhetorical question remark was first and foremost there to point it out in case you missed it.

[–] CaliforniaSober@lemmy.ca 1 points 41 minutes ago* (last edited 36 minutes ago)

To be on the same page look at comments of OP. Bad faith takes a lot of faith on your end. So in the end you’re sticking out your neck for a commenter who basically says the left half of the country is GeNoCiDaL for Fox News… all while the right half upvotes.