480
JD Vance's approval rating is worst among Boomers
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2024
480 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19089 readers
3426 users here now
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I know the term is involuntary celibate, but the "movement" has kinda moved onto any men who believe that a woman is obligated to fuck them. That crowd has picked up on a heavy pro-natal message, and Vance's disparaging comments about women who don't have kids plays well there. He might have had sex, but he's trying to offer those losers a world where they're on top of the power structure.
He has things in common with incels, but that doesn't make him one.
philosophically he really really is, in the same way andrew tate (except for thinking he's hot, which incels don't do) is.
It would be so easy to compare him to incels without saying he is one.
he's an incel who got laid. philosophically, psychologically, socially, he still is. he just got his dick wet a few times. as much as they whine about it;the difference isn't big enough to waste valuable bandwidth defining.
There is a big difference in a virgin and someone who fathered children.
And no I'm not defending him. He's a total piece of shit. Just not involuntarily celibate even if he shares some views with those who are.
I mean just as one example of how they're different: level of sexual frustration.
just because he's fucked, doesn't mean he's gotten any better. doesn't mean he doesn't hate women any less. probably resents having to fuck one for his public image.
And I never implied any of that. Just that it's silly to call someone a thing with a literal meaning as though words don't matter. And yes he's not any better off, just different.
brevity, especially in explicitly political messages, matters. nuance WILL be lost, communication has two sides, and sometimes you cannot convey perfect truth, you need to lose a little fidelity. so "JD vance is an incel" is true enough for literal government work.
"JD Vance is a misogynist"
Brief and accurate. Less confusing. Didn't need to make up anything untrue or stretch any definitions to something they aren't.
incel is more poetic and gives more a sense of scale. 'misogynist' without elaboration feels smaller, less accurate.
its a compression issue, dear. sorry.
Ugh yeah I don't agree that defying definitions of words makes something "poetic". The fact is that this entire thread indicates the issue, and the upvotes I got indicate I'm not alone
I agree, to me "he's an incel" is weak because to the not-terminally-online vast majority of people it's easily proven false.
He's married and has kids, he's not any more "involuntarily celibate" than Trump is.
Thank you!