230
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 31 Aug 2023
230 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19240 readers
2163 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
You claim that you believe that there is a problem with elected officials being incompetent, and yet you then contradict yourself by stating that you are part of the problem:
You are correct that the voters have the power to change their representatives if they are found to be incompetent, so use it. Don't fall victim to the ostrich effect.
I don't know where I said that to be honest. but I don't know that I would agree that its always clear based on someones behavior in publicly speaking that they are incompetent as a president.
You quite evidently agreed that there is a problem with incompetence, as the previous user pointed out.
No the both sides problem is reveling in political opponents bad health
Hm, I would be very hesitant to say that the voters are enjoying the fact that their representatives are in poor health. Unless you are inferring that jests directed at one side for voting in an individual who is in poor health is "reveling in politicial opponents bad health".
What do you mean? I'm saying saying most voters enjoy their own representatives poor health.
That's not how I would interpret it- but that may be how you do.
Yeah, that's what I just said that you said.
Haha I mistyped, I meant to say "I'm not saying"
Then what did you mean by "the both sides problem is reveling in political opponents bad health"? Taken litterally, that statement is saying that people are enjoying the fact that their political opponents are in poor health.
Kentucky voters might revel in Biden's health
Californian voters might revel in McConnell's health
I don't understand what you are objecting to in my interperetation, then. You are confirming that my interperetation of your statement is correct.
You said I was claiming voters revel in their own representatives poor health. I said instead that voters might revel in the poor health of the representatives of majority politically opposing voters.
Still, I would be very hesitant to make such a claim.
I'm not claiming all or even the majority of voters are, I am saying I have seen plenty of individual voters- in person, on YouTube, and on here reveling in it
What do you mean you don’t know where you said that? It was the comment the other person directly replied to… the last sentence…
I said the opposite on that sentence?