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.
- 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.
- 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
This happens every time I throw out an opinion that's even slightly controversial on Lemmy. Eventually, people realize they're wrong and they can't give me an actual counter point. So they resort to basically what's happening now, which is derailing the conversation by refusing to elaborate when I ask in good faith what they mean. This time, it's some apparent irony that they won't explain, probably because it doesn't even exist. Maybe the person doesn't respond because they are afraid I'll just dismantle their point again.
I mean, I can go back and reread all of messages from the mass of dissenters and try to to rationalize whatever "irony" it is they're talking about, but irony is subjective. And now were left with this permanent internet monument where nobody was able to actually throw out any counter arguments with real substance to them. So I guess I win?
You can't seriously be this stupid, but maybe you are so I'll throw you a bone.
You're "arguing" that someone's writing is coming across poorly to the audience and hurting their point. In a thread where the voting record clearly indicates that your writing is coming off poorly to the audience.
Didn't think that needed such a blatant explanation, but here we are.
You know you've won a discussion when the other person has resorted to calling you stupid, because they can't think of anything worhwhile to say. That's the best indicator that you've lost.
I love it.
Ahahaha!
Sure bud, go ahead and chalk this up as a win for yourself. You clearly need it.
🤡
Truth isn't determined by popular vote. Just because nobody likes it, doesn't mean it isn't true or that it isn't valid. They may also be downvoting because they don't like my tone, and not because I'm wrong. Besides, this is all just stupid infighting--OP's tonedeafness is shared by a broad group of left-leaning people and is splayed across the news media.
When it comes to convincing right-leaning people, their sentiment is doing legitimate harm to our movement. And at the end of the day, if people refuse to acknowledge my message because of my tone, they're the ones suffering. Conservatives really experience no downside by ignoring us, because they are happy to be classless, bigoted fools. So basically: suck it up and accept it, or continue to be ignored. Whatever.
But opinion is, and your argument is one of opinion, not facts.
And the prevailing opinion is that you're not worth listening to.
Lmao. So, you're saying that conservatives are onboard with the whole BLM/minority rights thing, and that people are getting their message across no biggie? Grow up.
Do you want a peer reviewed paper proving that conservatives don't agree with non-conservatives? Hilarious.
You're so worried about how people are talking and not what they are saying.
Do you really think right wingers really care about the politcs of respectability? They use manners as a cudgel, as you are. Seriously, you're playing their game and creating division by saying that using the so called improper emphasis is some how bad.
I mean way to go on the solidarity fucko.
You, didn’t do shit other than complain how someone responded to a question.