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 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
view the rest of the comments
Look, I am not a billionaire loving guy anymore than some of you are.
But has anyone here considered that Musk has made an impact on the views of young white men (whom also happen to be Republican and Conservative or Proud Boys?
Does it bother us that these men follow a billionaire who doesn't give two shits about them? Yes.
Do I care that Taylor Swift is the opposite of that and encourages young women and men, be it black, gay, trans, etc to be opposite end of that spectrum. Fuck yes, we shouldn't base our views off the rich but has it ever occurred to anyone here that it is using those billionairs to represent and have them be vocal with the power they hold with our views instead?
I will absolutely take Taylor Swift speaking up and saying what she believes in and her giving that voice to 100000+ people whose only voice is heard in a vote if her speaking up also encourages people to say fuck Trump and and Musk and every fucking dumb ass on this post that thinks Taylor speaking out is a bad thing by comparison to it somehow being worse then what they already do with Musk.
Fuckem, fuck billionaires, but God damn keep fucking roasting them TSwiftie.
If I had a platform that millions of people listened to (which I don't), and strongly held beliefs about how the country could be made better for everyone (which I do), why wouldn't I use my platform to share those beliefs? How could I not?
No one MUST obey what either of them says, just like no one would be compelled to obey me in my hypothetical. But I don't really have a problem with any person using whatever platform they've found themselves with to express their own beliefs and desires. I don't think people lose the right to free expression just because they are rich and/or famous and/or powerful.
Edit: And if you piss a lot of people off and lose all your advertisers because your opinions are repugnant and awful - well hey, that's the choice you made.
Ironically, Taylor Swift was, up to this point, trying very hard NOT to use her platform. Just read her post. She's BEGGING the reader not to blindly follow her in voting, and do their own research and make their own choice. She'd said she'd wait until after her tour to endorse a candidate (which would have been after the election 🤣 ), but she says in her post that the AI DeepFake Endorsement she 'made' of Trump compelled her to give up her secret ballot and outright state she's voting for Harris.
Great point and apologies for glossing over that. I guess my reply just blurred into my general opinion about people dismissing or being grumpy about "celebrity" endorsements or political statements.
I hear ya. Yeah, I do agree with 'you shouldn't make a political opinion based on what a celebrity does,' but the reality is that people might waiver until they hear someone they like and trust (like a celebrity) makes a decision. Sad fact of life in this popularity contest we call a political system. ;)
I think it's perfectly valid to say "the system that gave me this platform is unfair and I shouldn't have benefited from it to the degree that I have, but I have the platform now so I'm going to use it for good."
I'm not down with billionaires either, but at least she's using her fame and money towards some good things.
It's one of the very few ethical ways to become a billionaire I think. If you sell an album or book for $10, and you're a global sensation, it's reasonable you'll get 100 million people buying it. It just falls on you then to use that money for his good reasons and adequately compensate people who support you. And Swift has generally been really good about that.
Yes, agreed. I do think overall that being a billionaire necessitates someone else (lots of someone elses) getting the shaft. But there are degrees of... billionairism, and she is on the right side of that, albeit still a billionaire.
I think overall that is very much so the case. This is the exception, not the norm.
It's almost like people have attributes other than their net worth.
If your political opinion is swayed by either a pop star or a billionaire, you're kinda a dumb ass. Full stop.
Good thing dumbasses can't vote...
I think you forgot the /s.
You'd be surprised.
.... what? Are you serious? 80% of voters are dumb asses...
Nvm... I struggle without "/s"
It was sarcasm.
Oh.. shwoosh. My bad sry.
Poe's Law
That's just how people work. Belief is social. We all value input from people we see as members of our in-group more than outsiders.
First, thank you for your comment without personal attacks, I'm getting torn up over here, but its me that is getting reported and comments removed for "incivility."
Anyway, what you say is true, but I believe we need to be discerning with respect to our political influences and sources. I don't think it's necessarily wrong to consider the opinions of others (pop star or not), but it should not have the weight to sway our voting one way or the other
If only people were more logical and calm, like men! /s
Your political movement is impotent if it can't seduce. Here's an underrated short tube essay on the political power of bimbos: https://youtu.be/FeRIE6JDhCQ