view the rest of the comments
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
No he isn't, it's comparing the two, one is Walz (D) signing a law to bring free lunches for school children in his state, the other is sarah huckabee (R) signing a law to claw back child labor laws in her state
I'm not really sure why that would be relevant in this context. Was Huckabee running for VP? Why include her?
Primarily because I was sharing how the photos are linked in my memory.
They're also chronologically similar, happening within a week of each.
Lastly, they demonstrate stark differences in policies: a win for the new VP pick who, in my opinion, shows someone who actually cares about children and families.
Ok but do you know how many US Governors there are? 55. You picked one at random and threw it into a comment about a totally different person, place, and circumstance. People might mistakenly think Walz was somehow involved in that shitshow.
I can see this from your perspective now, perhaps my context was lacking. I felt it evident as a recollection but those without the context may misinterpret.
Edit: I've added context, thanks for pressing your point!
As another perspective - it took me a moment or two to work out what was happening in the second picture, but then the whole tableau made sense to me!
I was being a little too aggressive about it, I had a long morning. Sorry.
It took me a bit of morning brain fog processing to understand the context. But then it hit me.
Tim Walz has a history of delighting and helping people, and the excitement of the people (especially the kids) in the room we elated and the picture captured that.
In the other picture, the people that were being "helped' (again the kids) looked unimpressed and even a little letheragic.
It's a comparison of how one person & their party can excite & delight while the other person & their party depress.
Just gonna drop this here...
https://www.readingrockets.org/reading-101/reading-and-writing-basics/reading-comprehension
There was a ton of ambiguity in the initial statement. I had to read the statement twice and look at the pictures for a moment before I understood the context in my daily morning brain fog. So I don't fault them for asking their initial question.
What I do fault them for is doubling down after the explanations.