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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
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
Reign it in, Cuntalicious— this story was from 2011-2012. Were you ever born then? Lmao.
And just because Jeff isn’t currently being challenged for his district, doesn’t mean he isn’t a Titanic piece of shit. It also doesn’t mean that you aren’t a Titanic piece of shit for trying to stick up for him. Really, what is he done that you are willing to defend? Fuck you.
I bet you don’t even live in this district, ya poster.
Him not being a Republican is still enough to defend with everything we have in November. He wants to reform the scotus and undo cuts to medicare and social security. We need him to win in Novemver so go get your fucking canvassing clipboard out.
How about you demand better from the dems for once in your life?
He’s even not up for reelection in November, and won’t be until 2028
https://ballotpedia.org/New_York%27s_8th_Congressional_District_election,_2026
I stand corrected, not that it’s much of a race
You know, if you have a strong argument you don't need to resort to aggression and name calling.
I don't think this is an argument. OP has a personal vendetta with a high pfofile figure and telling him to "calm down we need him" doesn't remove that betrayal. He wasn't even disagreeing with the reply. Just asserting what we all already know in that Jeffries does not have the people's priorities in mind.
Him not being as bad as a literal nazi isn't a high bar to meet.
When I have a weak argument, I like to go with the "God told me I'm right in a vision, unbeliever" option. Works every time.
Research into rhetoric disagrees is the person is using themselves as part of the argument. If they bring I their credibility then an ad hominem is rhetorically the correct response.
With that fun fact of the way, in this instance I think you are right.