485
submitted 3 months ago by Five@slrpnk.net to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Your original comment:

Maybe the answer here is to pay more attention to what a politician does than what he says.

Your current comment:

I couldn't care less what Biden did in the 1970's.

Maybe the answer here is to not leave condescending replies to other people's comments if you're just going to completely contradict yourself and negate your own point.

[-] btaf45@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Dude what a politicians does NOW matters a hell of a lot more than what they did 50 years ago lol.

and negate your own point.

And Biden being the VP of the first black president 100% negates him being against forced busing in the 1970's. And everybody was against force busing in the 1970's. It was a stupid policy then.

[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Dude what a politicians does NOW matters

Do you understand how insanely incoherent what you're saying is? You're saying that my mistake in voting for Obama was that I listened to what he said instead of paying attention to what he did. But I should only pay attention to what a politician doing NOW, not what they've done in the past. So I shouldn't just listen to what they say they'll do in the future, but I can't judge them based on what they've done in the past...so how am I supposed to pick a candidate? Use psychic powers to know what they're going to do in the future?!?!?!

Like, I could keep arguing about Biden; you're ignoring 20 additional years of racist legislation I brought up, and I didn't even get to his support for the Iraq War...but I don't even care about that. Explain how the hell your philosophy of ignoring what a candidate says and watching what they do while ignoring what they've done makes any kind of sense.

[-] btaf45@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

But I should only pay attention to what a politician doing NOW, not what they’ve done in the past.

Yes. Now as in current term of office. Not 50 years ago. Biden's rejected of forced busing 50 years ago does not have the slightest relevance to anything he does as president. Do you not understand how much political climates change in a huge way over 1/2 of a century?

and I didn’t even get to his support for the Iraq War

You mean when Biden was one of the very few senators who voted against the first Iraq was in 1993?

but I can’t judge them based on what they’ve done in the past

If you are complaining about something Biden did in the 1970's, it's just because you are on some ridiculous anti-Biden kick. Everybody knows it doesn't have the slightest relevance to his presidential terms.

Explain how the hell your philosophy of ignoring what a candidate says and watching what they do while ignoring what they’ve done makes any kind of sense.

Watch what Biden has done as president. He's been the most progressive president since FDR. Pretty simple.

[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

OK, you're very clearly just avoiding all the things I say that you don't want to hear, and honestly, this feels like I'm just punching down now, so I'm just gonna stop. Good luck buddy.

[-] btaf45@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

OK, you're very clearly just avoiding that I said Biden was the most progressive president of the last 50 years, and not the most progressive senator. Good luck guy.

this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2024
485 points (96.4% liked)

politics

18930 readers
3082 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS