this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2024
17 points (60.2% liked)

politics

19089 readers
5629 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago

Here from the future: they weren’t wrong.

[–] dragontamer@lemmy.world 70 points 1 week ago (3 children)

We know that Twitter and Facebook interfered in the election by suppressing documents and information that would have hurt Joe Biden — think Hunter Biden’s laptop, the lack of scientific basis for COVID-19 restrictions and everything in between. It isn’t really a stretch to think that Republican speech was being suppressed in other ways across social media platforms.

But there has been a profound change in social media since the last presidential election. Elon Musk, a strong proponent of free speech, took control of Twitter/X in 2022, and as for Facebook, the discovery of its cover-ups most certainly has put a much harsher spotlight on it this time around.

What the fuck is this drivel?

It’s an opinion piece they published so they can appear “unbiased”. But it’s a really fucking stupid opinion, to be perfectly blunt.

The Hill has been putting out some worse takes than usual.

[–] ug01x@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

They've clearly been chugging the Q-lade.

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Honestly, I trust the betting markets more than the pollsters. Money on the line makes a difference.

[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

You don't necessarily get common sense with money, especially if you are very wealthy.

[–] FunderPants@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Betting markets can be swayed easily by wealth, sure. Another bias is that they're overwhelmingly frequented by young men.

[–] SilentStorms@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 week ago

Also betting on who you think will win, doesn't always match with who you're voting for.

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago

Definitely. Especially when you also know that the betting markets had Hillary Clinton at 82 percent odds of winning the day before the election and 90 percent odds of UK voters rejecting Brexit. That's obviously not what happened.

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago