this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
311 points (99.4% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2074 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] specseaweed@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Back in the before times, bills would come to a vote and bills that had virtually total support would go thru with unanimous consent. Now, bills are blocked from being voted on so that Senators aren't on the record being shitbags. As you quoted Vance saying, "“it’s idiotic for us to take the bait” in regards to Democrats using the bill to force Republicans to publicly declare whether or not they support IVF."

Think about that statement from a Senator, then marvel at how fundamentally different he sees the job of a Senator from say, you or me or regular humans.

Duckworth is putting a face to whoever opposes a wildly popular issue, IVF treatment. It causes people to think about the issue, because legislators are in fact advocators (you know, in complete contrast to Vance trying to hide what he advocates for). There's nothing performative about it.

in my opinion, it is the standard democrat cynicism. it is simply something that in the future can be used as a bullet point for her future candidacy. without context, one could write ‘honestly’ she “fought” for IVF.

For Duckworth and for many people, IVF is a opportunity that is basically magic. It changes their lives and it gives them the opportunity to have children. There are few things more powerful than that, and it's tone deaf to an extreme degree to think that something is performative just because it isn't targeted at you.

I mean, usually I'd say you're being a petulant childish asshole, but I'm trying to be better too.

It's ok if everything isn't important to you, champ. It can be important to others and we can support that. There will be Republican supporters of IVF that wanna know too.

[–] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Thanks for writing that up, appreciated.

Edit: Wow, a ninja edit just to add insults? I have never had this happen to me before. goodness, how deliciously underhanded of you <3

[–] specseaweed@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It wasn't for you. Your posts are banal and amateurish. It was for other people.