One day, when it's safe, when there's no personal downside to calling a thing what it is, when it's too late to hold anyone accountable, everyone will have always been against this.
— Omar El Akkad
this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2025
156 points (98.1% liked)
politics
26125 readers
2686 users here now
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
What does "woo" mean?
An old fashioned term meaning you are dating someone. The proper term is "pitching woo."
In other words, you are trying to entice someone to join your side.
I don't think pitch has to accompany woo like some other fossil words need their counterparts (eg no one says "fro" without the entire phrase "to and fro"). It's not used as much for romantic dating these days but it's still relatively common to hear about say, a company trying to woo a potential hire with perks without "pitch" being included. In fact, I'd say when the full phrase "pitching woo" is used is when it sounds truly old fashioned.
To court, romance someone would be to "woo" them.
This is excellent. The progressive pressure campaign is starting to turn some liberals and the politicians are starting to feel it. I've been reading the New York Times' comment section and
- Lately the comments are just venomous toward Israel where they were previously mostly blaming Hamas or both sides-ing the issue.
- The comment screeners are letting through a LOT more anti-Israel comments. These comments are always the most highly "recommended" (liked). The Times actively shapes the ideology of the comment section, so this is a big deal.
Here are the reasons the article's author thinks this is happening:
- Israeli-Palestinian conflict has become one of the defining issues of progressive politics.
- Israeli-Palestinian issues have become a proxy for a broader divide within the Democratic Party.
- The rise of Zohran Mamdani is reshaping Israeli-Palestinian politics within the party.
- The exit of Biden [who held back progress on the issue].
Yeah my comments still mostly get blocked.
It is cool, but I would hazard anyone excited about this to note that they are by and large dropping AIPAC funding just for J-Street funding. Liberal Zionism is still Zionist, and even if J-Street is nominally critical of Bibi, they still couch the ongoing genocide in dismissive language, to say nothing of their ongoing support of Israel continuing as an apartheid ethnostate.
Hey, honestly, that's great, but frankly, I'm quite tired of the focus on Israel/Palestine situation while the Republicans are doing a speed-run toward fascism here within our borders. I get that it would be covered, but seriously the coverage from outlets like TYT might make you believe it is about 70% of the news or something.
The contrast between what is happening here at home vs. a foreign conflict often feels just a bit gaslighty and disconnected from reality.
"Frankly, I don't care much that I'm responsible for a literal genocide"
Hows that genocide going under the guy all genocide joe voters helped elect
About the same. What's your point?
We need BDS.
Ack, accidentally hit reply on your comment instead of another, sorry about that if it didn't delete properly!
Yeah life would be better for everyone if we’d have voted Harris in.
I am utterly exhausted by the "pancakes vs waffles tweet"-style responses like this. The person you replied to didn't mention Harris nor even Biden, they talked about a trend in changes they're wishing the media was better about highlighting, because it and politicians will talk a lot more about elsewhere-issues than here. Ceasing support for Israel is fast and easy, so it becomes, now the they're finally paying attention, an easy score for "pick me" points, because outright stating in non-hyperbolic language that we've got a literal dictator brewing with systems of fascism merging together and coming up with solutions is a lot more complicated than rejecting one PAC donor.
At this point I'm treating these comments as MAGA psyops trying to tear up the left, because no one actually gives a shit about Harris except Republicans in their talking points. Even the Dem politicians shut up about her.
Life would have been better with her and you’d have to have your head buried quite far into the sand to not understand it was literally a choice between her or Trump.
I’m not sure why you’re mentioning Biden here though.
Until after elections... Cast your vote based on previous behavior. Not current.
And incumbents that have taken AIPAC money will try to distance themselves to keep a job, they first go too
Did they renounce the dual citizenship as well?