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 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
view the rest of the comments
I really don't think criminalizing speech is a great idea given the kind of shit bags we have running our criminal punishment systems. Also, this one is pretty clear, but hypothetically I could imagine polls where it's a lot more ambiguous whether they're faked or not (e.g. if they only get like 40 respondents because they're lazy/cheap, is that fake? If they ask misleading questions is that fake? etc.)
What's needed here is a better media ecosystem with more journalists who have more time to follow up on suspicious seeming things and get accurate information out there in a more effective manner
Also, the names of everyone involved with the Median Strateg6 uncovered and published, otherwise they will try to do this Mass deception again
I'm pretty sure fraud is already illegal and most people don't consider those laws a dangerous stifling of free speech.
I'm pretty sure fraud laws all require demonstrable financial harm or unjust enrichment (which this might end up being when more info comes out but that hasn't been proven yet).
If cops and prosecutors cpuld just call every statement they don't like fraud everybody who ever wrote an article on, like, flock cameras or gender affirming care would end up in prison. Misinformation/disinformation is a problem that deeply pisses me off, but if we try to imprison our way out of it those laws are 100% going to be used on people saying true things conservatives don't like hearing.
Yep we restrict speech all the time, the usual example being yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.
I don't either, but it also isn't a great idea to think that the speech of individuals is equal to the speech of corporations. This pollster may have swayed the outcome of an election with knowingly false statements; that should be illegal.
I see the point about needing time for real journalists to blow it open, but given the current landscape, I don't think it's a good idea to kick this can. What happens when the poll with fake data is released only hours before the election?
Adding an edit: I also see the point about margin of error and how it isn't clear sometimes and it ultimately makes the polls worthless. But isn't that a conflation or even a red herring here? If the poll is bad, it's bad. But what we are talking about was intentionally false.
I don't think that could be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Also, you could make an argument that, like, some diner near a polling place doing a special swayed the outcome of an election because it made the area look busy and potential voters decided they didn't have time.
Actually my point was more about needing more journalists and editors and newsroom support staff so that someone could have looked into this sooner and more aggressively
Probably only a few people see it and it doesn't have much impact
I appreciate the idea of limiting ourselves to people who make intentionally false statements, but when I intentionally say something like "race is a social construct" or "the president is a criminal" the average Republican thinks it's a false statement.
What these people did was super shitty, but I don't see a way to criminalize it without handing fascists a giant weapon to beat loud mouth leftists like me over the head with. I think the best remedy here is we get the names of everyone involved in this and then for the rest of their lives whenever they say anything of consequence we'll be able to say "Oh you're one of those liars who lied to all of us one time, I don't think I believe what you're claiming now."
Swaying something does not mean changed the results of it, it means influencing it strongly.