Politics

politics@beehaw.org

11,699 readers

339 active

79 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.

Guidelines for submissions:

Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

Socialism

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 4 years ago

moderation log

moderators

remington@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

circularfish@beehaw.org

knokelmaat@beehaw.org

Trump Administration Live Updates: Officials Demand States ‘Undo’ Work to Send Full Food Stamps (archive.ph)

submitted 1 year ago by Midnitte@beehaw.org to c/politics@beehaw.org

43 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Trump administration told states on Saturday that they must “immediately undo” any actions to provide full food stamp benefits to low-income families, in a move that added to the uncertainty surrounding the nation’s largest anti-hunger program during the government shutdown. In late-night guidance seen by The New York Times, the Agriculture Department also threatened financial penalties against states.

Why is feeding people political? What value add is forcing people to starve? Monsters.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is what you asked for a citation for.

Not it is not. Scroll up. I asked for evidence that Republicans overall were losing support specifically due to the shutdown. As I said previously, there are a Brazilian other factors that can affect those results.

Asking for "scientific evidence" of a trend of political opinions is already a sign that you're uninterested in any real discussion

LOOOOLOLOL WTF are you talking about!?

A sign that you're disinterested in a good faith discussion is refusing to answer simple questions and deferring to strawman arguments instead. Asking for evidence is the very definition of being interested.

Turn this back on yourself. You have provided no citations

I haven't because I haven't made any claims. Only pointed to simple logic and reason. If you don't have any evidence, you're welcome to state as much and I wouldn't hold it against you. That's fine. But you seem very disinterested in that.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent