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
In case no one has seen the study, the issue is people don't know which part of the revolution is tied to independence day, not they are clueless of what is going on.
In multiple choice responses were:
53% Adoption of Declaration of Independance
23% unsure
8% Ratification of Constitution
6% Victory of the Revolutionary War
5% Election of first President
3% Prilgrims landing on Plymouth Rock
1% Founding of Jamestown
It's worse, they didn't actually ask about the 4th.
"To the best of your knowledge, which of the following best describes what America's 250th anniversary commemorates?"
Yeah the 4th is the day, but plenty of people might reasonably be less certain given the options listed and the fact that the anniversary has been talked about in general terms in the media for weeks.
I appreciate the 23% willing to just admit they don't know, and the 8% are kind of close. That 3% who things pilgrims are why can fuck off, though.
I guess it depends on how you define "kinda close" since the Constitution didn't start getting drafted until a decade later
Except if your read the actual survey questions they don't ask about the 4th. They ask what "America's 250th anniversary celebration" is about. And any of the answers is valid then
Well, I guess you can be glad more than half got it right.
I knew there had to be an issue with the study. I have very little faith in America, but unless they polled 1-year-olds, there's no way so many people wouldn't understand what's it's at least about, even if not what specifically. Especially after so much 250th birthday advertising.
I always appreciate it when someone is willing to do the legwork to go to the study and find why the claim is bullshit. It was obvious from some comments in the article that the data was either flawed or made up, and now I don’t have to track down why.