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
It's also possible you did it. Neither is particularly likely, but it being a random accident is about as likely as you actually being the person who did it. So I suppose the cops should raid your house just to check. After all, we can't be sure. Better send the SWAT team to your home just in case.
No? This is an insane argument.
I found a random statistic online that a home has a 1 in 413 chance of a fire in a given year, lets round up to 1 in 1000. It may be not exactly right, but within an order of magnitude. Trump criticized this judge, any time within about a month would get people saying this- so lets say the stats are there is a 1 in 12,000 chance of any particular person's house burning down within a month of when Trump criticizes them. But Trump doesn't criticize just 1 person a year, lets lowball estimate he criticizes 100 people a year. So that's a 100 in 12,000 or 1 in 120 chance that in any particular year someone Trump criticizes house will burn down within a "suspicious" amount of time. That is nowhere near impossibly low, and now if you add in all the other unlikely but bad things that could happen to them- it happening sometimes is increasingly likely.
Now compare that with the one person writing this comment of the lowball estimate of 100 million people in America who could commit arson(again assuming it was arson).
We currently have no evidence at all forany conclusion so any version of “x or y is more likely” isn’t coming from an informed place.
IRL the most common cause if home fires is not arson. Until we have evidence that it is arson we should not presume it to be. This is how logical thinking works.
You're being purposefully dense. There's having an open mind, and then there's having a mind so open your brain falls out. I don't assume you're a complete idiot, which is why malice on your part is most likely.
And we do have evidence. The three components of a crime are means, motive, and opportunity. And we have abundant evidence for motive. If you tried your argument in court, you would be laughed out of a courtroom.
No, I am not being dense. We have zero evidence backing any theory right now so presuming violence rather than the much more common cause of fires is a stretch. It could be arson but right now you have nothing that suggests this other than vibes.
Chickenshit mod