After 2 different users brought this answer to my attention through flags ("rude or abusive" and a custom flag calling the answer "smears against a political figure"), I read it carefully and decided that the answer did two things which shouldn't have a place on Politics Stack Exchange:
- It accused the senators of one specific party of "abolishing or violating long-held political, economical and moral principles".
- It accused a specific politician of "unabashed and blatant immorality".
These are both opinionated judgment calls. Maybe there is a point to them. But maybe there is not. Fact is, both the party and the politician in question still have enough supporters who do not share the judgment passed by this answer. So we can not just postulate that these judgments are "factual preconditions". It is not a judgment we should be passing on this website. As the help center says:
Politics Stack Exchange is for objective questions about governments, policies and political processes.
It is not a place to advance opinions or debate, but rather for exchanging objective information about the policies, processes, and personalities that comprise the political arena.
And no, adding references doesn't fix the problem. The Internet is large. If you spend enough time looking, you can find enough critical articles to make any politician look like a complete monster. It might be easier with some politicians than with others, but we are not here to tell people what to think about specific politicians. That's what debate websites are for.