Hot answers tagged

19

Definitely. I think they are even more of a fit here than on history


18

No, we should not allow this. When we post questions about the political positions of individual people, then we should do so by asking for actual positions on specific issues. We should not ask whether or not abstract labels apply. Why? Abstract labels almost always include a positive or negative connotation. "Fascist" is a label with an especially ...


15

For anyone already familiar with the Stack Exchange format, This one should be really easy. A Stack Exchange-style Q&A generally forgoes questions that are overly subjective, argumentative, require extended discussion, or polling the community. While questions about political processes can raise a lot of controversy, this is not a discussion board or a ...


14

If nothing that has been tried has worked, how can we know what the best way is? Questions that aren't 100% fact-oriented aren't necessarily bad, but you should be able to look at a list of answers and say "that one's probably right". I could post the answer "I think that requiring donations in multiples of $7 would decrease corruption", and there's nothing ...


14

Yes, I think this question would be on-topic here.


13

If someone flagged an answer like that for deletion, I would decline that flag almost 100% of the time. As long as your answer looks like it's trying to help the OP solve his underlying problem(on politics.SE, it's usually to understand an issue) then you should be fine. As for whether I would be inclined upvote or downvote that answer, however, is a ...


12

I certainly would like to include Econ in our scope. If you agree, please vote this answer up. When we reach 10, I'll talk to people Economy used to be called political economy for a reason. Good policy comes from good macroeconomic understanding. Microeconomics tends to overlap with personal finance and psychology more, but macroeconomics is wholly ...


11

I agree with your assessment. The first question is on-topic, because it asks "why are these the visa rules for X?" and specifically asks for the political reasons. The second question is off-topic, because "what are the visa rules for X?" isn't a political question. You don't need to know the political backgrounds to answer the question, just the local ...


11

For the most part, I consider questions about politics in a historical context to be politics and therefore on-topic. However, there is a class of questions, which for lack of a better name, I'll call trivia. These are questions like Who is the person in this picture? Where is a document fitting this description? Etc. If these are about current ...


10

The term opinionated just adds an accusational tone to what we generally call "bad subjective." If you're somewhat familiar with our history, you've probably already seen this blog post: Good Subjective, Bad Subjective It outlines quite concisely what type of questions — even those that have some element of opinion and subjectivity — that are ...


10

History in politics includes the history of political ideas and theories too. This is not the same as “pure” history. And we have to understand the origins of what we see today, so I don’t see a practical way to exclude history from our site.


10

Political Opinions are irrelevant. I care about the facts you use to make your case. In forensics (the Debate kind, not the CSI kind), it is typical to be assigned a proposition and a position. Often the position may or may not be your own opinion. That is irrelevant. The question is - can you make the case? Can you marshal reason and facts to be ...


9

years ago, back in 2012, there use to be this close reason called "too localized" which was for questions exactly like yours. "Too Localized" questions were questions which needed answers tailored specifically to one asker, and are therefore not likely to help future visitors. The problem with the "too localized" close reason was that many people didn't ...


9

That is a good example of a "Rant in Disguise" question. In essence looks like a question that is not posted in good faith, and is intended to make some point(or in this case, I'd call it a "zinger" and not a "point") I usually close these questions as "Unclear what you're asking", because that's what replaced the old "not a real question" close reason, ...


9

Crime statistics in themselves are not about politics and political processes (unless, perhaps, if the perpetrators are politicians or if we are talking about political crimes). Yes, they might be relevant for political decisions, but almost everything is in some way relevant for political decision making. If we use that as a measure for what's on-topic, ...


8

I think we should allow questions on campaigning. For questions that are opaquely seeking campaign advice, we should probably worry more about the question being too localized. I think many campaign advice questions will be caught by the normal rules of a SE website, but I think the main thing to be on the lookout for in questions seeking campaign advice ...


8

I think these types of questions should be allowed, but we need to ensure that they are constructed in such a way as to rely on the fact that is available. Specifically, answers should be a discussion of existing Court precedent and free of speculation about how the Court might act in the future. I think both the edits that were made to this question ...


8

I think that questions about the political opinions of celebrities are usually not on-topic. Truth is, that they usually don't matter much for political processes. This question in particular doesn't seem to aim to gain a better understanding of politics and political processes (as by our site definition), but rather about gaining a better understanding of ...


8

Questions should always be asked on the stackexchange site where they are the most on-topic. Sports Stackexchange already has a tag about the FIFA, and there are several questions which are more about the people in suits than about the people in shirts. When you have a question about the internal workings of a sport organization, you will likely find more ...


8

I think asking for a salary table of government employees is rather stretching the scope of the site. You might argue it's a matter of government policy how much government employees are paid but I think it opens the door to a lot of uninteresting questions that are only tangentially related to politics. While there is a police tag, it's mostly used, like ...


7

The SE system automatically removes poorly used new tags, so I wouldn't say the "one-off" rule needs to be applied manually. It's a tough question, as each area has different opinions as to how important their area is. We could limit to countries and international organisations, but then would we consider uk to be the limit, or would scotland be appropriate?...


7

Not going to give a definite answer (yes or no) as I'm a sort of outsider, but I wanted to give my insight hoping that it helps. I'm a moderator on Linguistics SE and there we allow reference requests. There are two main reasons why we do: The site is relatively small and such questions are not so frequent. The papers are going to be of a small number ...


7

Those two categories of questions have to do with politics, so they're already on topic at Politics.SE. No additional expansion of scope is needed. Keep in mind that just because a question is on topic doesn't make it a good one. You should still ask questions which are not too broad, opinion-based or unclear.


7

Often these "why" questions are an attempt to promote a particular cause. The questioner who asks "Why isn't there a law against guns?" is often really saying "I think that there should be a law against guns, and here is why...". When this is clearly the case the question can be closed with the appropriate "off topic" reason. An example of this is when a ...


7

I think such questions can serve a useful purpose. The intention is usually: [Thing] recently happened, and the media is making a big sensation out of it. Is [thing] really something special and extraordinary in the political landscape or is it just business as usual? An answer to such a question would help people to better understand political processes ...


7

Let's dissect the two Why do US presidents play golf? - There's no attempt at a political angle, just a general "Why play golf?", which should be closed as off-topic (I can't tell you why any one president likes golf, let alone all of them for the last 30-ish years). An on-topic question might be Why do people sometimes get mad at US presidents for ...


7

My problem is broader than this one question. Fascism is ill-defined for our purposes here. I tend to think Jonah Goldberg got it right when he said In short, “fascist” is a modern word for “heretic,” branding an individual worthy of excommunication from the body politic. The left uses other words—“racist,” “sexist,” “homophobe,” “christianist”—for ...


7

It worth noting that there's a post notice for these very questions: This post relates to a rapidly changing event. Only ♦ moderators can apply and remove these notices. There are currently two questions on Politics Stack Exchange which have this notice: What options are left, if Britain cannot decide? Did Erdoǧan cheat in the 2018 election? You can find ...


6

I would reformulate the goal, it is not about aiming to help win elections, but instead about answering questions and sharing knowledge about a political process. Whether a given answer is useful in a specific situation should not influence us on giving the answer or not ;)


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible