this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2025
92 points (100.0% liked)

politics

24320 readers
2879 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Top Trump officials said their strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites were limited, but they don’t have much control over the knock-on effects in the Middle East and their party.

Donald Trump’s top national security officials spent much of Sunday insisting his administration doesn’t want to bring about the end of Iran’s government, only its nuclear program. Then Trump left the door open for exactly that.

“It’s not politically correct to use the term, ‘Regime Change,’ but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

While Trump did not call for the ouster of the regime, or say that the U.S. would play any role in overthrowing the Iranian government, his words undercut what had appeared to be a coordinated message from his top advisers. JD Vance, Marco Rubio and Pete Hegseth each insisted Sunday that the U.S. was only interested in dismantling Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

That's a good point. None of them seemed to understand tariffs, but honestly, neither did I. I'm still just a casual observer. What I want to know is where’s the data? We're months into tariffs, and I’ve yet to see any real analysis, just feel-good stories about Canadians boycotting the U.S. or U.S. towns begging for forgiveness. But what are the actual numbers?

This lack of follow-up, of concrete outcomes, leaves me pessimistic. So many leftist apparently, are any of them in economics? Are they not posting online? If they are, are we not sharing that?

We should be acting like relays in an information network. That’s what the right did so well in 2016. I watched them build networks like a slime mold. Fake accounts collecting random users and then connecting those into bigger ones like Charlie Kirk, Bannon, or Bongino.

On the left we did the opposite. Voices who weren’t even that political, scientists, educators, got torn down by our own side. I saw it: people mocking Neil deGrasse Tyson, attacking Bill Nye, even Bill Gates. Anyone targeted by Libs of TikTok should’ve had a wall of support drowning that crap out. Instead, we told each other “don’t wrestle with pigs.

Just look at our methods to engage. Don't tell me there's the biggest turn out for a protest and then turn around and tell me those mother fuckers will show up in the heat under threat of arrest and still cannot be bothered to create or share content to shut Charlie Kirk up. I'm nothing but pissed off at every protester because it shows how willing people are to just show up and go home for what? What did that protest do?

Libsotiktok a single Twitter account targeted educators across the country and harassed teachers for having rainbows in their class. Fuck those protesters for drawing all this energy up into a single moment that does fucking nothing. Fuck every single one of those protestors for showing up and failing to build a single network that can match that libs of tiktok bullshit. It's like when Democrats made their little signs and held them up. I have the same frustration towards that as I do towards these "protests" lately.

That mindset, that it’s beneath us to engage, is the problem. Disengagement isn’t noble. It’s surrender. We gave up the space. And they took it.

[–] KnitWit@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago

I’m definitely pessimistic about all of this as well. I think we’re on the same page on a lot of things, or at least in the same chapter. The tearing down is absolutely an issue, and one I am afraid is never going to be solved. I think some of that stems from the fact that the democratic party is comprised of two groups that really don’t want the same thing. So while they both agree that they are against what the conservatives are doing, they are constantly taking potshots at each other.

This gets exacerbated by the fact that the upper levels of the DNC are fully removed from even the liberal side of the party, and are fully captured by the moneyed interests. This means that while the Republican party can move forward as a monolith, on the other side you never get a true fortified position on anything. Which is further degraded because there are always enough captured dems to reach across the aisle when it serves the moneyed interests. This also works the other way, and stops any real progressive momentum so that even if the left succeeds, they will be hamstrung by their own party. Look for this to happen to Zoran Mamdani if NYC succeeds in electing him.

It all gets amplified by the media, who are fully corporate here. Kind of going back to your point in the first post about liberals also being an echo chamber, I definitely see it as well. You’ll get your ‘watch this space’ folks who fall into the same trap, an example to me is all this TACO nonsense. He doesn’t chicken out, he’s a bullshitter and there is a huge difference. And when you call a narcissist a chicken while he’s deciding whether or not he should start an international conflict for now reason, well maybe you are part of the problem. (Obviously not you haha, just the general ‘you’). I do believe that this group is a big reason we can’t have nice things though, because they are also the one’s who will see that Bill Clinton endorsed Cuomo and somehow thing all of that is a good thing.

As for the ‘joe rogan of the left’ I keep hearing about, that’s a pass for me. My problem with him is not that he is conservative. It’s that he is a piece of shit that will push anything to make a dollar. And the money will absolutely pay a POS to spread their propaganda. Anyone on the left doing so will absolutely fall into that trap, it just may take longer for everyone to catch on. And to get to that level of market saturation, you absolutely need the money to be pushing you.

So, where do we go from here? Personally, I’m a doomer. I do my best not to tear things down or spread ‘thought-terminating cliches’ when all of this horror shows up, but I honestly don’t see a way forward from this. More and more I’m coming to realize this is what people want. Obviously not all of them, but like with the brainwashing thing, these people are doing it to themselves. While options may be limited, no one is actually forcing anyone to consume all of this. So why do we do it? (Hopefully all of that didn’t bounce around too much)