this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2025
78 points (96.4% liked)

politics

20365 readers
3160 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 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LuxSpark@lemmy.cafe 38 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Wtf he was president before. He said incredibly worrying things during his campaign. Project2025?

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 37 points 2 days ago (2 children)
[–] Chozo@fedia.io 20 points 2 days ago

IIRC, he was allegedly not supposed to laugh in that scene, and he was just caught off-guard by Gene ad-libbing the "morons" line, so that's an authentic laugh that they kept in the film.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

It's not funny this time, though.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

A lot of people didn't even hear about project 2025. Even then, you had to be fairly plugged in to have heard anything more than his disavowal of it.

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

This is just making excuses... I'm not even from the USA and heard all about it

Choosing to stick your head in the Fox News sand does not excuse ignorance

[–] ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com 23 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

This seems like a standard hopium piece on the left. Take the first anecdote:

Last June, the popular UFC fighter Sean Strickland surprised onlookers when, immediately following a victory, he ducked into the audience and took a photo with a bystander: Donald Trump. “President Trump, you’re the man, bro,” Strickland declared in his post-match interview with Joe Rogan. “It is a damn travesty what they’re doing to you. I’ll be donating to you, my man. Let’s get it done.” Video of the moment rocketed across social media, serving as an early indicator of Trump’s enduring strength with his base, despite his recent felony convictions.

Strickland went viral last week for a very different reason: opposition to the president and his plan to take over Gaza. “Man if Trump keeps this bs up I’m about to start waving a Palestinian flag,” the fighter posted on X. “American cities are shitholes and you wanna go spend billions on this dumpster fire. Did we make a mistake?! This ain’t America first.” Strickland’s lament racked up 159,000 likes and 13.2 million views.

This isn't even buyer's remorse - Strickland couldn't even bring himself to make a statement rather than a question - but even assuming it is, the article fundamentally misunderstands MAGA believers' relationship with Trump. Sure, they will question random one-off decisions, but even outright contradicting their own interests will at best draw this - momentary mild annoyance. Meanwhile, if next week Trump says something that can be contorted to be a show of support for their own goals, even if wildly improbable and incoherent, they'll be back to fawning over him.

We see him as a toddler, or a middle-school bully who tears the legs off frogs for fun. Yes, that is true, but irrelevant. What this article writer doesn't get is that parents will usually do anything to protect their baby, or live in denial that their middle-schooler is a psychopath.

These complaints are in reality just cries for the warm blanket of propaganda to lull them back to sleep with some easy answer, and annoyance at the vertigo of momentarily seeing reality. The thesis that Trump's support will fall over time because of this is absurd.

[–] Alwaysnownevernotme@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

H.L. Mencken

[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The problem with this is that the same argument (that people are too stupid and can't be trusted with voting) was made against the concept of democracy in the first place, and was also the justification for the electoral college. It's an inherently cynical argument in favor of authoritarianism and "divine right to rule" over representative government.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

Yes, but an educated populice in required for democracy to be done correctly. Which we are lacking, which leads to statements like this becoming true and democracy becoming not true.

[–] blakenong@lemmings.world 13 points 2 days ago

A: Hey bud, this house is probably gonna need a new roof soon. the foundation is all eaten up. Those pipes are still lead. There’s asbestos in the walls. And you’re right next to a waste water treatment plant. Maybe you should look for anoth—

B: No I like it. The door is my favorite color.

A: Color? I mean, you can paint any—

B: No no, this is the one. It has a red door. Nothing else matters.