this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
895 points (97.6% liked)

politics

19121 readers
2640 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] I_Clean_Here@lemmy.world 79 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's so he can start bitching more and more after he loses again and his cult can try to overthrow the government again.

He wants to break the system, dumbasses.

[–] BigBlackCockroach@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago (2 children)

He is prove the system is already broken. When in a democracy, voters who can read and write, who are impoverished and on avg can't even afford a $500 emergency vote for a billionaire, I'd say that is a failure of the system.

[–] BigBlackCockroach@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (6 children)

edit: I am not saying billionaires are worse than anybody else, I am just saying their interests probably don't have a lot of overlap with the avg voter.

[–] SmoothIsFast@citizensgaming.com 31 points 1 year ago

It's ok, I'll say it, billionaires are greedy fucks killing our society, individuals who should not exist in a functional society.

[–] sploosh@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

Billionaires are worse than everyone else. Greed on their scale is killing the planet and people.

[–] s1ndr0m3@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No one becomes a billionaire through ethical means. You have to grind people down to make that kind of money.

[–] AutistoMephisto@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

To prove it, just how rich can someone get without making any unethical choices?

[–] gatelike@feddit.de 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Imagine waking up with billions of dollars. What would you do with it? If you say keep it and try o take more from the populous then you are an enemy of the populous. They have brain damage from greed. They are worse than everyone else.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I would spend all but 1 billion on just buying wetlands and the legal resources to make sure they never get touched. Doing good the laziest way possible.

With the remaining billion I will start my own space program.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh don't apologize! Let me show you something:

  • 10,000 seconds = 2.8 hours
  • 100,000 seconds = 27.8 hours
  • 1,000,000 seconds = 11.6 days
  • 10,000,000 seconds = 115.7 days
  • 1,000,000,000 seconds = 31.7 YEARS

I haven't even lived for a billion seconds yet and I was born in 94! A billion is a truly obscene high quantity. I don't think there's a moral way to gain that much wealth, and if there is, it's an exceptionally rare possibility.

[–] Xero@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I am 1,735,668,000 seconds old, and so I have seen some shit. Donald Trump is just an unseemly hiccup in an insignificant span of time. There were ghastly horrors before him and there will be ghastly horrors after him. These nuisances seem important because this is your now, you'll realize how little they meant when this is your then. As in, it seemed so important then, while you look back at the Land of Then from the clear hilltops of After.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I hope so. I'd rather this all be something my kids or grandkids ask me about.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

They are objectively worse - it's immoral for a billionaire to exist (meaning to amass that amount of money, not to physically exist). You can't get to that point without knowingly/actively hurting others. They are worse people, period... and you don't have to cover your bases and backpedal on this point. Starts to sound line the famous "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" quote.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That’s why the Electoral College exists

If people are voting for Trump then they will put their votes towards a better alternative

[–] BigBlackCockroach@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ironically Hillary Clinton had 3 million more votes than Trump. Without electoral college it would have been a Hillary Presidency.

[–] Gumbyyy@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

We've had 6 presidential elections in the 21st century. The Republican candidate won the popular vote one out of those 6 times. Yet we've had 3 Republican Presidential terms resulting from those elections.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, it doesn’t work as intended but political parties weren’t intended either

[–] BigBlackCockroach@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think it works as intended by those who put it in place.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

A lot of things brought in were done so because they didn’t know how to exploit it

[–] s1gtrap@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Only in certain polls, and as we have seen time and again, the polls don't mean shit. Bernie was leading in the polls this far out from the election in 2019. "Somehow" he isn't president.

Hell, Hillary was leading in the polls on, and after, election day 2016. She won the general election.....

[–] irreticent@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The electoral college needs to be abolished.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Agreed. If the Superbowl was "won" by the losing team 17% of the time people would riot.

[–] s1gtrap@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Only in certain polls,

.. specifically the majority of polls published in the last week: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/national/

That being 8/13 at the time of writing with Biden only leading in one.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"The polls"

If I go outside and ask the three young kids riding their bikes what their favorite ice cream is, I've joust conducted a poll.

Apropos to this specific scenario, if I go to a chocolate lovers convention and ask their favorite ice cream flavor, guess which flavor might leaf the way. Now what is while along the question, I was wearing a t-shirt that says "vote for chocolate and I'll give you $20 bucks".

"Chocolate is leading in the polls, okay... You know it, I know it."

[–] s1gtrap@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What point are you trying to make?

Are you implying that only live and die Trump voters are being polled?

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I mean, to a degree, polling in general is still conducted with a very antiquated structure that tends to bring in responses predominately from the underemployed, undereducated and elderly (so huge cross section of enthusiastic trump voters over represented in those groups). But my specific point here was that he's ambiguously citing "polls" and not a specific poll - They aren't all created equal and in fact, you can bet the ones that trump would proudly reference are typically biased as fuck in how they ask questions and analyze results.