this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
296 points (96.8% liked)

politics

19072 readers
3100 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.
  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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 114 points 2 months ago (1 children)

“Oh well, you know, he’s not serious,” Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., told reporters in the U.S. Capitol. “He likes to goad you. You can’t take him seriously when he’s talking about stuff like this.”

"i don't kid."

-trump

"he tells it like it is"

-trump ~~voter~~ cultist

[–] lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 2 months ago

This sentence is a lie.

-The Ascended, product of Trump and his cult fusing into one giant monstrosity... That promptly implodes from the self-loathing of realising it's mostly made up of 🤢 poor people 🤮

[–] dogsnest@lemmy.world 85 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Fox wasn't even aware of Trump's unilateral debate announcement.

[–] OhStopYellingAtMe@lemmy.world 34 points 2 months ago

Need to find a way to make a hybrid scarecrow/tin-man/lion/trump. Seeing as how he’s brainless, heartless, and cowardly.

[–] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 60 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

I enjoy that pollsters are starting to poll for what happens if Trump drops and Vance is the top of the ticket, while Washington republicans are trying to figure out how to oust Janky Douche.

At this point I wouldn't be completely surprised if that chair that Clint Eastwood shouted at a few years ends up on the ballot.

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 39 points 2 months ago (2 children)

i enjoy watching republicans eat each other alive while self-immolating

[–] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 31 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What's delightful is that their whole... (waves hands frantically) thing^1^, takes all the most crucial tools off the table. Imagine this safety sign posted at the RNC:

Absolutely NO:

  • compromising
  • back-tracking
  • changing your mind
  • making mistakes
  • wrong opinions


All one can do from there is lie while doing one of those things anyway. At a certain point people are going to take notice, which just makes it worse.

^1^ - Machismo? Rampant authoritarianism? Sociopathic narcissism? I can't keep up.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

^1^ - Machismo? Rampant authoritarianism? Sociopathic narcissism? I can’t keep up.

Yes.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] EnderWiggin@lemmy.world 30 points 2 months ago (2 children)

At this point I wouldn’t be completely surprised if that chair that Clint Eastwood shouted at a few years ends up on the ballot.

That was 12 years ago :(

[–] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That hurts. That hurts deep inside.

stupid time

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

honestly, with the rate at which the gop has gone balls to the wall deranged it feels more like 50 years.

think about it: the reason talking to a chair became a meme was because it was so unbelievable. the reason vance fucking a couch became a meme is because it's so believable.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Fuckin weird then and it's weird now.

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 21 points 2 months ago (1 children)

People told me that it was impossible for the Republican party to even concieve of replacing Trump. Yeah? How's that going now, huh? Personally, I'm looking forward to Trump ripping the party in half.

[–] Clasm@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's the problem when you have a bunch of narcissistic opportunities vying for power. Eventually, they start trying to push each other down the stairs...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The chair would have less felony convictions and rapes

[–] MrVilliam@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's where you're wrong. The chair would actually have fewer felony convictions and rapes. Allegedly. I don't know that chair personally. But the point is that "fewer" is the grammatically correct word for the point you're making.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (3 children)

"Less" is going to become grammatically correct as it's used more and more. It's only a matter of time. There is no useful distinction between the two terms.

[–] MelodiousFunk@slrpnk.net 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So more less begets more less, more or less?

[–] dactylotheca@suppo.fi 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Linguistic descriptivism 💪

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yes, although I will lament the loss of a useful term when it happens, like when "literally" became commonly used to mean "figuratively."

"Less" and "fewer," though? Worthless distinction. "Whom" needs to go ahead and die as well.

[–] dactylotheca@suppo.fi 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Oh yeah I'm a staunch descriptivist, but I do sometimes mourn the changes that are going on in Finnish which is my native language.

Change is inevitable, especially when there are more learners whose native language is from a completely different family (which'd be the vast majority of immigrants here, Uralic languages aren't exactly common), but it's still a bit sad to see the language start to lose some of its unique features that have made it so expressive – but also hard as fuck to learn.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm a big fan of language being as useful for communication as possible for people, which means it has to evolve with the times. While it's cool that Icelanders can still read 1000 year old documents, the fact that the language was artificially forced to stay the same doesn't sit well with me. They can get away with it because it's a niche language of only around 330,000 speakers, but no world language would ever survive under those kind of constraints.

[–] dactylotheca@suppo.fi 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

As a native speaker of a relatively small language (under 6 million speakers) in a very niche language family, I understand eg. Iceland's desire to "preserve" the language – languages are by definition communication tools, but they're also inextricably tied to the culture(s) that produced them (and vice versa), so while I absolutely do agree that fighting change is relatively pointless, I think it's understandable that speakers of minority languages try to protect them.

So yeah, even though I definitely am a descriptivist and know that linguistic evolution is just a fact of life, I just can't help being a bit sad about it at the same time when it comes to Finnish. Not that I'd want to somehow "freeze" it since that'd be silly and impossible, but at the same time I'd love to see eg. promotion of some of the features that are currently dying out (whatever the hell that'd mean in practice). The primacy of English in this age of global mass media has minority languages in a real bind.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

A language being closely tied to your identity is something I've never really experienced since my native language, English, is so widespread. I definitely agree that preservation of language is important - it doesn't have to be keeping the language the same, but can also just be keeping track of the changes. I've always been fascinated by the etymology of words, and English's word origins are very well-documented. I always assumed that it was the same in other languages that aren't in danger of dying out - are you able look up a random Finnish word online to see where it came from?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Goodmorningsunshine@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Very late to the comment, but I don't think and don't hope this is correct. There is a distinction - fewer is for things you can count, less is for a more abstract, less countable amount. I have fewer opportunities as I have less time. I'm just an old English major, but I like accuracy with language.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Yes, there is a difference, but as far as understanding what a person is saying, you can use them interchangeably. In what situation would you need to know whether it's a countable or abstract amount?

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Problems. “I have fewer problems than I did last year” means that I understand what my problems are or am tracking some of them and no longer have as many. “I have less problems than I did last year” is more vibes based and is a statement that this year seems to be going easier than last year went

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Cadeillac@lemmy.world 51 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The same Vance that refuses to learn a nice life lesson from Mamaw?

"I'll never forget the time I convinced myself that I was gay. I was eight or nine, maybe younger, and I stumbled upon a broadcast by some fire-and-brimstone preacher. The man spoke about the evils of homosexuals, how they had infiltrated our society, and how they were all destined for hell absent some serious repenting. At the time, the only thing I knew about gay men was that they preferred men to women. This described me perfectly: I disliked girls, and my best friend in the world was my buddy Bill. Oh no, I'm going to hell."

When he brought up the issue with his grandmother — known to Vance as "Mamaw" — she replied bluntly: "Don't be a fucking idiot, how would you know that you're gay?"

When Vance explained his reasoning, she laughed.

"JD, do you want to suck dicks?" she said, according to the book.

The young Vance, apparently "flabbergasted," said: "Of course not!"

"Then you're not gay. And even if you did want to suck dicks, that would be okay," she replied. "God would still love you."

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Oh wow. Even when they try they can't get it right. Many people know they're gay by 9, not all gay men want to do oral sex, and all most 9 year olds know is they're supposed to want this thing called sex. It's literally the grade where they talk about "it" and some braggart says they did "it".

And the God loves you line is just classic. According to conservatives God loves gay people which is why it's important to save them from hell.

This entire story is just a massive line of red flags.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

My family loves to tell the story about my cousin and I running around the house when we were like 6 and supposedly he stopped dead in his tracks, looked at my stepmom and said "that dress is so your color."

Doesn't have to do with dicks, but from that day they knew he was gay and he very much is now that we're in our late 30s. I love him to death, he's such a great guy!

He finally came out to me when we went to an art exhibit because I always liked Tim Burton stuff and he kept commenting on paintings "why are the men all clothed and the women all topless? Why does Jack not have a bulge but Sally is full figured!?" That kind of stuff. So over dinner I was like "ya know... I couldn't help notice some of your comments? You know I love you, is there anything you want to share with me?" Lol

[–] leadore@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

If he replaces Vance, it'll have to be Nancy Mace, the only one left in the potential pick pool whose one-syllable name ends in "ce".

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

But she doesn't have a 5 letter last name, so she's straight out.

[–] leadore@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Looks like he's stuck with JD then!

[–] aodhsishaj@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)
[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 26 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Ok I'm interested. He was picked July 15, 3 weeks, 21 days ago. That's 1.9 Scaramuccis as of today. If he's replaced tomorrow Aug 6, that's 2 Scaramuccis on the dot.

Ohio needs the names Aug 7.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago

Cap’n! Tha Mooch scale was ne’er intended for campaignin’! I dunnae how much longer she’ll hold!

[–] 242@lemmy.cafe 5 points 2 months ago (4 children)

But what happens in Ohio if Trump/Vance is the name on the ballot, but Vance has since been replaced by Rubio? Is the vote just torn up and tossed? If a VP candidate dies in a bizarre boating accident in October is it just... over?

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Even if it is too late to remove a name from ballots, the Democrats and Republicans would name a new nominee as their standard-bearer.

Fortier said it's important to remember that when people cast a vote, they aren't voting for a candidate, but for electors who will vote for their preferred party in the Electoral College.

Because of that, electors in most states could simply vote for the replacement nominee, regardless of which name is actually on the ballot, he said.

Nevertheless, it gets complicated once again if a candidate dies or becomes incapacitated when electors vote because of state laws restricting who the electors can vote for.

“There is a potential for some confusion,” said Ned Foley, director of the Election Law Program at Ohio State. That's because about a dozen states either don’t specifically address what electors should do if a candidate has dies, or have laws obligating electors to vote for the name on the ballot rather than the party’s nominee, he said

States might move to change the law, or the question of who electors should vote for could be decided in state courts, he said.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/07/17/presidential-candidate-death-during-campaign/74402360007/

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If a VP candidate dies in a bizarre boating accident in October is it just… over?

Are you suggesting that JD Vance may have an "accident" where he ends up sleeping with the dolphins?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Oh yeah there's problems with that. The electoral college also elects the VP. It is not just an appointment. But if it's soon enough you know Ohio will just decide to honor it's post dated extension trap they tried to catch the Democrats in.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RIPandTERROR@sh.itjust.works 16 points 2 months ago

CARRY IT TO TERM LOSERS

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 months ago

i don't know how much i would pay to see this as a huge banner at the debate, but it would be a lot

load more comments
view more: next ›