this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
522 points (94.4% liked)

politics

19089 readers
3865 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
 

He's coming right out and saying it. What more do people need? You'll be safe if you're a white, cishet, Christian man. Anyone else who helps this guy into office could be potentially signing their own death warrant and he's coming right out and admitting it. Promoting it.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Red0ctober@lemmy.world 131 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You mean he's saying he'll do the thing the right keeps saying Biden is doing???

[–] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 35 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yes, but it's better when he does it...for reasons.

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Any idiot can see Trump is a selfless vessel for justice and prosperity...

cough cough cough excuse me. No, no what I meant was racism and genocide. Better.

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe 90 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Here's the kicker: a substantial number of Americans actually want a dictatorships run by him or someone like him, and they've wanted it since the end of the Civil War. That's why Trump is openly promoting it: he knows it's what will get him elected.

The left badly needs to realize that other people do not think like them or have the same priorities, goals or worldview as they do.

The right simply are not our countrymen and you all need to stop pretending they are before they fucking kill you all.

[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 20 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Hear fucking hear. Conservatives have adopted violence as part of their ideology. If the normal people are not able to prevent them from taking power and are not prepared to physically resist them, conservatives will gleefully kill us wholesale.

Conservatives do not value the lives of humans and animals the way normal people do. They will not spare you because you are their coworker or their relative. They will shrug their shoulders as your existence is made illegal. We have watched conservatives do this exact thing time and time again throughout history.

[–] thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org 17 points 11 months ago

The left badly needs to realize that other people do not think like them or have the same priorities, goals or worldview as they do.

This is the wrong way to look at it. The left knows that other people are different. It's a core tenant to the idea of liberty.

The understanding that people aren't like them, don't share the same priorities, goals or worldview is it's strength. It can be a heavy burden and painful to understand that people would kill you for allowing them to be different.

But the alternative is only pain and suffering. In the eyes of Trump, there is only one way to gain relevance. And that path is firmly set in, with an edge that would be dead to cross. Because with them you can only think one way. Deviation is NOT acceptable.

So what is the option? Those that know will be slow to act but action will come.

Free Men always fight like badgers and the caged Man will be a slave to his master.

[–] RememberTheApollo@lemmy.world 81 points 11 months ago (2 children)

You forgot conservative/republican, anti science, reactionary, pro-gun, etc. just being white and Christian isn’t enough because you can still be a liberal or have some actual intelligence.

[–] Followupquestion@lemm.ee 24 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I know quite a few people who are pro gun and dislike Trump with a passion, including myself. I would argue Trump is a symptom of why many people keep guns; a fascist dictatorship is an immediate threat to communities who won’t benefit from the “warm embrace” of such a government. I bought my first AR the day after Trump won in 2016 because it was clear the future was not trending toward the light. It was a rabbit-hole, because I realized I needed enough to equip my family and friends for what’s coming, and I like piecing them together over time so the financial outlay isn’t as high due to the variou parts going on sale over time.

[–] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You're not alone; I have owned firearms for years and am politically left (like, in the vicinity of being a social democrat). I am not surprised that marginalized people have been buying firearms over the last few years, given the state of things. But I really, really hope we don't see more violence anytime soon.

I feel like our country is in a really precarious place. Republicans plan to elevate the power of the president and erode checks and balances which safeguard against tyranny and autocracy. The GOP's persecution of marginalized people (e.g., trans, gay, black people, etc) will escalate. Yet if Trump is defeated, his rabid followers may pull something better planned and more effective than we saw during the Jan 6 insurrection.

[–] Followupquestion@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Spot on. I’m politically left of anybody in power, so I know I’m on at least a few lists of potential “dissidents”, let alone being openly Jewish in a Christofascist dictatorship and friends/family with people in the LGBTQ+ community and from various ethnic backgrounds. I always hope for the best, but that hope isn’t going to scare off a truckload of paramilitaries, so I have guns and ammo.

I also stockpile water, medical, food, and so on. If there’s an earthquake, I’m prepared, same for a medium term power outage, but in the most extreme case, I know I’ve done everything I can to keep my family safe in a dangerous time. Nobody else in my family is dying in a ditch if I can help it.

[–] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Always a good idea to prepare for adverse situations like, in my case, blizzards, cold spells or heat waves. And those precautions can help with unforseen bad situations as well like you say.

Peace and best of luck you to and all of us.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 16 points 11 months ago

He will decide who is liberal and therefore to be burned at the stake.

[–] pete_the_cat@lemmy.world 70 points 11 months ago (1 children)

He did this before with the "I'm going to kick all illegal immigrants out of this country when I become president" and people with illegal immigrants in their families still voted for him!

I remember a new story shortly after this happened of a woman who voted for him crying because her husband was being kicked out and her words were "I thought he was only going to kick bad illegal immigrants out of the country! My husband isn't a criminal!"

These idiots are all for this shit until it affects them personally.

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

My favorite was immediately after the election the travel ban was in effect and they were interviewing someone lucky enough to make it into the country. He was like, "Yay! America."

I know you're not going to shit on the country that just took you in but damn it was sobering to see the juxtaposition.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] marietta_man@yall.theatl.social 49 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Don’t imply “white, cishet, Christian man” somehow aligns with or is safe from trump. That’s false, and wanting to see rational democratic values upheld is independent of gender/racial identity.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 23 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Of course they're not ultimately safe; nobody is with authoritarians, but they'll be the safest for longer than anybody else. All of those demographics get immense privilege by default, and they'll be wringing their hands as they watch everybody else lose their rights first.

Naturally, there will be exceptions to that generality, and they might even fall along party lines—certainly religious ones (gotta be their brand of Christian™).

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BossDj@lemm.ee 21 points 11 months ago

He very much targeted punishing legislation at blue states as a whole

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

The only fun part of a Trump dictatorship would be watching him eat the faces of the leopards. Then it would settle into a proper hellscape for the entire world though, so I think we should take a pass.

[–] Candelestine@lemmy.world 33 points 11 months ago

I mean ... at least he's finally being honest. It's what he always wanted, but he was too much of a coward until backed into a corner.

[–] GONADS125@lemmy.world 32 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don't disagree with OP's personal take that they added to the post body, but I really think that's a bad practice...

It's one thing when someone links an excerpt from the article they are posting, which is commonplace. But the post body absolutely should not be for the user's subjective take, especially when the common practice is to quote the article. It muddies the waters and can be unclear who the author is (user or article).

Comments like OP made should be in the comments section where they belong. Anyone remember how r/Askreddit had to change the rules/automod because users would ask a question just to make a long story text post?

Comments should stay in the comments section for news communities like this. The only exception should be posts with many links/megathreads.

I've also seen users state things in the post body that contradict the article they posted. I think there should be a rule added to stop this practice. If your personal take has merit, it'll be upvoted in the comments. It's vain and problematic to put it in the post body IMO.

[–] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago (1 children)

... Or you can just realize this isn't reddit and that the post body is there for a reason. That is for OP to add whatever they please.

[–] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 31 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The post body is for whatever the community rules say the post body is for. They have an opinion on what rules this community should adopt regarding post bodies, and I think it's fair that they can voice that opinion. It has nothing to do with whether or not this is Reddit, they just used an example from Reddit.

[–] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Agreed. And not including post body information beyond anything except the article has always been a strictly reddit based thing.

This is Lemmy and Federated so I'm against that hard.

There really should be no point in having to post a second comment rather than OP utilizing the space already built into post submissions either to save comment space/bandwith or prime discussion.

I see no real need why they need to be separated. The difference is negligible to my browsing experience. It does end up making OP need to do one more post though.

If we didn't want OP to have an opinion on something posted, then what's the difference between simply not letting them comment then? Is there some psychological trick that's make their words at the top of the page more credible just because they posted a bogus or trusted source? Does that distinction really need to be made or are users just not used to it due to reddiquette?

I think it's the latter, and antiquated.

[–] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

And not including post body information beyond anything except the article has always been a strictly reddit based thing.

This is Lemmy and Federated so I'm against that hard.

The entire point of the fediverse and Lemmy is that different instances and the communities within them can set things up as they see fit. And I think being so militantly against something simply because people on Reddit did it that way is silly. There's no reason to dismiss an idea simply because it was done that way on Reddit before. Just let Lemmy be its own thing without worrying about how Reddit does or doesn't do things.

I see no real need why they need to be separated. The difference is negligible to my browsing experience. It does end up making OP need to do one more post though.

The suggestion is based on the opinion that the content of posts on this community should be limited to objective information directly from/about what is being posted. Opinions, discussions, arguments, etc have their place in comments section, that way people can respond to those individual comments. Having the post itself be a combination of an article and a random musing from the OP means top level comments will be a mish-mash of responses to the article and responses to the OP's post body comment. By requiring the OP to post their comments in the comments section, we ensure that all top-level comments are responses to the linked article itself.

If we didn't want OP to have an opinion on something posted, then what's the difference between simply not letting them comment then?

Nobody is saying they don't want OP to have an opinion or be able to comment, it's a simple suggestion to separate the OP's comments from the post body itself.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 30 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Part of him coming out of the fascist closet now may be all the court cases that have been brought up against him. His back is essentially up against the wall and getting the presidency is his only real 'Get Out of Jail Free' card he's got left. If he doesn't get elected, he's pretty much done and may spend the rest of his life in prison. There's the state case that could be problematic, but I doubt he has any problem throwing the country into a constitutional crisis if it means saving his own skin. For the Federal case I imagine he just pardons himself, which could be another crisis in and of itself, or it just flies by without issue.

Imagine he gets elected (that this is still even a possibility is ridiculous), Georgia finds him guilty in that case and he's supposed to face jail time there. He will refuse to go and I'm not sure that anybody would enforce it to place him under arrest, or if they do try, then does the Federal govt do anything to protect him? Do we have Secret Service agents getting into firefights with Georgia law enforcement? Does the military step in, especially if Trump starts stacking it with his own people? Or does the whole thing just get ignored and we have a sitting President who should be sitting in jail and he either just never goes to Georgia or nobody goes to arrest him?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] fatbeer@reddthat.com 25 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Before you share this with your trump-loving family like I almost did, he didn’t promote it, he ‘retweeted’ someone who linked the article saying among other things: “The American people want the economy Trump created…” Shitty journalism and click-bait headlines like this is why republicans look down on us and why people start wondering if they’re on the right side.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 5 points 11 months ago

"Shitty journalism and click-bait headlines" is why my internet consumption has dropped significantly over the past few years. It's also why I'll rarely comment on anything before I read the entire article (unless I'm commenting on a comment). Sites like Newsweek (off the top of my head) are full of misinformation and contain only a sentence or two of information relevant to the actual news story. The rest is in support of the writer's perspective and opinion which is often coming out of left field.

It feels like most of today's generated content is just about a headline and the shares and comments that that headline can generate. Granted, I could just be handing out in the wrong parts of the internet and have built my own inverse feedback loop.

[–] Habahnow@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago

Yeah I agree this is a bit misleading. I'm leaning more towards it's the publisher that is problematic (meditate).

[–] xc2215x@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago

We had a feeling.

[–] Godric@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Where is Trump reposting the article? You'd think that the post would be shown instead of someone else posting it.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 12 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

They did show it, it's just slightly confusing. He retweeted (or retruthed it's apparently called on truth social) that guy Cory Mills. So in the story where they show the post from Cory Mills and the Washington post article below, that's the entry from trump's account of trump retweeting it. Cory Mills is just the original person who shared the article, then Trump reshared the post about Cory Mills sharing that article. Whoever made the story cropped out a slight thing that's above that where it says "Donald J trump retruthed" this, would have been less confusing if they left that in. He often does it this way with the most controversial stuff and calls to violence and things, so he can falsely claim "I never shared that." He thinks retweeting doesn't count.

Here's his truth social account if you want to scroll down just a bit and see for yourself. Get some eye bleach and brain bleach ready after trying to read that mess though, ugh. https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump

[–] Godric@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Damn, I had leftover covid bleach ready, but my IP is blocked :/

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It's not worth it, I had to follow the ex president's advice and inject it straight in afterwards. The horrible burning helps distract from what I saw. Anyways, time to call 911.

[–] reddwarf@feddit.nl 3 points 11 months ago

Well, I browsed that cum sock of a channel of his for about 30 seconds and was thoroughly disgusted. What surprised me though, as I was not aware, is that Kelsey Grammer is supporting that piece of excrement. Sigh, another delusional actor who seems to have lost his marbles.

[–] ME5SENGER_24@lemm.ee 7 points 11 months ago

He doesn’t need to be President again to have congress give him the Caesar treatment. In fact, I’ll vote for him…to receive the “Et tu Brute”

[–] PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

You see, this is why I'm uniquely disappointed in Democrats right now. Instead of doing the legislative blitz to stop a dictatorship from forming, they're almost banking on Trump running because they think they can beat him.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

How are you supposed to do a legislative blitz when Republicans have one of the houses of Congress?

[–] PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Shit, youre right, guess fascism already won and we should just go home /s.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 3 points 11 months ago

There are other ways to fight it, but you can't expect being able to pass legislation when it requires both parties.

[–] TechAnon@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

Upvoting because this is just an opinion. Dems know they can beat him again. It's too early to blitz. A calmer approach next August - November will inform the folks in the political middle and it won't fire up Trump's base as much. When children get upset you calmly tell them the consequences; you don't jump up and down, cry and yell back at them.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›