this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2024
370 points (100.0% liked)

politics

22786 readers
3139 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 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Minarble@aussie.zone 57 points 10 months ago

Fat old convicted criminal looks tired.

More at 11.

[–] kikutwo@lemmy.world 53 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 8 points 10 months ago

Prisoner Elect.

[–] xantoxis@lemmy.world 50 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Four years ago he was a deranged fascist with limited mental faculties. I don't think that dial has really moved.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 24 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Somehow he has actually gotten worse mentally

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago (1 children)

somehow? you mean like taking a very old demented person and adding four years?

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

Yup, that'll do it

[–] BrundleFly2077@sh.itjust.works 7 points 10 months ago

Somehow, Palpatine has got worse.

[–] ChowJeeBai@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

Well, he's now also a convicted felon.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 46 points 10 months ago (1 children)

He looks like the Hamburglar chose the wrong grail.

[–] eran_morad@lemmy.world 22 points 10 months ago
[–] unreasonabro@lemmy.world 28 points 10 months ago (1 children)

He was only ever a shadow of what you thought he was, that's been the whole point the entire time, you are chasing shadows

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

Now he's less more like a lighting artifact that stupid people think is a UFO.

[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 17 points 10 months ago

A shadow of what he was 4 years ago?

So a steaming pile of shit is now... Like dried turd?

[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 16 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Four years ago?

I can't tell the difference between his insane statements today, and his insane statements from 8+ years ago.

[–] ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago

"They're the same picture"

[–] Jimmycakes@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago

Dude is on so many drugs. It's like that episode of Simpsons when mr burns sees the doctor and the doctor tries to push a bunch of plushies through the door

[–] Sneptaur@pawb.social 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

And yet he’s still more likely to win than Biden.

[–] Xeroxchasechase@lemmy.world 41 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's the power of cult of personality, and the weird idea of being dependant on a few "swing states".

[–] 13esq@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago (5 children)

Hillary didn't lose because of a cult of personality or a few swing states, she was just simply a shit candidate.

If you're worried about losing to Trump, then get your own candidate that's not senile.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 41 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Hillary didn’t lose because of a cult of personality or a few swing states, she was just simply a shit candidate.

She had decades of accumulated hatred from Republicans. She had resentment from Obama Democrats regarding her behavior in the 2008 primaries. She had greater resentment from Sanders Democrats because of the way party leadership favored her in the 2016 primaries. She coupled that with a VP nominee that was to her right, as a slap to the face of progressives she had done her best to alienate. Then she didn't campaign in key swing states that she went on to lose.

What I'm saying here is that she was not simply a shit candidate. Her shittiness was remarkable for its complexity.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

Give me a fucking break. Hillary was not a shit candidate. She's arguably the most qualified candidate in recent elections, probably more so than Obama. And I don't say that as someone who agrees with most of her policies but as someone who respects her intelligence and experience. She would have made an excellent president.

Leaving aside our broken system, she lost because she is a woman and a lot of people can't stand that.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments