this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
149 points (96.9% liked)

politics

18992 readers
2736 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 71 points 3 months ago

I'm so tired of the rich just controlling everything with just money. They aren't smart or special, they just have enough mammon juice to inject in whatever they want.

[–] [email protected] 68 points 3 months ago (1 children)

"Awful person, who trump awarded a medal to (who doesn't deserve it just like all the other times he awarded medals to shit people), vows to spend an enormous amount of money that she didn't earn or deserve to do awful things that will lead America to destruction."

I'm having fun creating factual headlines for these shit people's actions.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Keep up the good work :)

Edit: avoiding words like slammed already makes your headlines better than most of "professional" headlines

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

"Known ghoul, prepares to slam all of America in the butt"

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

With a tiny bit of work this could probably be turned into a Chuck Tingle title.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What if, just hear me out here, Biden and Trump go full on WWE during the debate?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Make it pay-per-view and we could wipe out the national debt.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

I like the way you think.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

AIPAC and Israel aren't on either party's side.

If they get both pro-Israel candidates to win their primary, they give zero shits who wins the general.

They don't have the Dem party's best interest at heart, and it's fucking sickening our party leadership is fine with a foreign country influencing our elections at a fundamental level (who the general candidates are) just because the party leadership take the dirty money too.

I'm never voting for anyone that takes AIPAC money, I don't care if it's president or dog catcher. If they want my vote they can't take money from a foreign government especially when that government is openly committing a genocide and the people taking the money deny it.

If we don't have standards, we're just as bad as Republicans taking Russian money funneled thru the NRA.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Sheldon Adelson’s widow. Just say that, NYT we know who he was.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I just learned about these fuckwads from this article. So no, saying that would not work.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

“Sheldon Adelson’s Widow Has $100 Million Dollar Plan to Elect Trump” is the same article with none of the ridiculous forced drama of the “Who is this mysterious woman???” Which is just clickbait.

Hell it’s in the URL even - there’s just skeezy reasons for that headline being what it is.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago

Oligarch, Wealth Horder, ASSet Goblin...so many better terms

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

I’m sure she will be thrilled to meet the fine people on both sides of Charlottesville!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

She's worse than her husband.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

What a waste of money. Think of all the good things that could be done with $100 million.