599
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 76 points 10 months ago

Fucker needs to be in prison.Not in office.

[-] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 25 points 10 months ago

Rich, white Republicans don't go to prison unless they have a pardon lined up.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 22 points 10 months ago

He’s not rich and he’s definitely orange

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

The US political system has countless weaknesses, but Trump has shone a light on one of the deepest weaknesses inherent to all democracies — what happens if/when the majority support fascism, authoritarianism, a holy war to genocide X, etc (not the case atm, but Trump having more than 1% of the vote is insanity).

You could argue that moral citizens should take up arms against tyranny, but that appears to be what the majority of MAGA's believe they are doing, and would be anti-democratic, so you're ultimately just hoping that the more moral and ethical are better at slaughtering the least moral and ethical — not much of a failsafe if you ask me.

I guess my point is that I'm not surprised we have no evidence of other intelligent life, and the great filter preventing universal colonisation seems to simply be life itself...

[-] frezik@midwest.social 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The majority don't support it. Fascists never do. They get by with about 20% of the population directly supporting them, another 10-20% having reservations but being more afraid of leftists removing their cushy position in a stratified society, and a final 10% or so centrists who vote for their side because they voted for the other side last time.

Trump lost the popular vote both times, and only got in once because of a poorly conceived electoral college system. The German Nazi Party got 44% of the vote in 1933--much of that with voter intimidation--and then an old guy with a family title handed him the chancellorship. Mussolini never had a vote in his favor at all--his party led violent protests against the existing Prime Minister, and the King handed the job over to Mussolini.

They don't win at democracy. They win by exploiting holes in the democratic process and the failure of liberalism to make things better for people.

[-] paddirn@lemmy.world 52 points 10 months ago

It's like the Paradox of Intolerance. In order to remain free and democratic, we need to disqualify candidates who would take away that freedom and would void our democracy. Not even counting all the myriad of crimes he's been guilty of, just based on his words and his platform, he should be disqualified. We have to be intolerant of intolerance.

[-] jballs@sh.itjust.works 19 points 10 months ago

Philosopher Rainer Forst resolves the contradiction in philosophical terms by outlining tolerance as a social norm and distinguishing between two notions of "intolerance": the denial of tolerance as a social norm, and the rejection of this denial.

I think viewing tolerance as a social contract perfectly sums up this situation. We allowed Trump to run for president when he had said some crazy shit, but hadn't yet tried to overthrow the government. As soon as that happened, the social contract was off. No do overs.

[-] osarusan@kbin.social 22 points 10 months ago

It's literally following the law.

[-] HAL_9_TRILLION@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 10 months ago

If it lets an insurrectionist like Trump on the ballot, the supreme court will be putting out a welcome mat to autocracy

And they will be among the first up against the wall if that day comes, you can bet on it. I wonder if they have the slightest shred of self-preservation. If they are more afraid of maga now and not what maga will become, then their self-preservation instinct is badly flawed. We'll see.

[-] osarusan@kbin.social 6 points 10 months ago

I think the right-leaning justices know pretty well that their positions are safe. They're already benefiting immensely from corruption. When democracy dies and they have no obligation to the law, they'll do whatever it takes to enrich themselves further.

[-] rifugee@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

After all, someone has to rubber stamp the actions of the autocrat.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] frezik@midwest.social 3 points 10 months ago

Roberts doesn't. His response to the American people who were angry about the Dobbs abortion decision was that they should shut up and listen to the court's authority.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] theUnlikely@sopuli.xyz 18 points 10 months ago

What happened to his hand and why has no one mentioned this? Are those burns or what?

[-] Jax@sh.itjust.works 12 points 10 months ago

Actually someone else in this thread mentions how it looks like secondary syphilis.

[-] spider@aussie.zone 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Trump acts like a mob boss, and Al Capone died in his Florida mansion of complications from syphilis.

Wouldn't it be great if history repeated itself?

[-] theUnlikely@sopuli.xyz 5 points 10 months ago

Grabbed one too many pussies eh?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 17 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It's the same group of dopes who have latched onto the ignorant "we're not a democracy, were a constitutional republic!" who are now arguing that disqualifying candidates that the cotus disqualifies is denying them their right to vote for whom they want.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Jaysyn@kbin.social 13 points 10 months ago

If we literally follow the Constitution, Trump is already barred from office & needs Congress to vote to remove that disability.

[-] Dkarma@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

He's not qualified. Pretty simple . Just like any 34 year old.

[-] FrowingFostek@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

I love Steven Greenhouse. 'Beaten down worked up' set the groundwork for many discussions I had with my coworkers on worker rights. Also, he warns us against Niki Haley and her high heels.

With that being said I think she is a larger threat to labor rights than any other candidate for the GOP. Trump being the largest threat to democracy.

[-] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 10 months ago

Unfortunately, I think Project 2025 is the equalizer when it comes to who is worst and why. As long as the Republicans are dead set on forming a christofascist dictatorship it may not matter which Republican dictator we hypothetically get for domestic issues. And I'm not confident that any of them would be better on international issues either.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago

If you're not worried about the 2025 stuff, look at the Supreme Court, how little it took to quickly and fundamentally shift that to a broken body with absolutely zero integrity - now times that dangerous transition with every single aspect of government.

Your relatives who vote for trump are literally voting for the end of American democracy. They've had there's, they are going to die sometime soon, and they are tossing a match over their shoulders into the gasoline soaked mass they created behind them.

[-] selokichtli@lemmy.ml 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Imagine leaving the White House like Trump did, and to live in a place where this orange guy is a serious contender to occupy the presidency once again after four years.

Maybe this democracy is not worthy of protection. With all due respect, American democracy may need way more than stopping Trump's second term.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 10 months ago

That's not much of a solution, either. Don't like what American democracy is doing now? Just wait until it doesn't care about having pretenses to invade other countries, or even use nuclear weapons.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2024
599 points (97.6% liked)

politics

19089 readers
3949 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