this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2024
260 points (97.1% liked)

politics

25279 readers
3264 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
all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Myxomatosis@lemmy.world 95 points 1 year ago (1 children)

60 greedy assholes who need to pay more taxes are backing the oldest, most corrupt nominee in American history.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Also most fascist. Billionaires should not exist, and I have thoughts on the best way for those particular billionaires to not exist.

[–] casmael@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago

Hmm perhaps some kind of ergonomic contraption could be devised for the purpose

[–] Myxomatosis@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Totally agree that billionaires should not exist.

[–] MeekerThanBeaker@lemmy.world 59 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I hate the fact that there are over 60 billionaires. I hate the fact that there is more than 0 billionaires.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Pushing hard for those uninformed votes, I see. Anyone with an ounce of political knowledge could tell you republican policies are never anti-establishment.

[–] tdawg@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No no, you misunderstand. It's antiesablishment of sensible laws and protections

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I dont know when I crawled into a mirror but if I could please just exit.

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Trump should probably drop out of the race.

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago

Anti-establishment, LOL.

WTAF. Only in upside down la-la land can a guy born with a helluva silver, no, platinum, spoon in his mouth, promising even more handouts to bazillionaires, be considered "anti-establishment".

[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago

We need a website that keeps track of these billionaires' locations. It would be nice to keep an eye on our oligarchs' on a day-to-day basis.

[–] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 16 points 1 year ago

I mean of course billionaires support someone who can be easily lobbied.

[–] WhyDoYouPersist@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Elon giving simp here

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The fact that this is significant and will probably influence the election as a whole shows in complete fullness that America doesn't exist in a democracy ... it's a plutocracy, an oligarchy or an aristocracy ... it definitely isn't a democracy.

[–] Cornpop@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago