this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2025
181 points (97.9% liked)

politics

26020 readers
1876 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 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 12 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

like... why is he diagonal

[–] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 8 points 3 hours ago

Lifts in the shoes. Why u think he was so worried about getting his shoes in the assassination attempt?

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago

I like this strategy, because in order to try to defend Taco, Taco or one of his dimwit supporters will say that of course Taco knew that, tacitly admitting Taco was lying.

It also reminds everyone that has fallen asleep that Taco was responsible for the terrorism of J6.

[–] leadore@lemmy.world 7 points 5 hours ago

The problem is that while trump may not know what he's talking about, his followers will believe him anyway. So it's important to loudly and repeatedly point these things out.

Of course the media should but won't do it, so it's good that Newsom is calling attention to it, but even then he has to be aggressive and sensationalist about it for the media to report what he says. It's a role he has taken on, possibly detrimental to his career (or maybe not--we'll see) but it's a role that someone with influence like his needs to play so I'm glad he's stepping up.

[–] RedstoneValley@sh.itjust.works 42 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (4 children)

I rotated the photo so that the runway in the background is aligned with the horizon. Also filled in the resulting gaps to not lose too much of the original photo. Looks like it was tilted on purpose. The rotated image is much less dramatic but also boring. I guess sometimes you don't need AI to manipulate people.

Edit: I don't get why people think it's necessary to resort to stupid little tricks like these. This is just dumb

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Was it to make the Trump side look taller?

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Bit does he do it? Like the center of gravity must be shifted via a massive belt that has lead weights towards the butt side. Otherwise how can most of his body be leaning forward like that?

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 3 points 4 hours ago

Do this experiment. Click on the image and then zoon into it such that you can scroll left and right. Then scroll to hide each person past the end of your screen. You will see that for everyone, their face and belly disappear the moment their shoes disappear. Except for his most respectful excellence. But I guess that's the trick. Most of the mass is on the shoes. Its only some that's leaning forward.

OK back to other things.

[–] CaptSneeze@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

What’s with both of their shoes? Newsom looks like he has no toes and his shoes taper to nothing. Trump looks like he’s wearing construction boots with a heel lift.

[–] titanicx@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 hours ago

Newsoms shoes are in the shadow, so that's not anything. Donald j Trump, the child rapist, has lifts in his shoes to make himself taller, and to hide how much of a fat fuck he is.

[–] Junkers_Klunker@feddit.dk 6 points 5 hours ago

Dont come here with reason and facts.

[–] Gnugit@aussie.zone 25 points 9 hours ago (6 children)

How does that thing stand leaning forward like that?

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago

Very strong plastic girdle holding in his enormous hamberder gut

[–] Lon3star@lemmy.world 17 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Titanium hamstrings, space shuttle grade

[–] Gnugit@aussie.zone 5 points 9 hours ago

It's not the Gavin on the left holding him up.

[–] troy_frizzell@mstdn.social 8 points 8 hours ago

@Gnugit @just_another_person

Just like people can get accustomed to walking in high heels, a raging narcissist can get used to standing in the heel lifts that they use to feel tall.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

Look at the horizon.

[–] ramble81@lemmy.zip 7 points 8 hours ago

Michael Jackson is his idol.

[–] spongebue@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

I looks like everyone behind him is doing the same thing to an extent. Almost as if it made his look less obvious

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 16 points 8 hours ago

Are the other two leaning with him to make him look less tipsy? The only straight one in that image is Newsom.

[–] frazw@lemmy.world 10 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Does this not destroy his argument or betray his own lies.

Either:

A. His assertion is that the FBI under Biden's direction or agents into the crowd to indie violence. This is demonstrably false since Biden did not control the FBI and therefore could not have done this. He could have said agents but he chose to lie that it was the FBI, and in doing so, crippled his own argument.

Or

B: There were agents in the crowds tasked with inciting violence. These agents must have been working under Trumps direction as it was his FBI. Therefore he is telling on himself. This time the lie is under whose orders the agents were acting.

I believe there were no agents there. Just a bunch of sycophants who revere trump so much they would be willing to root in jail for him and that their cause is so righteous that overruling democracy is fine.

[–] SparkyBauer44@lemmy.world 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I think that every criminal with an 'R' on his chest thinks that they will be pardoned for any and everything.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

So far so good!

[–] Fyrnyx@kbin.melroy.org 9 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Why do we have old fuckers running anything? Clearly, in the past few presidencies now aside from Obama, we've watched old-as-fuck presidents practically decay in office. And they aren't getting better.

Who is next in 2028? Some 92 year old?

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

With changes in biotech, who knows? I don't think age is the issue, by the way. Taco could be 35 for all I GAF. I sure hope that one day biotech makes 92 year olds in politics an everyday thing...

[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 1 points 5 hours ago

We need age limits. No running if you're older than 67