this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2024
518 points (97.8% liked)

politics

19126 readers
2299 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
 

One of the amazing political achievements of Republicans in this election cycle has been their ability, at least so far, to send Donald Trump’s last year in office down the memory hole. Voters are supposed to remember the good economy of January 2020, with its combination of low unemployment and low inflation, while forgetting about the plague year that followed.

Since Trump’s romp in the Super Tuesday primaries, however, the ex-president and his surrogates have begun trying to pull off an even more impressive act of revisionism: portraying his entire presidency — even 2020, that awful first pandemic year — as pure magnificence. On Wednesday, Representative Elise Stefanik, the chair of the House Republican Conference, tried echoing Ronald Reagan: “Are you better off today than you were four years ago?”

And Trump himself, in his Tuesday night victory speech, reflected wistfully on his time in office as one in which “our country was coming together.”

Non-paywall link

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago (3 children)

I'm not really that worried about his age tbh, but I keep being told this means I'm afraid of something.

The political meta matrix surrounding Biden's age is a bunch of bullshit. Anyone expressing concerns with his age should worry about who his vice president is. There's really nothing to fear there unless you're a conservative worried that the Dems could pivot off Biden's death in office into a 14-year stretch of democratic administration. That is basically the death of the living GOP.

[–] OpenStars@startrek.website 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I dunno - personally I think his age is a whole third thing. There's: (a) I am alive and healthy and well and President, there's (b) I am dead now, so control passes over to my VP, while I go sit in my coffin for... forever, and then (c) I am old and so while I seem to be health enough on most days, I am also unreliable in that at any time I could zone out and miss a crucial detail in a meeting, before having to make decisions with literally nuclear consequences.

A vote for Biden would hopefully, in practical terms, translate into a vote to separate out the Commander-In-Chief role (that needs a much more active presence than e.g. a mere speaker behind a podium) from the other aspects of the Presidency, except that is simply not how the Presidency is defined.

And, I should point out, the former at least has some hope of working out the way we might want it to, whereas for Trump there is no hope at all that he would not hold on tightly to the reigns of power, and he could literally decide to assassinate someone on a mere whim, again.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

There's also Regan's, and likely Trump if he wins, d) "I'm basically a vegetable being propped up by advisors."

[–] OpenStars@startrek.website 0 points 8 months ago

(he said the quiet part out loud:-P)