this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
425 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2860 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] joyjoy@lemm.ee 317 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

They're showing how much of a cuck the US president elect is.

[–] classic@fedia.io 118 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

That's really what this comes off at. Or a reminder of kompromat

[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 60 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

I don't think the kompromat angle makes sense at this point. It may have once but now? What could they have that would matter? Americans voted for him. Full on piss tapes being leaked online wouldn't make a difference.

[–] mriguy@lemmy.world 33 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yup. We know he’s a rapist, a racist, and a criminal, and that didn’t lose him any support. What exactly could there be that would turn off his supporters? At this point I really don’t think anything would do it. They’d just say “well, on him it looks good!”

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 32 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

They could have Epstein videos of him fucking a thirteen year old and I'd bet there'd be a referendum on lowering age of consent to twelve. And I'm not sure it wouldn't pass at this point.

[–] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Why would they lower the age of consent for people who (in their eyes) don't have rights to begin with?

People as things, that’s where it starts.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

your body my choice

Is apparently a thing that some shitty psycho school boys have started saying to school girls in some parts of the country

[–] AngryRobot@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

I think it came from Andrew tate or another of those shitbags that have corrupted our youth.

[–] 14th_cylon@lemm.ee 24 points 2 weeks ago

At this point, even if there were photos of him fucking 10 yo kids, he would just say it is ai and his voter base would not give a fuck.

[–] masterbaexunn@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Do you not know how vain this old shit diaper is?? The man colors his skin orange. To him, it most certainly makes a difference.

[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Does it though? Trump cares about his crowd sizes. He doesn't give a fuck that people think he abuses women. He wears that shit like a badge of honor. He proclaims his corruption loudly and his fans think it makes him shrewd. I honestly can't imagine what Putin has on him that would matter. Maybe a picture of his tiny... hands, but he'd just claim it was faked.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Video of him with an underage blonde girl whom he calls “Ivanka”. She’s the one and only person he needs in his life. And she’ll abandon him.

[–] classic@fedia.io 5 points 2 weeks ago

I dunno. And of course the idea that there even is kompromat isn't substantiated. But if there is, and you accept the idea that Trump has NPD, then the answer is not whether the voters would care, but that he would.

[–] Thorry84@feddit.nl 20 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I really wonder what it could possibly be? Trump has every lawsuit imaginable waged against him, he has broken just about every law and proven himself to be a terrible human being. Even if Putin has video of him raping kids (which given Trumps connection to Epstein seems likely), I don't know at this point it would matter? His followers would just say fake news or not even care. And he's already elected as supreme leader, president for life, dictator or king, however you want to state it.

Putin will probably have him killed if he doesn't follow the plan, but I have a feeling Trump wants to follow the plan regardless.

I think it was naive of us thinking there's no way someone would be willingly become a cuck for Putin, he must have some leverage. But I feel at this point, Trump just really really wants to be Putins main bitch.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 186 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Is this not very clearly a public demonstration of how absolutely pwned he is by Russia? Am I reading too much into this? This feels like the kind of thing that gets revealed with dramatic musical effects in a spy movie when someone looks over and sees a headline or a news clip.

[–] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 66 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

They are trying to incite a civil war next.

They will reveal they stole the election and a civil war will start.

lying on a blue carpet with the U.S. seal, as though the editors of the men's magazine knew something in advance about the future of their model."

They are just confirming she's their asset.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 30 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I assume the plantation text messages are part of them stoking a civil war.

Wouldn’t surprise me if they hacked a bunch of voting machines.

Still I’m really curious what trumps response will be.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago

Some Republican fuckwad will screenshot your comment and use that to argue that Democrats are not accepting the election results. I'm not disagreeing with you, just expressing my endless cynicism, newly expanded Wednesday morning

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 7 points 2 weeks ago

Not necessarily stoking a civil war, but raising tension among those they intend to attack. Textbook psyops.

[–] Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

They will reveal they stole the election and a civil war will start.

That's laughable that you think that would trigger a full blown civil war. Minor scuffle at most.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 4 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah the civil war won't start until the liberals let every general and admiral get replaced first.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sneaky@r.nf 6 points 2 weeks ago

Fuck. If they lose control of Trump they'll for sure skip to that step. I was thinking they'd spend the next few years working to keep him in power. But yeah if that option is out they only have finite time to execute.

[–] tired_n_bored@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

You're not reading too much into it. It's just that 70 million people are too stupid to realize that

[–] fan0m@lemmy.world 139 points 2 weeks ago

“… why has the media chosen to scrutinize my celebration of the human form in a fashion photo shoot? Are we no longer able to appreciate the beauty of the human body?"

Because this is pornography and project 2025 says distributors of porn should be imprisoned. Thats why you’re being scrutinized.

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 95 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

And like the good cuck he is, wont do anything about it.

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 25 points 2 weeks ago

He will ask for copy. He hasn't seen her nude in years.

[–] _bcron_@lemmy.world 59 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Trump will mistake it for flattery and not an overt insult, like his supporters thought Putin literally endorsed Kamala and didn't use it as an opportunity to make a slight

[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago

You give Putin far less credit than he deserves. Trump knows. He was financed by Russia and is a puppet for the money. Flaunting Milania sends a message he cannot retaliate.

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 41 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 20 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I wish we had President Camacho.

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

yeah, at least that dude cared.

He was a great president. He was informed of a problem, then gathered people more knowledgeable than him to figure out how to solve it.

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 33 points 2 weeks ago

How is this not a bigger story?

This is Russia just taunting the US that he is basically the US soon to be commander in chief's proverbial daddy.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 31 points 2 weeks ago

putin being extremely based at least once

[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io 26 points 2 weeks ago

The land of traditional religious morals.

[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

But weren't those like professional shots or something for some magazine or whatever?

Kind of defeats the whole owned factor when everyone has already seen them.

[–] aramis87@fedia.io 21 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It's a threat that they could also air the pee tapes.

[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Which Is so strange to me. If Trump gets his way with the dictatorships, if that threatened him that much, he could wipe Russia off the map. We already publicly know they have a paper army, and we know Russia never had nearly the number of nukes they claimed, how could anyone who becomes a dictator with the US military be afraid of anything but people close enough to him to kill him?

[–] Pips@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 2 weeks ago

This may surprise you but they don't really need as many nukes as Russia claims to have on paper. As long as they have enough that work, or hell, even just one, MAD is in play.

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 4 points 2 weeks ago

Russia probably still has enough nukes for MAD. And it's not likely China would tolerate an attack on Russia.

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Try AZnude perhaps? IDKif they're on there.

[–] negativenull@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

Next up: a dead horse head in Trump's bed

[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago
load more comments
view more: next ›