politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Just a damn kid. No wonder he missed. Probably expected some kinda aim assist to kick in
20 years old, he never owned a gun before, 130 yard shot, nicked the ear. Honestly he was closer than would have expected.
Supposedly he actually hit the teleprompter and shards from that is what nicked Trump, so bro just missed entirely.
He was also not allowed to join his school's rifle club for being a hilariously bad shot...
Oh lame. That makes more sense though, it's not hard but it took me a bit of practice to nail 100 yard shots. If he was inexperienced it makes me wonder if the rifle was even zeroed properly, cause if it wasn't there was no chance in hell he was going to hit Trump.
Did some digging, some comments say he had ironsights. Also read the articles about him being a bad shot, apparently he would be so off target that he would hit the leftmost lane when he was sitting in the rightmost lane of the range. Yeah Trump was in no danger.
how is that even physically possible LMAO
I asked myself the same question
I totally agree. That's not an easy shot to make, especially for someone who is not trained or experienced.
He came absurdly close to changing the course of history.
He went for a 360 no scope but the fkn' joycon drift sent him off course. Sad.
Bro did not make use Gyro controls. Sad!
I like my gyro controls with extra tzatziki and no tomatoes.
Removed, advocating violence.
That's not how things are supposed to work. Trump should be spending his life in prison.
We're well past how things are "supposed" to work.
So you support murder. I do not.
So you would've sided with the nobles getting guillotined rather than the people doing the guillotining?
I mean, when they went in and killed all those nobles in the French Revolution that were already locked up, which im not a huge fan of
Do you side with the soviet revolutionaries, or the Tsar?
The revolutionaries? So you are advocating for the murder of not only the leader, but his young children too.
I agree. It was a dumb thing for him to even try in the first place, but it's hard to blame some kid who was a teenager during the pandemic. Still, considering the case most likely to get Trump in jail was just dismissed I wouldn't hold your breath for this country's justice system.
Don't make excuses for this idiot. He attempted to murder a politician because he didn't have anything else going on in his sad life. We can all do better.
And that case will be appealed.
His classmates said he was a bully during high school. This doesn't appear to be the victim nor the hero Lemmy tries so hard to make us believe.
Just keep in mind, the alt-right are rooting for a civil war for years now. So who do you think is behind inciting lefties to become violent, Lemmy?
It doesn't matter who is behind it. The whataboutism on this is gross. It doesn't matter what the other side does, we do not have to stoop to murder or threats. We can all be better.
on principal I completely agree.
But heres a comparison people will likely cry about.
At what point from hitlers starting point in politics, to his suicide in the bunker, should the german people have started committing violence to overthrow their government?
A comment I shamelessly copied from another thread, but it answers your question well.
I think the point I am making is slightly different. I am not suggesting the german people should have killed hitler, job done. I specifically said to overthrow their government.
If the implication isn’t obvious - at what point should the german people have risen up and began a civil war to overthrow the entire nazi government.
Not just one single person, because like you pointed out, it wouldn’t have changed much in the grand scheme.
A war against the elected government in a climate of disinformation doesn't seem doable. You don't get a majority until it's too late.
Efforts has been punched down the same way as in russia. Dictatorships end with war.
The only solution is to not elect fascists in the first place.
What would a civil war in America look like these days, 30+ years of ambushes and small battles until people get tired and end it without a solution? US cities will look like Bagdad and your short lives will be miserable.
Getting violent now as a violent minority will push the majority to the guys defending, not the guys attacking. Trump doesn't live in a vacuum and he has been coming a long way, but by getting violent now, he will get bonus points.
Your only chance is to not elect him. How do you think you will motivate enough people to kill strangers and neighbours when you can't even convince them to vote.
So how about starting to make people vote instead of inciting violence on the Internet?
Im not american, im just watching the dumpster fire burning while asking sincere questions about it, and wondering at what point drawing parallels stops being “hurr they arent nazis”
They are indeed Neonazis, there's no doubt about it.
You shouldn't be inciting violence just for your amusement, though.
When it starts in the US, it will land right in the front of your door.
I am not inciting violence, at all. I have repeatedly said I disagree with it.
But at some points in history, when we can look back, I think its valid to consider what could have been done differently.
When I ask these questions, I am not saying violence is the only answer. I am wondering what other pathways could have been taken
Could the german people have rid themselves of the nazis without violence? That would of course be preferred.
Could the US civil war, which really was about “we want slaves”, instead have been entirely nonviolent instead?
Could the american revolutionaries created a new country separate from the british empire, without violence?
This isn't that, not yet anyway. All bets are off if they start rounding americans up based on their race or political ideology but we should otherwise use our institutions, both the elections and the courts, and freedom of speech.
No I completely agree. I am just posing the hypothetical of when “political violence” moves into effectively “battle for survival under an oppressive regime”
That's my point. The commentor I replied to got downvoted for condemning violence, while the ones above that should get banned for inciting violence get upvoted like crazy.
And it's no secret that troll farms have it easy here. Willful audience to eat it all up and get radicalised. I just tried to wake them up to what's happening on here.
Removed, advocating violence.
It is not killed, it will be appealed.
On the tip of a shiv
He failed to take the Coriolis effect into account.