this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2024
677 points (96.7% liked)

politics

19149 readers
3896 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
 

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) suggested Monday that Russian President Vladimir Putin has some sort of financial influence over former President Trump.

In an interview with MSNBC’s “Inside with Jen Psaki,” Pelosi said Putin is the “richest person in the world” and has “stiff competition” to being named the most evil person in the world.

Pelosi asked “what does he have on Donald Trump that he’d have to constantly be catering to Putin?”

Her comments came just after Trump doubled down on his criticism of NATO and said he would encourage Russia to attack U.S. allies who fail to reach the alliance’s defense spending goals. Trump has also declined to criticize Putin for the death of opposition leader Alexei Navalny in a Russian prison last week.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid 247 points 9 months ago (78 children)

Jesus Christ, Democrats. Stop pussyfooting around with this shit. He's a traitor. He's a rapist. He wants to be a dictator. Putin controls him. Just come right out and say this shit.

I've said this already once today. Just say these words: "If you vote for Trump, you're voting for a rapist." And say it repeatedly.

They can't even do that! Fucking baffling.

[–] [email protected] 64 points 9 months ago (3 children)

"If you vote for Trump, you're voting for a rapist."

This didn't really work that first time.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Then nothing will work, but at least Dems can show some fucking spines instead of trying to compromise with traitors.

[–] Ensign_Crab 26 points 9 months ago (2 children)

But compromising with traitors is the best way to show progressives that traitors are better regarded by the party than they'll ever be.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

The one thing everyone in Washington can agree on - progressives are the scum of the earth.

Ending the “campaign finance” gravy train, improving social safety nets to allow people to live a life free from fear and desperation, meaningful action to address climate change, fair wages…truly a capitalist’s nightmare.

[–] Nudding 2 points 9 months ago
[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 months ago (2 children)

That's the tactic the Democrats used in 2016 when they lost. It seemed like a slam dunk tactic to point out that anyone voting for Trump was voting for someone who commits sexual assault against women, but his voters ate it up.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Who fucking cares about his voters? The point is to motivate everyone else to vote and maybe catch undecided voters by showing a spine.

It didn't work in 2020 because Hilary's campaign focused on safe states instead of battleground states. The same thing worked in 2020 because Biden campaigned better. Both won the popular vote, but one didn't motivate where it mattered.

[–] suction 5 points 9 months ago

I agree a hundred percent but whoever is still not motivated to vote against Trump probably secretly roots for him.

[–] FlyingSquid 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Do you really think this weak-ass shit they're doing right now will work better?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

No, I don't think either will work at all.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FlyingSquid 4 points 9 months ago

A judge didn't deem him a rapist the first time.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Seems to be a positive for republicans

[–] [email protected] 53 points 9 months ago (2 children)

A tape was released where he boasted about committing sexual assault. He bragged about grabbing them by the pussy. That tape came out like a month or two before the 2016 election. An October surprise that would have sunk any other candidate in the history of the USA. His fans did not care at all. Most of them probably cheered him on.

Rape? This is the party who think it's impossible to rape your own wife. Rape doesn't even exist to them.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 19 points 9 months ago

An October surprise that would have sunk any other candidate in the history of the USA.

It only sinks your campaign if your voter base disapproves of the behavior. Trump won a majority of white women voters. An outright majority. Think about that.

Our country is so fucking misogynist that white women will hear "real estate cretin grabs actress by her crouch just because he can" and reply "as is his right" as though he's a fucking 13th century aristocrat claiming prima nocta.

This is the real primal power of a fascist campaign. You're not bound by the rules. You are, in fact, rewarded for breaking them. And the more rules you can break without anyone stopping you, the more popular appeal you possess.

[–] FlyingSquid 10 points 9 months ago

Rape doesn't exist to MAGA people. They will vote for Trump anyway. They are not who they should be trying to reach.

Do you think that it shouldn't be brought up?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)
[–] kautau 13 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

And trump just sold nearly half a million dollars in cheap chinese shoes in half a day. Idiots are idiots. And the "representative" of the LLC that was just formed a month ago to sell these shoes is Andrew Pierce, of Cloud Peak Law (which seems to be distancing themselves from that name really quickly lol) https://wyomingllcattorney.com/About.

They are a tax evasion firm. https://www.offshorealert.com/wyoming-asset-protection-law-firm-cloud-peak-seeks-to-quash-irs-summons-for-danish-tax-investigation/

Trump may be an idiot. Or he may be somebody pretending to be an idiot. But his team isn't. They are excellent at convincing idiots that they are smart by supporting him.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

I can almost guarantee you that he didn't actually sell that many. The whole grift is to sell like 100 pairs, but say you sold 1000, and then put another 100 on eBay for 3x the price to cash in on the fomo

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 1 points 9 months ago

And trump just sold nearly half a million dollars in cheap chinese shoes in half a day.

Selling cheap imported designer goods to rubs is half the fashion industry playbook. $400 for a pair of shiny high tops is honestly a steal. Some of these sneakers go for a full four figures. I wouldn't be surprised if the Trump Shoes get resold at some rally for north of a grand.

Trump may be an idiot.

The argument that Trump is an idiot keeps running counter to the comic inability for American civil authorities to meaningfully censure or deter him from doing obvious frauds, scams, and crimes. If he looks stupid, it may only be due to the fact that the whole system is fucking stupid and he's just the clown at the front of the parade.

[–] Zehzin 9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

But the civility. What will the donors think?

[–] danc4498 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Keep in mind the Trump v Biden election cycle hasn’t even started. September/October are going to be spicy.

[–] postmateDumbass 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Oh, how will Thanksgiving go?

Gun fight or football?

[–] Brunbrun6766 4 points 9 months ago

Sniper football. You play a full game of football and each down a sniper on each team gets to take one shot while the teams run around for their lives. Very American

[–] danc4498 3 points 9 months ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

I think they are legitimately fearful that going too hard will provoke violence.

Or rather, if you believe that these people can be deprogrammed at some point... eventually... and again become functional members of society, then you need to leave some path back.

Or rather, most people are still afraid of confronting the reality where these people actually have no path back from this collective edgy post-truth fascist-life-crisis.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

His followers know all that. They like him for what he is, not despite it.

[–] GladiusB 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think you want war. When they are thinking long term. We all know it. But lowering themselves to his level allows A LOT more mud slinging. Which is bad enough. It's distracting enough to give the citizens nothing. And that's what it should be about.

[–] FlyingSquid 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Because the short term is really fucking dire. And they want war. Taking the high road and not giving to them is not going to work.

[–] mriguy 4 points 9 months ago

They are currently fighting the war. And winning it, because we keep pretending they aren’t. When they go low and we go high, they get what they want and fascism gets further up the beach.

load more comments (70 replies)