this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2024
74 points (93.0% liked)

politics

31112 readers
1976 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MeekerThanBeaker@lemmy.world 74 points 2 years ago (3 children)

So... another Putin puppet. Awesome!

I like it when I don't know who the people are when chosen for these positions. It means they are probably qualified. Not this reality shitshow contest.

We are definitely heading towards Idiocracy... if we're not annihilated first.

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 29 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I would take President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Camacho over Trump though.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 23 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Sure, he was looking for solutions and allowed smarter people to steer the research. He also allowed the smarter man to take his place in office.

[–] riverSpirit@thelemmy.club 5 points 2 years ago

Did he really though?

He let someone else do all the hard work for him, while he relaxed. History remembers President Dwayne elizondo mountain dew herbert camacho, no one remembers the name of the guy who came after him.

Clearly he was the smarter man.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Not just Putin, she's been tight with Modi's party in India (outside of any role she had as a legislator) and went on that stupid trip to Syria with Syrian regime handlers. This is well beyond Trump putting loyalist goons into positions of power and closer to actively compromising our country. Hard to believe Gabbard could even get a security clearance.

[–] osaerisxero@kbin.melroy.org 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

She couldn't, unless the requirements have changed dramatically over the last 2 years.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 2 years ago

The guy who was elected overruled the requirements to get his ineligible family clearances. She won't have a problem.

[–] semperverus@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] Numenor@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] DeLacue@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Project sundial was a cold war American project to build a bomb so big it wouldn't matter where it was detonated It was a true doomsday weapon

[–] leadore@lemmy.world 31 points 2 years ago

A Russian asset in charge of every department, what could possibly go wrong?

(answer: everything. every fucking thing.)

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 27 points 2 years ago (2 children)
[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 years ago (2 children)

what's next? space lasers greene as nasa administrator?

[–] meco03211@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago

YOU SHUT THE FUCK UP! DON'T GIVE THEM IDEAS!

[–] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

Nah, they’ll just kill NASA outright and transition to SpaceX.

I expect Madge to get the Dept of Homeland Security.

[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

Seriously... it's the Mirror Universe West Wing.

[–] Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

In charge of going to find some?

Drill baby, drill.

[–] Nasan@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 years ago

Guess we're gonna be out of not just NATO, but five eyes too

[–] WindyRebel@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Why is the headline former democratic representative? Does that matter? She has been transitioning to republican for a while now and is currently full R.

[–] Blackout@fedia.io 4 points 2 years ago

Duh, no intelligence here, uhhhhhhh

[–] goodgame@feddit.uk 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

National Intelligence! Oxymoron shenanigans, I've called it.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Well, you need a certain lack of intelligence to switch from Dem to Rep, so it fits perfectly.

It also fits with Trumps desire not to look to closely at Russian interference.

[–] throwawayqwerty@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

All of y'all freaking out over this are tripping so hard it's nuts.

See any of her debates, speeches, interviews, whatever else. She is a patriot who puts the good of the American people and the lives of her fellow service members above loyalty to a party of individual. She can acknowledge when she's made a mistake and explain why her thinking changed. She's everything Kamala wasn't and would've had my vote over trump if she was a contender in this election.