this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
332 points (96.1% liked)

politics

19072 readers
4243 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
 

Trump makes Bond villains look good by comparison.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 129 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

“How’s her husband doing by the way?” and saying a “wall around her house” didn’t do a “good job” of protecting her 82-year-old husband from an intruder who fractured his skull with a hammer during a break-in last year—prompting laughter from the crowd.

Hillary didn't go far enough. Trump and his supporters aren't just deplorable, they're vile.

[–] hootenannyshenanigan@lemmy.world 112 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Wait, so is he saying walls do nothing?

[–] charliespider@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

BWA HA HA HA HA

I think he is!

[–] WHYAREWEALLCAPS@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

No, he's saying liberal walls do nothing.

[–] fiat_lux@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

When I described him in 2016 as a "wannabe Lex Luthor comic-book villain", someone said I was exaggerating. The truth is that at the time I was somewhat exaggerating. That person made a fair assessment of what was an emotionally-charged reaction to the election results.

I dislike how accurate the description ended up being.

Like, who even says this shit for real? And who laughs at it? What even? I can't understand it at all; and it sort of scares me to know that I might one day randomly encounter someone in power who laughed when he said it.

[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

IMO no Lex Luthor comic book villain would ridicule a handicap man, say "Why do you bring people like that here? No one wants to see that, the wounded" about a badly disable vet, rape a woman, or brag that he can "Grab them by the pussy", among a hundred other examples. I've never seen or met anyone in my entire life who is as disgusting, obscenely cruel a human being as Trump.

[–] Echo@reddthat.com 8 points 1 year ago

Go meet a couple more 'business men' and 'CEOs' you'll come to find these psychopaths are fairly standard issue capitalists

[–] Perfide@reddthat.com 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is disrespectful to Lex Luthor. He's not even half as evil as Trump is.

[–] fiat_lux@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Honestly, when I said it, I had a specific image in mind. It seemed just as absurd as the whole situation, and my comparison was more a reflection of that than Luthor's character.

Lex Luthor took 40 cakes

Image description: Entry for the word 'forty' from an old Superman-themed children's illustrated dictionary that uses both the word and numerals. Lex Luthor is running while wearing a hot pink and green super-villain costume of questionable taste. Behind him he pulls a rope attached to a simple yellow four-tier cart of what looks like full 12 inch pies, complete with crusts. The image has a light pink background.
Text content: Forty. When no one was looking, Lex Luthor took forty cakes. He took 40 cakes. That's as many as four tens. And that's terrible.

[–] Zeppo@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Deplorable is pretty good. One of the most annoying things was the cretins who didn’t really know what deplorable meant, just they figured out it was meant to be bad, and started calling themselves “proud deplorable!” and so on.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It wasn't good, no. Using an uncommon word like that made it easier for them to rebrand it than just speaking plainly would have.

Besides, "half of his supporters are a basket of deplorables" is a horribly inelegant sentence and she'd been in politics more than long enough to know that the right wing echochamber would remove the "half of" part from the collective consciousness and inflate their own numbers to make people believe she was talking about half of the population rather than 9%.

[–] Zeppo@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean it's accurate. I do agree that her saying that wasn't a savvy move.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Yeah, we're agreed on both points then awkward 80s high five

[–] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

She could have called them give people and they would have hated her for it. The problem is maybe that in 2016, the media could still take that and run with it, since that kind of name calling was still fairly new. That and making Hilary run was so stupid, she wasn't gonna win that kind of media fight