this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
38 points (97.5% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2571 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 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 hours ago

I got a co-worker. Real die-hard Trumper. For about a week after the election was called, he'd walk into the office with a proud "Happy MAGA day". Even made his computer profile picture the image of Trump after he got shot with his fist in the air.

Anyway, once these cabinet picks started getting known, he brought up to another co-worker (retired navy) about how the military was going to be run by a news host. Navy retiree didn't know what he was talking about. I chimed in and said that Trump is packing his cabinet full of political "Yes-men" to which I was promptly told he's not. I doubled down with a "yes he is" and said that the cabinet should be made up of experts in the field, people who bring the president the proper information to create an informed decision. Navy retiree said it should be like that but it's not.

Long story short, I haven't heard this much kick-back about cabinet picks ever. The only other cabinet pick I remember hearing anything about was Obama's (I think) energy pick who liked to dress in skirts and high heels, and I'm sure I only heard about that because the news wanted to poke fun at him. Have any other recent presidents chosen such a poor cabinet to advise them?

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 29 points 11 hours ago

This is one that maybe I can get behind, if only for the chance to see all those Trump loving Midwest farmers being completely fucked by this inept groupie

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 23 points 11 hours ago

Oh, the Kelly Loeffler who was credibly accused of insider trading in connection with the COVID crisis? That Kelly Loeffler?

That fits.

[–] EndOfLine@lemmy.world 17 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Reading the Kelly Loeffler Wikipedia page to see just how unqualified for this position she is.

Loeffler aligned with President Donald Trump in her time in the Senate, touting a "100 percent Trump voting record" during her campaigns.[3][4] After the November 2020 election, Loeffler and Perdue claimed without evidence that there had been unspecified failures in the 2020 U.S. presidential election, and called for the resignation of Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger, who rejected the accusations. She later supported a lawsuit by Trump allies seeking to overturn the election results,[5] and also announced her intention to object to the certification of the Electoral College results in Congress.

Due in part to her stance on the Black Lives Matter movement, and the resulting criticism expressed by many players on the Dream roster and within the league, in February 2021 Loeffler sold her stake in the team.

Loeffler donated portions of her Senate salary to anti-abortion pregnancy centers and an anti-LGBTQ adoption agency.

During the 2024 United States presidential election, Loeffler was a top donor to Donald Trump, having contributed more than $4.9 million to his re-election effort.

And there is so much more in that wiki page.

[–] NeoToasty@kbin.melroy.org 7 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Looks at her part where she's gone against social causes

Looks at what department she's to lead

Looks back at what she's done

Looks back at the department name

One of these things is clearly not like the other.

[–] wildncrazyguy138@fedia.io 4 points 10 hours ago

Just wait until she learns what they do to male chicken eggs.

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 13 points 11 hours ago

So has Ms. Loeffler ever heard the word agriculture before? Just asking questions.