this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024
264 points (99.3% liked)

politics

18930 readers
3026 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] walter_wiggles@lemmy.nz 22 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I feel like nobody called out his complete ignorance of how tariffs work. Like it's just 100% wrong.

[–] sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip 18 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Once upon a time I used to get into arguments with people on the comments section of Paul Krugman's articles, or with my Econ professor about how Iceland's response to the 08 financial crash (jail all the corrupt bankers) did not infact destroy their entire economy and thus austerity is not actually mandatory.

But alas, those arguments are over and we now just live in the dullest corporate cyberpunk dystopia, without all the edgy style or superhuman abilities of the genre.

I... I remember when idiocracy came out, and the general response to it was that the future of utter morons it depicted was far, far too implausible, that it was just a goofy, half baked 'dude bro' comedy. Many more popular sci fi had done far more interesting and cerebral conceptions of possible futures.

But now, people look at idiocracy as.. still flawed in many ways, but shockingly accurate in terms of the just total anti intellectualism, recourse to superstition and slogans, hypercharging of corporate control over everything and its rhetoric and slogans entirely being culture.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 4 points 5 days ago

My big frustration is that the media (including this article) tries to read more into what he says. It's always just an incoherent word salad, and then reporters rewrite it into something that's semi coherent which they then try to analyse.

Demand that he write down his plans so they can be properly costed and judged, and if he says something in a rally, just say it didn't make sense.

His team wrote down his plans as project 2025, so report on just that.

Same with the Democrats BTW, Harris just gets to give vague speeches, but people have real questions about what she'll do about Gaza, if she's going to stay the course at the FTC, CFPB, NLRB, etc. I'm sure they're working on concrete plans, but I don't hear anyone asking her about those things directly.