this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2024
387 points (98.3% liked)

politics

18160 readers
3081 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

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Navalny was willing to take on Vladimir Putin and risk his life. Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson is so afraid of losing his speakership that he caves to Marjorie Taylor Greene

Upon the news of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny’s death, House Speaker Mike Johnson denounced Vladimir Putin.

“As Congress debates the best path forward to support Ukraine, the United States and our partners must be using every means available to cut off Putin’s ability to fund his unprovoked war in Ukraine and aggression against the Baltic states,” he said in a statement.

Of course, Johnson’s words would hold much more weight if he had actually put through the aid package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan that the Senate passed on the floor of the House of Representatives. Indeed, as the Senate labored late into the night on Monday and into the wee hours of Tuesday to pass that aid bill, Johnson summarily killed the bill because it did not address immigration at the US-Mexico border.

This came after Johnson and the rest of House Republican leadership blew up a bipartisan agreement that would have included aggressive restrictions to immigration in exchange for aid to Israel and Ukraine. Johnson, like most of the Republican Party, did so in the service of Donald Trump after he came out in opposition to the deal — despite the fact it would give him sweeping authority to deport migrants if he became president again.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 74 points 5 months ago (14 children)

Congress is not debating anything Mike. You sent them on vacation because you where losing control of Congress with your failed impeachment attempt and blocking of the border bill on trump's behest.

[–] rdyoung@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (13 children)

Why do so many people think that anyone is doing anything on trumps behalf? Even if trump did ask directly or indirectly for things, he most certainly did not come up with ideas himself. He has never put forth any policy that came out of his own head, everything he says he says because someone else is telling him to. At this point I wonder exactly how many masters he actually has and if they have worked out a time share agreement or if it's just first come, first serve.

[–] crunchyoutside@kbin.social 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

He has never put forth any policy that came out of his own head,

[[ citation needed ]]

[–] rdyoung@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Citation is the past 30 years of watching him do whatever the fuck he's been doing.

If you believe that trump has come up with any actual policy then I ask you to cite those. I'm talking actual, well written plans regardless of how flawed they may be when executed. I'm not talking about broad statements like make america great again or closing the borders to immigration, etc.

Trump is the kind of person that underlings have to make him think it's his idea or else it never happens.

Anyone who ever watched his reality show on creating a business from scratch should be able to tell you how smart trump isn't. I tried watching it once and gave up because it was all about the drama and even when it came time for the roundtable or whatever, trump never gave any real advice or help. Why? Because he doesn't actually know how to run a business or even start one from scratch.

I hate reality TV but if Mark Cuban did one and did right I'd watch it almost religiously.

[–] bostonbananarama@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm not the person you were talking to, but the last 30 years have been moronic off the cuff ideas that were poorly executed. It looked a lot like his presidency. Trans service member ban by tweet, banning Muslims from 7 countries on a whim, etc. No reason to think those weren't his ideas, as they're both stupid and bigoted, they fit nicely within his wheelhouse.

But more importantly, you don't get to claim that he has no hand is developing policies and then ask others to prove you wrong. You made the claim, you have the burden on supporting it or making clear that it's merely speculation.

[–] rdyoung@lemmy.world -4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

None of what you said is policy at all. And yes, I get to turn it around because I am not aware of any speech or even publication by him or his team that outlines what his administration will work towards and what they stand for. This is also true for every single republican running over the past few decades.

As for the shit he did pull. Yeah, maybe some of it was a knee jerk reaction but I'd still bet that he is getting notes passed from the likes of putin, Harlan Crow, etc. And none of that is his idea. Hell, most of the progressive ideas the right fights against were originally from their side of the aisle though they were from before some of them were born.

[–] qprimed@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

border wall is not policy, its marketing and political posturing - something the orange asshole appears to be quite good at when directed towards his rubes.

[–] rdyoung@lemmy.world -4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Where did I say border was policy? I specifically said that it wasn't. I called that out intentionally because some people may think that it counts as policy when it doesn't. Over arching changes to border security and or immigration would count but something as stupid as build a wall and make Mexico pay for it isn't policy.

[–] qprimed@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

you intimated that these ideas are not from his own head. I would say that many of them are. he is a politcal used car salesman and knows quite well what motivates his base. It would seem (likewise, without proof) that much of the bullshit he erroneously puts forth as "policy" tracks pretty well with his entire life arc - its deeply embedded in him; a means to an end.

he is now surrounded by a cadre of likeminded conmen, so lots of walls to throw shit at, but the execution is all him.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)