1225
submitted 3 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] vxx@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago

Most of them in russia, I assume.

[-] Mio@feddit.nu 12 points 3 months ago

I don't understand why Trump can't be happy to be one of the few people to have been a president. Why must he do it again?

Now, let him retire. He have the money. He is already famous. Just let him go in peace to the prison...

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Baggins@feddit.uk 12 points 3 months ago

That's not barely coherent, that's the weave!

Weaving in and out of reality more like.

Am really pissed off when interviewers or reporters don't just call him out there and then. They do it to people here in UK (a lot of the time) unless you're on a dog whistle station.

[-] henfredemars@infosec.pub 12 points 3 months ago

You misunderstand. His mental acuity is rapidly increasing! Hence why we often fail to comprehend the great leader's genius.

[-] CaptDust@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

"My goodness, he's weaving 15, 20, even 25 topics simultaneously now! Inconceivable!" - some "english professor" no ones met

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] distantsounds@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Still here and still not voting for trump. I do appreciate being able to vote for someone who is coherent. It would be nice to have a candidate progressive enough to address current and approaching crisis instead of the continuing this slide to the right.

[-] Suavevillain@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

Trump shouldn't be up there. I got no issue saying that and it isn't ageist. I'm not going to also memory hole all the people that blindly defended Biden when you could see with your own eye's his decline. GOP people never cared from the start it was just a talking point for them.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

Opinion section saying what the Politics section never will? Check.

[-] MehBlah@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago

Same place they were physically then. Getting blind drunk in russia. Just like normal.

[-] finley@lemm.ee 8 points 3 months ago

for the GOP, it was never about age or fitness with Biden-- that was just another weakness to attack; it didn't even matter if it was true. With Trump, it's all about "our team must win"

[-] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

"barely coherent" is being generous. "Rarely coherent" or "almost never coherent" are more accurate.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

They're not questioning him for the same reason questions about Biden's fitness were brushed aside until the debate; no one's actually listening to the old guy right now. For Biden, this was because his team was carefully controlling his public appearances. For Trump, it's because no one goes to his rallies except his supporters, and they're obviously not going to question him. Most people get the headlines and clips of his most outrageous statements, but almost all of them (myself included) would rather bash our own heads in with a crowbar than sit through one of his rambling, racist speeches.

At the debate, a large portion of the population is going to sit down and listen to Trump speak, and this time, his opponent won't be an even older, even more incoherent man. If that doesn't lead to questions about his fitness or mental state, then I will be concerned. But right now, the fact that no one is paying attention to Trump's mental decline makes sense to me.

[-] CaptKoala@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago

Licking trump's boots, that's where.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2024
1225 points (97.2% liked)

politics

19244 readers
3169 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS