this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
413 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2607 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
 

Lol, that was quick. Effectively, “Thanks for your supporters but we’ll be fine without you”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I see nothing in the article that indicates Trump himself feels this way. What his "advisors" think is irrelevant.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The advisors are what makes this time different from last time. This time, they have a plan. Turnip loves when other people come up with plans, because he can't.

[–] skulblaka 1 points 2 weeks ago

Turnip loves when other people come up with plans, because he ~~can't~~ can just ignore it and do what he wants anyway

That's like the one silver lining I'm seeing out of this whole situation, is that Trump can't stick to a plan if his literal life and freedom depend on it. We saw that in action in the E. Jean Carroll defamation suit. It doesn't matter how well the plans are laid by his mice and men, he's not going to read them. And if we're lucky that by itself will be enough to prevent a total enactment of P2025.

load more comments (1 replies)