this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
7 points (88.9% liked)

politics

19091 readers
3938 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 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Kalysta@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

So of course Musk immediately threatens to “give her a child”. Like a normal not weird person.

[–] N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago (8 children)

If Taylor Swift spearheads voter registration drives in swing states and Pennsylvania specifically, the race could be over.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Couldn't give two shits about all these Pop Star positions. I do delight in this specific one because Trump's campaign fucked with her, and drew a line in the sand with regard to Generative AI bullshit in a campaign.

They deserve all the negative press that comes from this, and much more. I don't care for Taylor Swift, but I like this move.

[–] fuzzywombat@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Her statement was impeccable. She mentioned the AI generated fake image which appeared three weeks ago. This is the response that had to be made by her. She signed it Childless Cat Lady. Perfect.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jballs@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (22 children)

Swift, 34, signed her post "Childless Cat Lady"

Well played, Tay Tay, well played.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Ah, yes. "It was sarcasm." Trump pulled that last night too.

If you didn't like it then I meant something different and you just didn't get it. Women love that response.

load more comments (21 replies)
[–] Prethoryn@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (11 children)

Look, I am not a billionaire loving guy anymore than some of you are.

But has anyone here considered that Musk has made an impact on the views of young white men (whom also happen to be Republican and Conservative or Proud Boys?

Does it bother us that these men follow a billionaire who doesn't give two shits about them? Yes.

Do I care that Taylor Swift is the opposite of that and encourages young women and men, be it black, gay, trans, etc to be opposite end of that spectrum. Fuck yes, we shouldn't base our views off the rich but has it ever occurred to anyone here that it is using those billionairs to represent and have them be vocal with the power they hold with our views instead?

I will absolutely take Taylor Swift speaking up and saying what she believes in and her giving that voice to 100000+ people whose only voice is heard in a vote if her speaking up also encourages people to say fuck Trump and and Musk and every fucking dumb ass on this post that thinks Taylor speaking out is a bad thing by comparison to it somehow being worse then what they already do with Musk.

Fuckem, fuck billionaires, but God damn keep fucking roasting them TSwiftie.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

If I had a platform that millions of people listened to (which I don't), and strongly held beliefs about how the country could be made better for everyone (which I do), why wouldn't I use my platform to share those beliefs? How could I not?

No one MUST obey what either of them says, just like no one would be compelled to obey me in my hypothetical. But I don't really have a problem with any person using whatever platform they've found themselves with to express their own beliefs and desires. I don't think people lose the right to free expression just because they are rich and/or famous and/or powerful.

Edit: And if you piss a lot of people off and lose all your advertisers because your opinions are repugnant and awful - well hey, that's the choice you made.

[–] booly@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

why wouldn't I use my platform to share those beliefs?

I think it's perfectly valid to say "the system that gave me this platform is unfair and I shouldn't have benefited from it to the degree that I have, but I have the platform now so I'm going to use it for good."

[–] TheGiantKorean@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

I'm not down with billionaires either, but at least she's using her fame and money towards some good things.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 1 points 2 months ago

It's almost like people have attributes other than their net worth.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›