this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
230 points (97.9% liked)

politics

19091 readers
3409 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
all 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] youngalfred@lemm.ee 67 points 1 month ago (2 children)

That didn't happen.
And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
And if it was, that's not a big deal.
And if it is, that's not my fault.
And if it was, I didn't mean it.
And if I did, you deserved it.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 3 points 1 month ago

It's almost like he's referencing it, but that would take being patient enough to read six lines in a row, and self awareness.

Exactly... It's almost too on the nose, unfortunately.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 67 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Like your business fraud and tax evasion are “just smart business”, Diaper Donnie?

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 22 points 1 month ago (2 children)

successfully conning people might mean the victims are stupid, but it in no way whatsoever means that the con man is smart

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

If ever there was proof of that, Trump is certainly it. He's an absolute moron yet somehow still a highly successful conman, at least going by the metric of morons that believe him if not by actual money conned out of people (although he seems to have been depressingly successful at that as well). If there's a silver lining in all this it's that Trump is so stupid and incredibly bad at business that he seems to burn through money as fast as he cons it out of people.

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

pretty sure his lifelong motto is "why spend your own money when you can get some rube to spend theirs"

it is mind-boggling, how many decades he's gone notoriously skipping out on his bills and people still deal with him

[–] FunderPants@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago

Yes, I call this the dum-dums vote for dum-dums hypothesis.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 33 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Trump will talk to Putin, but not 60 Minutes

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 17 points 1 month ago (2 children)

after this bloomberg disaster, i wouldn't be surprised if he flakes out of every upcoming interview that isn't with one of his own fluffers

[–] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 month ago

I posted this just after the debate last month:

Calling it now:

Since there’s not enough time left for him to recover from this brutal ego bruise, I predict he’ll only do rallies from now on, or appearances on far-right media, because he’ll retreat to his snowglobe for reassurance for a while. He’ll avoid addressing Kamala directly, but he’ll ramp up his own network and rile up his mob. His team will struggle to rein him in, and some appearances might be cancelled.

I’m not a prophet – he’s just that predictable.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This just in: Donald Trump abruptly canceled an interview on his economic plans with business channel CNBC, the Daily Beast reports.

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

*concepts of plans

[–] cdf12345@lemm.ee 28 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

A Nacarsist’s prayer

That didn't happen.

And if it did, it wasn't that bad.

And if it was, that's not a big deal.

And if it is, that's not my fault.

And if it was, I didn't mean it.

And if I did...

You deserved it.

[–] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 24 points 1 month ago

Narcissist appeal to authority fallacy.

"I did it, so it must be smart"

[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago

Smart for Putin, yes.

[–] knobbysideup@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 month ago

Treason is what all the smart kids do now.

[–] CLOTHESPlN@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

So he put himself in the position of "I'm not smart" or "I talked to Putin"? Imagine putting yourself in checkmate like that

[–] EtherWhack@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Trump's lawyer: Hypothetical excuses are bad. They can ruin the credibility of your defense. M'kay?

Trump: (to the media) If I did do it, it would have made it a smart concept, and therefore it would make me a genius.

Trump's lawyer: ...

[–] errer@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Ah the OJ Simpson defense, let’s see how this works out for him

[–] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago

ABC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for ABC News:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-talk-putin-smart-thing/story?id=114823799
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support