this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2025
110 points (99.1% liked)

politics

24552 readers
2704 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
 

Summary

Trump’s recent Congress address was rife with debunked claims.

  • He falsely stated the U.S. gave Ukraine $350bn, ignoring data showing $120bn from the U.S. and nearly $138bn from Europe.

  • He mischaracterized USAID’s Lincoln Scholarships as $45m for DEI in Burma.

  • He misleadingly claimed millions of dead people receive Social Security payments and alleged a Florida school “socially transitioned” a 13-year-old—a lawsuit that was dismissed.

  • He cherry-picked an outdated poll to claim most Americans think the country is on the right track.

  • He falsely asserted Musk’s cost-cutting uncovered hundreds of billions in fraud, which lacks evidence and amounts to less than $9 billion at most.

top 3 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheLowestStone@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Without reading the article, I'm going to guess that there were 0 facts in that address.

[–] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 months ago

It might be easier to truth check.

[–] LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

Thanks The Guardian for not mentioning how he also talked about a trans woman that set a new record on a race by 5 hours. Turns out 2 things, the race is over 800 miles and takes 8 days so 5 hours is next to nothing, and also that it was a Co-Ed race. So the trans woman set a record in a race that takes 8 days and I would bet she set that record because she traveled just a little bit faster than her competition.

He portrayed it as the trans woman setting the record in woman's sports but if he said it was a Co-Ed race then his point would be moot. But the Guardian can't talk about that because they are on his side there.