this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2026
204 points (99.0% liked)

politics

30598 readers
3356 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 73 points 1 day ago (4 children)

I cannot believe Pedolf Shitler was even still talking about this. Wasn't this like 3 years ago.

Christ, I think conservatives think more about trans than trans people do.

[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 5 points 21 hours ago

The most searches for transgender porn are where? That's right, in Republican areas. They're obsessed in every way.

[–] WhoIzDisIz@lemmy.today 47 points 1 day ago (2 children)

They do because they secretly fetishize trans people. It's a side effect of their self-denial.

[–] MrVilliam@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Right? In his sad little roast, trump said that Kaitlan Collins is attractive and also said that she looks like Dylan Mulvaney. So he thinks that Dylan Mulvaney is attractive. Which is fine, but it's weird that he also is trying to erase trans people. It's like these assholes are afraid of being attracted to somebody and then finding out that they have a penis, and that would make them gay, and gay=bad, so then they hate themselves. But like, who the fuck cares. Go fuck your wife and quit worrying about the genitals of people you'll never have a hope of fucking in the first place.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago

Go fuck your wife and quit worrying about the genitals of people you’ll never have a hope of fucking in the first place.

I'm not sure he's banging his wife, either.

Go fuck your wife and quit worrying about the genitals of people you’ll never have a hope of fucking in the first place.

Fairly sure Lumpty Trumpty prefers to rape children.

[–] MintyFresh@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Right!? How much better off we'd be if a certain segment would just admit they're into or want to be chicks with dicks, femboys etc.

[–] stretch2m@infosec.pub 5 points 1 day ago

Best derogatory nickname for Trump that I've seen.

[–] AmyAye@nord.pub 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I had to look up the name to remind me who she even was. I guess she was the Tik Toker who got a Bud Light can that cause a "boycot".

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

It also caused completely rational responses from the far right, like machine gunning cases of Bud Light. Also, at least for a little while, they stomped off in a huff to buy other brands of InBev for a while, LOL.

Reading about it here...it's interesting to note that their stock is now higher than it was before the boycott started - it's around $84 a share for InBev right now, and $66 when the all the butthurt over trans started.

I wonder if Gates still has all his shares that he bought at $56...

Edit: forgot the link...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bud_Light_boycott

[–] Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Which led to Busch Light apparently becoming the official beer of transphobes.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Meanwhile the official beer of trans people remains "something good and local"

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Definitely have to read the fine print, since InBev sells like 27% of the world's beer.

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I would applaud their stock increase after the blow up over Mulvaney if it hadn't been for the fact that they dropped her like a fucking rock the moment that shit hit the fan. They left her in the cold while people were sending death threats and harassing the ever living shit out of her meanwhile Budweiser tried their damnedest to convince the country and the world that they had completely reversed course on any trans inclusion or sympathy.

So the Budweiser corporation or whatever conglomerate they are a subsidiary of can get fucked I won't touch that piss water for all the tea in China.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh right, yeah. It resulted in them getting boycotted from both sides. I just have to laugh that the RW seems think they did any long-term damage to them...

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago

Yes, there is an old saying that any publicity is good publicity.

And for about half a year Budweiser was on the minds and mouths of just about any media person who had a platform.

[–] saigot@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago