this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2024
1301 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19072 readers
4650 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 145 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Has this guy ever been wrong about anything?

Best President we never had.

[–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 33 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Pity right? Right up there with what could've been had RBG stepped down a bit earlier.

[–] rosymind@leminal.space 25 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'll never forgive her for clinging on to power. She destroyed her legacy and ruined lives for the greed of it

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago (1 children)

RBG wanted Hillary to pick her replacement. The hubris of that decision. SMH

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I don't think anyone expected Donnie Disgrace to get elected

[–] BigBenis@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Hopefully we've learned our lesson... But I wouldn't bet on it.

[–] vanontom@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

I thought the same thing before the 2020 election. Was hopeful, but frankly only a crushing blowout would prove beyond any doubts that "we've learned". It didn't happen.

[–] docAvid@midwest.social 4 points 10 months ago

A lot of us did, actually.

[–] dumpsterlid@lemmy.world 30 points 10 months ago (6 children)

I mean yeah he actually wasn’t quick to denounce Israel’s genocide in Gaza. I am super happy he has come around but I think I’m the beginning he was reluctant to (not because he agreed with it, because he probably didn’t want to mess with Israeli money coming after him politically).

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 42 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I doubt he gives a good fuck about AIPAC setting their sights on him, they've been sniping for years.

I can't speak for him but my bet is that he's experienced enough to wait for the dust to settle a little before forming an opinion.

[–] dumpsterlid@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago

Fair, whatever the reason is I am glad he is on the right side now

[–] jasondj@ttrpg.network 28 points 10 months ago

Dude was raised in a Jewish family and volunteered with his wife in Israel in college.

Mad props for ever speaking out about Israel, IMO.

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 23 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I don't think he's alone. The Hamas attack was a shock to many people, and Israel of course would respond but... even six weeks ago it was starting to become obvious that this was a gross overreaction.

[–] dumpsterlid@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

and what a long, awful six weeks it has been for humanity :(

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think he's too smart to call it a genocide though

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

True israel needs to kill at least 20k innocent kids. Step it up Netanyahu these are rookie numbers

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 15 points 10 months ago (2 children)

He's against nuclear power, and that's the only thing I've ever disagreed with him on.

[–] Lazhward@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The more I learn about nuclear the less it makes sense. It's a great source of energy but it's complex and expensive to maintain. Solar, wind, hydro and geothermal are simple and becoming cheaper by the day. It's hard to imagine a scenario in which we ever require more energy than those combined could provide.

[–] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Solar and Wind can't create a stable grid, you would need gas/coal backups.

Hydro is fine but causes a lot of damage to river ecosystems and there is so much hydro you can build.

Geothermal is probably best source of energy if you can get it but is only viable in few places.

[–] Reptorian@lemmy.zip 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There's fusion on the work, so that alleviate some energy issues without nuclear energy and fossil fuels. And fusion might even have less problems, but I don't know much about it.

[–] ChillPenguin@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The problem is fusion is always 20 years away. It's essentially limitless energy if we can develop the technology and get it working. Also a lot of places have been moving away from nuclear.

[–] Welt@lazysoci.al 6 points 10 months ago

Nuclear ain't nuclear. Uranium fission plants allow for nuclear weapons proliferation. Thorium fission plants don't melt down, don't create radioactive waste, and even use uranium fission waste so there's less remaining. It can't be used for bombs though. Why do you think the great powers opted for uranium technology? Thorium fission is a viable option, but we should stop just saying "nuclear".