this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2026
15 points (77.8% liked)

politics

31202 readers
2719 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Typhoon@lemmy.ca 17 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The same guy who said the war was already won is now telling us he'll make a great deal to reopen the straight that was open before he attacked.

[–] Red0ctober@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

And which Iran then opened to traffic, only to close it again because Israel ~~couldn't~~ would not honor their part. Which then resulted in the US Navy blockading it also. Is the straight in superposition? I can't tell.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

because Israel couldn’t honor their part

"Couldn't."

[–] Red0ctober@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Sorry, I misspoke. Because Israel would not honor their part. Word choice is important, thank you.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Yeah, but at least he completely invalidated the prior agreement we had with them, and it had the n[CLANG] President's name on it. That was obviously a threat to white supremacy to have evidence of a n[CLANG] Presidential legacy.

[–] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Like the 90 deals in 90 days for his tariffs that never came to fruition, or his concepts of a plan for healthcare?

American news media is happily playing as Charlie Brown while Trump promises, pinky swears, to keep the football on the ground this time.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

I wish at least one of them would ask about any of his prior "two weeks" types of answers and how they turned out.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

This idiot bit player realtor is way over his fucking head.

[–] HootinNHollerin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 5 months ago

Shart of the Deal

[–] santa@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I believe nothing when he says anything.

[–] Bwaz@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

blahblahblahblah...