this post was submitted on 01 May 2025
815 points (99.5% liked)

Political Memes

8000 readers
2813 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 138 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Oh so a first amendment violation as a law.

[–] No_Ones_Slick_Like_Gaston@lemmy.world 66 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] errer@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago (2 children)

You thoughtless person, where’s the disclaimer?! I dislocated a rib laughing at this

[–] No_Ones_Slick_Like_Gaston@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Well, have you said thank you once?

/s

[–] frunch@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It actually sounds sane, but no, won't pass 1A muster in any court.

https://old.lemmy.world/comment/16787464

[–] Mirshe@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago

The issue is whether that matters. Texas has always been a testbed for things like "can we just ignore the Constitution" and "can we just ignore court orders".

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 74 points 1 week ago (3 children)
  1. The law applies only to office holders, candidates, campaigns, or to people who buy or sell political advertising.
  2. People and platforms who post and distribute content without exchanging money are exempted.
  3. All the big media firms: tv, radio, ISPs, Internet content platforms, and billboard operators are exempted when they just run someone else's ads. The people who are liable are the ones who place the ads.
  4. The requirement is to include a disclosure message when depictions of a public figure have been altered by technology: Photoshop, AI, deepfake audio, or whatever else. The content itself is not censored, it just has to be noticed that it's artificial.
  5. "Superficial" alterations are exempted from the notice message, for example, changing the color balance on a video.
[–] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 13 points 1 week ago (3 children)

What does this actually accomplish then?

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

Hard to say for sure, but probably more "fine print" style notices on TV ads and billboards.

This could conceivably be used to prosecute dirty tricks-style campaigns. For example, many years ago there was an anonymous mailer campaign against the incumbent mayor in my city where a photograph of him was photoshopped to insinuate that had been beaten up, when he really hadn't. That kind of thing might become the target of this if it becomes law.

It's also possible that federal courts will step in and carve out some exceptions for obviously fake parody stuff. Texas law cannot override the first amendment.

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

A chilling effect and job security for lawyers.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kn0wmad1c@programming.dev 11 points 1 week ago

But will they face consequences?

[–] WolfLink@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Honestly sounds reasonable to me. But it would be nice if they could include deterring that over dramatic black-and-white effect lol.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JustAThought@lemm.ee 57 points 1 week ago (5 children)

It irks me when rich people will just pay the fine rather than following the law. Example: Parking in handicap spots and not caring about a $250 fine. It is like paying $5 parking fee for low income drivers.

Finland actually has speeding fines proportional to your income! In 2002, a Finnish millionaire was fined €103,000 (over $100,000 USD at the time) for going 75 km/h in a 50 km/h zone. (47mph in a 32mph zone)

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Like the Tesla in New York City which has racked up $38,000 worth of parking tickets?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] MuskyMelon@lemmy.world 50 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I can tell this is fake. Trump would have bigger moobs.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"My moobs are the biggest, most beautiful moobs in the world. Skinny Joe Biden wishes he had moobs like mine."

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

The horse would also have snapped in half.

[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Putins nipple shines through. Just just copied Putin's body.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] altkey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 week ago

This one time Nazguls tried to look like humans.

[–] cygnus@lemmy.ca 33 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Damn, from democracy to lèse-majesté in 100 ~~months~~ days, congrats guys!

[–] Lucky_777@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] cygnus@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Oops, you're right. 100 months will be the length of Trump's second term.

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Do you really think his body will hold out for that long?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Etterra@discuss.online 29 points 1 week ago

I'll say it until I'm dead: fines need to be calculated by income and net worth, increasing exponentially. The only way for a fine to act as a deterrent is for it to cost more relative to a person or company's ability to pay it.

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

And so, the era of the illegal meme dealer has begun

About time

[–] BlueLineBae@midwest.social 10 points 1 week ago

Pssssst... Hey buddy. You looking for some memes? I got the good stuff...

[–] frunch@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

shady guy opens trenchcoat

"I got spicy, i got deep-fried, I've even got some rage comics if you're old enough to remember em. $375 for a ½ gig, $700 for a full gig"

[–] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 20 points 1 week ago

Disclaimer: Go fuck yourselves.

[–] griff@lemmings.world 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

base fines on income as Finland does for traffic violations

[–] klu9@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The rich can always find ways around the law, including income-based fines. See the death of singer Kirsty McColl.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 16 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

For the filthy rich, the ONLY penalty is very often a fine, and it's a very small one proportionate to the profit they made from the crime. It's the cost of doing business.

The filthy rich only do jail time if they bilked other filthy rich people out of their money.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 days ago

Rich people are far less likely to do time, because "the companies I own are responsible for other people's livelihoods, you'd be punishing them as well" is generally accepted by most courts of law as a valid reason not to jail them. If they were less short-sighted they'd be treating the fact that the person had power and responsibilities as an aggravating circumstance and giving them longer sentences...

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Lol. Have fun trying to enforce that while real crimes are happening.

Texas set to overtake Florida for America's redheaded stepchild.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

The trick is, they don’t really care about enforcing it - just having it as a potential charge to pursue when they hate someone.

This just in: Breathing is illegal. They’ll only bother prosecuting critics of Trump though.

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

As always with these laws, they are a tool designed to be used selectively against someone you already decided you don't like.

Holy shit I didn't know he was part of a gang

[–] xorollo@leminal.space 7 points 6 days ago

I thought that was some sort of weird cyberpunk monocle 🙀

[–] Allonzee@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

"herp derp jerb creators deserve to be above the law!"

What our robber barons have convinced many to most Americans to believe to spin their greed disease into being somehow noble, and what those robber barons unreflectively believe about themselves.

There are developed nations, which we most certainly are not, that literally prorate vehicular fines as a percentage of income. We would never do that here, because this shithole, including tens of millions of self-hating, deluded fools, believe the person that exploits thousands of laborers for private profit deserves to risk your life doing 90 on main street on the basis of their successful exploitation.

https://www.mic.com/articles/79039/the-untold-story-of-alice-walton-s-dwi-incident

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GhostPain@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Specific to the fine: unless it scales with net worth/income.

Also, fuck Republicans.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 6 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Too bad I don't live in Texas, and fuck you Texas, what are you going to do?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ieatpwns@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

Ms13 is everywhere they even alter images with their art department mspaint

Who are they going to pay to evaluate all the damn memes on the internet? What counts as alteration? Resizing, cropping, other basic photo manipulations that people use all the time? Has a politician ever used images of themselves without touch up?

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

That penis was actually there, not interpreted, don't do this. The penis was tattooed right on his face.

load more comments
view more: next ›