this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2025
212 points (98.6% liked)

Leopards Ate My Face

7114 readers
633 users here now

Rules:

  1. The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a post/comment removed, please appeal.
  2. Off-topic posts will be removed. If you don't know what "Leopards ate my Face" is, try reading this post.
  3. If the reason your post meets Rule 1 isn't in the source, you must add a source in the post body (not the comments) to explain this.
  4. Posts should use high-quality sources, and posts about an article should have the same headline as that article. You may edit your post if the source changes the headline. For a rough idea, check out this list.
  5. For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the post body.
  6. Reposts within 1 year or the Top 100 of all time are subject to removal.
  7. This is not exclusively a US politics community. You're encouraged to post stories about anyone from any place in the world at any point in history as long as you meet the other rules.
  8. All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.

Also feel free to check out !leopardsatemyface@lemm.ee (also active).

Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Darren Bullock, 40, is a Trump voter who switched from the Democrats in 2016.

He is likely to lose Medicaid coverage because of the new requirements, although he is not hopeful of finding adequate employment.

“If they want people to work 80 hours a month, they’d need to bring in a lot more jobs,” he says.

top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world 56 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

“If they want people to work 80 hours a month, they’d need to bring in a lot more jobs,” he says.

Who is exactly is the “they” in this sentence?

If you want the government to provide you with employment opportunities and free healthcare, then you should consider not voting for the team that is privatizing every public (government) sector.

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 8 points 9 hours ago

It's worse. They mean the 1%

[–] Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 51 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

Of the 200 counties with the highest proportion of voters reliant on public health insurance, a staggering 84pc voted for Trump in last year’s election.

Nowhere exemplifies this contradiction more than Knox County, where 72pc of people backed the Republican presidential candidate.

Here, 68pc of the population use some form of public health insurance, and of the 3,142 counties in America, it is one of the top 20 poorest

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 61 points 12 hours ago (5 children)

There’s stupid and then there’s USA stupid. A very special breed of moron because of how obvious it is that they’re fucked, how they have the money and resources to fix it, and how they refuse to do the right thing so hard that they actively shoot themselves in the feet, legs, arms, torsos, and just about everywhere to avoid even needing to consider thinking about helping other people.

Like, at least the right-wingers in better countries are living in the good world that more leftist policies have built. They’re dumb as hell but at least they’re not steeped in the thick shit of the right to the point where it should be too bad to ignore.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 36 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

It's not like they haven't already tried it either. We've been doing the same policies since Reagan and they continue to fail and continue to be doubled down on. Hell, Kansas was touted as the example of what conservative policies could do under Brownback. They created their conservative utopia and it crashed hard. They couldn't even afford to keep their schools open for the full school year.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_experiment

Conservatives looked at that massive failure and said they wanted more.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 12 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

We've been doing the same policies since Reagan and they continue to fail and continue to be doubled down on.

You say "fail" as if they aren't working exactly as intended.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Depends on perspective. They failed for the 99% of us.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Well of course, but they're a roaring success for the people the instigators of the policies actually give a shit about.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago

Presumably not the people that the voters care about.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 18 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

They’re dumb as hell but at least they’re not steeped in the thick shit of the right to the point where it should be too bad to ignore.

Propaganda works. If you believe any country is immune, you’re wrong. Heads up. CPAC is already in Canada, the UK and Poland. Murdoch sewers are everywhere.

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 9 points 11 hours ago (5 children)

I read an article once about a guy who grew up in a poor rural area in the US that changed my opinion a bit. He talked about how progressive and left leaning people want to help the poor and uneducated, but typically only in major city centers.

Poor people in major cities are seen as victims of society. Socioeconomic forces beyond their control have caused them to fall behind and they need help! Rap music is the voice of the oppressed! Poor people in rural towns are seen as hillbillies who should have paid more attention in science class instead of playing football and taking their cousin to prom. Country music is for hicks! Combine this with the stats that inner city poverty is mostly minorities and rural poverty is mostly white people and you get a sense as to how rural people can see progressive programs as "racist". It certainly doesn't help that this idea is beamed into their heads by billionaire funded propaganda like Fox News.

A tech company lays off 1,000 employees and there's rage, but a coal mine shuts down putting 1,000 people out of work and there's cheers. Biden telling rural Americans facing the loss of their livelihood "learn to program" is pretty rich coming from a wealthy successful man who likely doesn't know how to work a computer, let alone know how to program one. Republican politicians at least pretend to care about run down rural towns. And if they don't do that, at least they pledge to knock those smug city slickers down a few pegs! Send the Marines into LA!

Hopefully the US can fix its urban-rural divide. I have no idea how that would happen, but it seems to be a major hindrance to class consciousness.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 6 points 10 hours ago

You nailed it. I have yet to read anything that outlines Trump voters better than this:

How Half of America Lost It's Fucking Mind

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 6 points 10 hours ago

Republican politicians at least pretend to care about run down rural towns.

They don’t, it’s just a safe audience since Fox News and talk radio brainwashed everyone.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago

I read an article once about a guy who grew up in a poor rural area in the US that changed my opinion a bit. He talked about how progressive and left leaning people want to help the poor and uneducated, but typically only in major city centers.

I think I know the article you're talking about (although I'm having a hard time finding it again), but I don't think that's quite what it said.

It's more like progressives are perceived by rural people as not wanting to help them, because the type of help they offer is assistance in moving or retraining or otherwise changing in order for their lives to improve. This is because the progressives understand (correctly) that the jobs that used to sustain the small towns are never coming back, regardless of how much the rural people want them to.

The writer then pointed out (also correctly) that this "elitist" approach was not effective in solving the problem.

Unfortunately, I don't remember what the author's conclusion/recommendation of a better strategy was.

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

The thing is that democrats are hardly leftist and their approach to economics is still pretty dogshit. When people say to shut down the coal mines anyone who gives a shit will also say that governments should help retrain people to do other jobs. Like, a shut down oil rig should be a great opportunity to retrain the workers there to do maitenance on a solar power farm.

The other problem I have with it all is that they’re fighting to have personal money and would rather keep something like a coal mine running and polluting than retrain. Instead of asking why they’re constantly being threatened by corporations and the lack of a safety net they’re actively defending the people who are hurting them. That takes a lot of my sympathy away.

And then there’s their fucking “towns” that are just super spread-out nightmares which they refuse to fix. They want their lives to be cheaper but they demand heavily car-centric infrastructure and attack anything that would actually make their lives easier and cheaper. And oh my god do they moan about the concept of having a neighbour within 100ft.

I’ve lived in a more rural place and I’ve lived in cities. People in cities generally want things that will legitimately make their lives better(but oh my god are there some people…), and they don’t often fight the people who are trying to help them. Rural North Americans are so fucking stupid and they get aggressive when they get scared, which is all the time because they’re huge fucking babies.

As for the tech company thing, a big reason is because the layoff are all to pad quarterly earnings. A coal mine shuts down because it’s an environmental disaster but Microsoft will layoff 10,000 people via video call from a private island Sting concert just so the executives can make more money. These things are not equivalent.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 1 points 6 hours ago

I have a hypothesis that many conservatives are reflexively opposed to change. So if you suggest putting in a bus lane, they'll fight you tooth and claw. But once you get it in, a couple years later, if someone suggests removing it those same people will fight tooth and claw to keep it.

In other words, sometimes they're stupid and don't have good reasons.

[–] Mac@mander.xyz 1 points 22 minutes ago

this idea is beamed into their heads by billionaire propaganda

There it is.

[–] crank0271@lemmy.world 8 points 11 hours ago

Americans will shoot anything

[–] rayyy@lemmy.world 6 points 9 hours ago

MAGA - Morons and Genuine Assholes

[–] grue@lemmy.world 11 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Why is The Telegraph using "pc" instead of "%"?

[–] Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 hours ago

No idea. Honestly surprised they put an otherwise legible article together

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 17 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Trillions over the long term.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 16 points 12 hours ago

And it will be long term. It's far easier to destroy than to build, or repair.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 7 points 7 hours ago

Big Billionaire Boondoggle

[–] TomMasz@lemmy.world 5 points 11 hours ago

They shot themselves in the foot. And now they can't afford to get their foot treated.

[–] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 5 points 1 hour ago

The "more jobs" they are bringing is the reason they're deporting all the migrant workers.

Have fun being an indentured servant to a plantation owner & get "paid" via a discount on medical bills...

[–] jaupsinluggies@feddit.uk 3 points 2 hours ago

Oh no! Anyway...