this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2025
156 points (97.6% liked)

politics

25847 readers
2535 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Assassassin@lemmy.world 81 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Wtf is that show supposed to be? After watching the clip, it just seems like a bunch of self righteous Republicans interrupting each other with no actual discussion.

[–] Brunbrun6766@lemmy.world 33 points 2 days ago

That is every Conservative talk show. It's either a Russian TV style circle jerk or a 1 hour argument with commercial breaks and a host who's mic levels are higher than his guests on purpose

[–] TrojanRoomCoffeePot@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I've heard those shows called the Talking Heads, but in this case I guess that all of the heads are on the same Ettin?

collapsed inline media

[–] binarytobis@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

“The Contentious Ettin” sounds like a podcast I’d listen to

[–] TheLowestStone@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The Contentious Ettin was literally a random encounter I ran. The only thing the two heads agreed on was trying to kill the party.

Tucking that one away for future use lol

[–] Hamartia@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago

Dancing on the head of a pin

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 days ago

the view for consecutives but worse than it and much lower budget

[–] thespcicifcocean@lemmy.world 58 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Fuckin candy ass snowflake

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

The entire Right

[–] TrojanRoomCoffeePot@lemmy.world 43 points 2 days ago (1 children)

TFW political discourse has devolved to a level where criticizing Netanyahu is equivocated with antisemitism. No one, and I mean no one would accuse you of hating Kyrgystanis for critiquing Sadyr Japarov. No one. Michaels couldn't even participate in the debate without getting offended and making a dramatic exit, it's fucking pathetic.

collapsed inline media

[–] Jerkface@lemmy.world 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I grew up with narcissists who understood the theater of arguing. If you act offended enough, there's a good chance you can convince bystanders the other person did something wrong. But you have to seize the narrative. That part is already mostly done, so all it takes to fan flames is to throw tantrums.

That's less than encouraging, and my condolences on your first 20-30 years dealing with that bullshit.

[–] macncheese@lemmy.world 32 points 3 days ago

The Biggest Loser lady??

[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 24 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Rare (lately) Ana Kasparian W.

[–] baines@lemmy.cafe 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)
[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

More or less, last I heard she was trying to grift the right. But don't take my word on it, I don't really give a damned.

[–] baines@lemmy.cafe -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 points 18 hours ago

lol i meant colbert report

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 days ago

Seems like she went all in on the grift

[–] TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org 18 points 3 days ago (2 children)

WTF did the furries do? Why are they involved in all this at all?

[–] knightly@pawb.social 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Kirk's shooter had some shell casings with what was originally a furry meme etched onto them, but that phrase had been co-opted by groypers and transvestigators and is more likely to be evidence that the shooter did it for the lulz than that they were furry.

The furry community is very tight-knit, if it was one of us then we'd have figured out who the shooter was before the cops did. The only connection here is that Republicans have been trying to make the existence of furries into another front in their culture war.

[–] onslaught545@lemmy.zip 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

He said that the engravings were a meme.

[–] Soulg@ani.social 5 points 2 days ago

I mean of course they were. People seem to think he had them engraved specifically for this, guarantee he just did that to a bunch of bullets for hunting or whatever because he thought it would be funny

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Maybe the Fbi found a hair.

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

The video clip. Tried to post it directly here but file is too big

removed X link

Edit: thanks @CubitOom@infosec.pub

https://files.catbox.moe/uwe6ji.mp4

[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 53 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Let's not send Fediverse users to Nazi websites.

I uploaded the video to Catbox.moe for you.

Video

[–] desmosthenes@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago

doing the lords work +1

[–] ABetterTomorrow@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] RaoulDuke@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Isn’t she a conservative now?

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Yeah, but at least she seems to still be on the right side of the fascist apartheid state issue.

Not saying that it absolves her from all the other bullshit she's been spouting since her and Cenk's heel turn, but it's something 🤷

[–] Soulg@ani.social 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I mean, she was very much spewing shit during the election that the whole project 2025 stuff was complete hyperbole and not going to happen.

In fairness to her she also did explicitly acknowledge she was wrong and apologize, but at the same time it takes real skill to be that stupid to begin with.

I honestly am much more sympathetic to cenk. I don't think he's being cynical I think he's just wrong but earnest

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 0 points 2 days ago

I never got into them as I can't take someone seriously who spent years pushing for idiocy. Its like I used to be stupids but now im smarts. Even if I agree with the particular segment or points it just feel like they went the one way and did not do well so just flipped and got traction so stuck with it until they don't see profit and then will try flipping again.

[–] WhiteOakBayou@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Oh no, when did she become a conservative? I lay watched them around 2020 and she was left on most things and a liberal other times.

[–] RaoulDuke@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 days ago

I used to watch them during Trump 1.0 and I enjoyed her too, but it was a little too much for me, but I remember seeing videos of her last year being a bootlicker. Not sure when it happened.

[–] ABetterTomorrow@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Was that conservative mindset to you?

[–] RedRibbonArmy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

Nah, she's still progressive. She and Cenk are trying to build bridges with the right on the things we can agree on. They're doing good.

[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 1 points 2 days ago

Why would TYT have a fascist on their show?

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 days ago

Ana Kasparian

Clown