this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2025
403 points (99.0% liked)

politics

26499 readers
2054 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
 

The governor told NBC News that the president's mental state should be serious cause for concern.

Gov. Tim Walz (D-Minn.) accused Donald Trump of behaving erratically after a Thanksgiving rant where he raged at the Democrat and called him a slur.

During a Sunday morning appearance on NBC News’ “Meet the Press,” the 2024 vice presidential candidate suggested the president was “fading physically,” and his “mental capacity” should also be serious cause for concern.

In a late Thursday evening rant, the Trump called Walz “seriously retarded” while falsely accusing him of allowing “hundreds of thousands of refugees from Somalia” to invade his state.

top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 29 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)
[–] Tronn4@lemmy.world 8 points 4 hours ago

He's dreaming of sucking Clinton

[–] xxce2AAb@feddit.dk 26 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

"I would, but, uh, my dog ate them."

"Sir, you don't have a dog."

"Uhh, I meant - whathisname - Eric. Eric ate them."

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 8 points 8 hours ago

"They can't be released while I'm under audit."

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 8 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

"I would, but, my dog ate them."

"Sir, you don't have a dog?"

"I had to show the dog who's boss! I ate the dog! I'M EATING THE CATS AND DOGS!!!"

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

By the transitive property, Trump ate the report.

[–] atlasraven@sh.itjust.works 8 points 10 hours ago

Not fading but senile. Doesn't remember people he's pardoned or his good friend Jeffrey Epstein.

[–] daannii@lemmy.world 14 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Fronto temporal dementia

Neuropsychologist have been saying it since his first term.

https://youtu.be/9OtO-cypKmY

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 13 points 9 hours ago (4 children)

I'm all for the differently-abled having the same opportunities as everyone else, but this seems like a poor condition for the "leader of the 'free*' world" to have, right?

[–] daannii@lemmy.world 6 points 8 hours ago

Yeah I agree.

Cognitive/psychological disabilities are a bit different than physical disabilities.

We can acknowledge that.

Someone without the ability to think or plan or even be aware of where they are shouldn't be in charge of other people's lives or livelihoods.

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 3 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Yup. Equality is unhelpful in the real world past a certain point. It’s better to think of equitability instead. Colour blind people can become pilots, but their rating is limited according to the extent of their condition, such as being banned from night flying, or not being given a commercial licence. So they have equality in being allowed to train and to take the medical assessment, and equitability in being treated differently due to their specific circumstances rather than in general terms.

As there are already restrictions on who can be president, it’s not too much to ask that they also be of sound mind. The equitable (indeed only sane) thing would be for anyone with dementia to be immediately removed from the military chain of command.

[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

As far as I'm concerned, disabled folks should be able to be hired to do any job that a normally-abled person can do, if they can do it with reasonable accommodations. But I'm going to have some questions if a blind person wants to do color grading, or if a nonverbal person is applying to be a live interpreter. The answer isn't no, but I do have some questions.

Those questions grow with the number of lives that are at risk. A potential surgeon who has a motor control disability is probably going to need a longer interview. An air traffic controller with sensory processing issues, even longer. A nuclear bomb technician with uncontrolled hallucinations, let's block out most of the day.

A really old guy with memory, processing, and concentration issues wants a job running a decent chunk of the whole world? A job that takes heightened focus and quick decision making, and that regularly burns out people half his age? A job that has a lot of handles on foreign and domestic policy, and the nuclear codes? I think we should probably spending a couple of months talking about that, and poring over his medical records.

And then we should hire someone else instead, because come on

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 hours ago

differently-abled

Taught this term as a kid, in recent years saw complaints from the referenced community, wonder if choosing “disabled” is best for balance these days 🤷‍♂️

[–] watson@lemmy.world 13 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

Leave it to Tim Walz to initiate a shrewd counter attack. Good. I’m glad he’s not taking this sitting down.

Don’t be too surprised if soon we hear the term “Dementia Don” or “Tizzy Trump”

[–] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

If we're still working in nicknames, I submit Pedonald or Tronald Dump.

[–] santa@sh.itjust.works 12 points 9 hours ago

Anything released will not be released with any transparency or ounce of truth. Still good to ask, because it will only reflect on them how they will respond.

[–] dogs0n@sh.itjust.works 12 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

How did the White House become a care home?

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 9 points 5 hours ago

Corporate capture. 50+ are pretty set in their ways, you wouldn't want anyone to have a midlife crisis and think "oh fuck, oh shit I'm a bad fucking person we gotta change some shit!".

[–] WhatGodIsMadeOf@feddit.org 8 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

What if we did charity donation events? All politicians have to fight and the public donates money to watch. All the money goes to creating a new government system and the fights go on until there is no one left.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

It sounds fun on paper, but all we'd be left with is jocks running the government.

I agree we have a shit government now, but that wouldn't be an improvement. It would be an equally stupid government.

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 10 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

First event is a civics test.

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 4 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 1 points 5 hours ago

Maybe also throw in a "what would you do" staged events to specifically filter for people with empathy.

[–] velindora@lemmy.cafe 4 points 9 hours ago
[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago

Can’t lose what you never had, Tim.

[–] richardmtanguay@lemmings.world 1 points 3 hours ago

Only if Walz will join our fight against our conquerors, but I'm sure he will keep allowing them to be there, thus making me more glad I left that state! :-(