this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2025
74 points (97.4% liked)

politics

26738 readers
2386 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
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] apples4anna@lemmy.world 14 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

The post says: The presidency once served as a reminder of our common humanity. Ronald Reagan described its purpose as building "a nation composed of good and decent people."

He’s a fellow rich person. If he would’ve praised Reagan’s economic policy it would’ve at least made sense. But out of all the things to choose… his “humanity” is the 1 you want to praise? Seriously?

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 4 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

My guess is it's half same old attempts/mistakes of trying to give a bridge to a way off the MAGA ship. There are A LOT of voters who believe Reagan did good things for the economy, and his economic policy directly conflicts with MAGA's pro tariff policies.

It's not likely to help many Republicans see things as wrong, and is very likely to make possible voters who would vote for a good Democrat candidate to question them.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

Newsom isn’t exactly a paragon of progressive virtues and certainly would continue to benefit from trickle-down policies.

It’s not hard to imagine that he actually likes Reagan’s policies here, never mind that his corporate donors gave him his marching orders.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 37 minutes ago

If he would’ve praised Reagan’s economic policy it would’ve at least made sense.

Running up the deficit and leaving it to the Dems to clean up?

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 10 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

I still don't understand why people idolized Reagen. The guy was not good

[–] Phegan@lemmy.world 2 points 23 minutes ago

I would argue, he was bad, even.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 minutes ago

Especially since when he was governor, he ordered the army into Berkeley to corral the protesting Boomers, but then when those same Boomers got older and richer, they didn't want to pay taxes so they embraced him. These same "enlightened educated hippies" have descendants who now make up the tech bros controlling the country and embracing fascism.

In his last years, he was as demented as Trump, and he killed millions with purposeful inaction on AIDS, much like Trump with COVID.

[–] rocci@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 hour ago

Oops! The mask slipped off!!

[–] WamGams@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Ronald Reagan was a cuckold.

His first wife used to drag him to parties, mock him in front of other men, and then go home with those men.

As she once said at one of these parties, "if you asked Ronnie to tell you the time, he would tell you how they build watches."

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 1 points 21 minutes ago

Is that rely true? I cant tell

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 37 minutes ago

Well, Reagan was another smooth-talking weasel with a slicked-back quiff. Game recognize game.

[–] vega208@sh.itjust.works -4 points 3 hours ago

If the Democrats nominate Newsom, then I will be voting Republican.