this post was submitted on 26 May 2025
432 points (99.3% liked)

politics

23667 readers
2425 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 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DandomRude@lemmy.world 97 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

I think it's mainly about one thing: the US president is using his power to manipulate the stock market to enrich himself and his partners.

How did I come to this conclusion? Because he has done this repeatedly over the past six months.

This is organized crime, not politics.

[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 24 points 3 days ago

This is exactly what the mob was doing with the unions and all sorts of businesses back in the day. Trump knew a lot of those guys through Roy Cohn. The mob never really went under, just the stupid ones like Gotti that did their business in the open. The smart ones met guys like Cohn who could wash their money and put it to work to legitimize them. They formed a little chrysalis, an organized crime/politics incubation chamber, and what emerged was Donald Trump.

[–] breecher@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago

He also bragged about them doing it on camera. So there is that.

[–] Child_of_the_bukkake@lemmy.cafe 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The DNC is hobbled by oligarchs who don’t want Progressives to achieve any of their goals. The GOP is bolstered by oligarchs who want Conservatives to achieve all of their goals.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Indeed. There are no leftist oligarchs, pretty much by logic and definition, which is a significant disadvantage in electoral oligarchy.

If populism is ever associated with right wing politics it is typically by design of the oligarchs.

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 5 points 2 days ago

"Right-wing populism" = The people are useful idiots for getting fascists into power.

[–] WatDabney@lemmy.dbzer0.com 83 points 3 days ago (3 children)

I'd love to play poker against him.

[–] some_designer_dude@lemmy.world 55 points 3 days ago (1 children)

“Hit me.” “Sir, this is poker.” “Sorry, king me.” “That’s checkers.” “Go fish?”

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 20 points 3 days ago

"Close enough."

"BINGO!"

"The Game is over sir."

"Did I win?"

[–] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 20 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Nah, he's the type to have a hand of 5 aces. Maybe a four of a kind flush.

[–] entwine413@lemm.ee 13 points 3 days ago (2 children)

But you're not allowed to look at his cards.

[–] chase_what_matters@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

He does a press conference with stacks of unopened decks of cards on a table.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Which are actually matchboxes that have "CaRds" written in sharpie on them.

[–] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 3 days ago

That's actually "cRads"

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago

He won. That's all you need to know.

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

"No, sir, jokers don't rank above aces."

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago

By the time you win the game, the prize money will have been looted so the chips are worthless and the tires will have been stolen off your car.

[–] thesohoriots@lemmy.world 50 points 3 days ago (1 children)

“I mean, we’ve set the deal. It’s at 50 percent,” he said at the White House.

Just not now. But we totally have a deal. 50% or we walk. In a month or two. Maybe longer. 50%, folks.

[–] tonytins@pawb.social 26 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] Cavemanfreak@lemm.ee 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

In five and a half weeks™

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 42 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

What's crazy is that he was just bragging about having a deal with them. He's so stuck on his tariffs that he's forgetting about "winning" or the appearance of winning. It he just finds an excuse to claim victory and end the tariffs, the average low-information American would believe him.

So he went back on having a deal. But now they have a deal again.

Now he looks like a weak loser.

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 30 points 3 days ago (1 children)

He always looks like a weak loser. Maybe that's why magats feel so comfortable with him.

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 7 points 3 days ago

Relatability is paramount

[–] Bieren@lemmy.world 35 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It was never about the tariffs. It’s about market manipulation.

[–] EtherWhack@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

Just like his buddy

[–] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 26 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

One good explanation is that Trump is using the tariffs to profit.

  • Step 1: Announce a massive tariff, causing the markets to plummet.

  • Step 2: With stock prices down, Trump and his minions scoop up cheap stocks.

  • Step 3: Announce a temporary roll-back of the tariffs, causing the markets to rally.

  • Step 4: Trump and his minions sell stocks and take their profits.

  • Step 5: Rinse, repeat.

An alternative explanation is that Trump has poor impulse control and has a deep-seated need for attention, so he throws out massive numbers for tariffs. Then, stocks plummet and bond yields rise, raising grave concerns about the financial stability of the U.S.. Anyone in his administration with any inkling about economics panic, warn him of the potential for financial collapse and the end of his regime. Fearing for his own future, he then walks back the tariffs in an effort to attempt to mitigate the harm he has caused.

Honestly, I don't know which it is, but what I do know is that this tariff merry-go-round is not sustainable, and eventually the U.S. will lose all credibility and the money pulsing through our markets will seek saner grounds elsewhere.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Trump is dead serious about the tariffs. He's been dead serious about tariffs for pretty much his entire adult life. This obsession goes back decades. Yes, people are opportunisticly using the chaos to profit, but the chaos is not the plan, just a side effect of Trump's total inability to plan.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 3 days ago (3 children)

He's using tariffs as a sword to show off his power.

Tariffs is pretty much the most dangerous non-military weapon that the President can use without any legislative action. You are correct that his goal isn't chaos itself, but we would be remiss if we don't understand why Trump is using them.

Trump not only wants to look powerful, he wants to feel powerful. He is like a kid who knocks someone else's blocks down so that people can see he's in charge. Through his eyes, he sees someone else's suffering from his actions and then he can see the pain of those people as they look at him in disbelief. Trump is using tariffs as a stick to cause panic in those countries so that he can see them grovel at his feet.

That's why he doesn't care that it hurts his supporters. I would go so far as to say he wants his supporters to be hurt so that they can know that he's in charge.

This is authoritarianism. This is about him. Even if whatever trade deals come out of these tariffs are worse than they were before him, he claims victory because he forced the other side to the table.

[–] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

Spot on. I'll add that Trump not only wants to see other countries panic and grovel, he wants U.S. CEOs to panic and grovel at his feet. Hence his feud with Tim Apple and threats to ramp up tariffs solely on i-phones.

[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

But has he even forced anyone to the table recently? Last time Europe said counter tariffs, then China flatout said no, and now Europe is flatout saying no as well. Trump is practically a crazy man yelling at people across the street at this point.

Mexico and Canada famously came back to the table only for Trump to renegotiate a deal that they both were already going to do.

I honestly haven't kept track but it wouldn't surprise me if some of the smaller countries that are dependent on US sales have renegotiated their deals.

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

Well put. We're in agreement on all of this, and understanding why Trump is so obsessed with tariffs helps to explain why he is so thoroughly confused about what exactly his tariffs are supposed to achieve. They are, simultaneously, a means of raising government income, a means of repatriating manufacturing, and a means of forcing other countries into more favourable trade terms (any careful examination shows that each of these objectives instantly nullifies the other two; it literally cannot be the case that more than one of these is true). The reason he's so confused is because he starts with the use of tariffs as his desired outcome and then post-hoc justifies it with whatever reason he's been given most recently. He wants to force other people to the table, yes, but he also wants to bring manufacturing back, and he also wants to cut taxes and replace them with tariffs, because really he just wants tariffs to be a thing that he does, that succeeds by some definition. The actual definition of success is irrelevant.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Except the bond yields also tank because everyone can see that we’re maxing out the credit cards

[–] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

The yield is the interest rate paid on the bonds issued. As the U.S. becomes a worse credit risk, investors demand additional interest to compensate for the risk. Existing bond values tank, because they were issued at a lower rate, and accordingly are paying less than bonds currently issued. Here is an archive link to a recent Economist article discussing the issue.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SnarkoPolo@lemm.ee 25 points 3 days ago (2 children)
[–] entwine413@lemm.ee 14 points 3 days ago

Don't insult food like that

[–] skvlp@lemm.ee 8 points 3 days ago

Benito Cheetolini

[–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Not quite chickens out. He postponed it with 9 days (edit: 5 weeks - 9th of july). It does sound like he does not mean anything of what he says though. At this point I believe it's more of a market manipulation method to pump value into stocks before they get sold .

He can keep this up forever though as long as it makes him and his friends money

[–] Cavemanfreak@lemm.ee 4 points 3 days ago

He postponed it five and a half weeks. The new date is 9th of July.

[–] TomMasz@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

He couldn't deal his way out of a soap bubble with a sword in his hand. But he can spin defeat better than anyone.

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 9 points 3 days ago

The Commission President said that talks will begin rapidly. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

He's like a child that just learned a new phrase with the 'attention to this matter' thing lol

[–] morphballganon@lemmynsfw.com 7 points 3 days ago

"Hello this is Europe"

"Europe you son of a bitch"

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

what a fucking pile of melting pudding

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Why do they even entertain a call with him? What do we make that they can't digitally pirate? I know we export agricultural products, but is there anything else? And can they truly not develop their ag to make up for it? I assume corn is the dominant reason to keep talking to us, from my limited understanding of the market.

Just isolate us and be done with it. We're too toxic to be worth it.

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

You think Steven Seagals just grow on trees?

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

Good point, but the one we had is now in Russia, I think? Great comment. Made me chuckle.

[–] Bear_pile@lemm.ee 3 points 3 days ago

I am truly grateful that they don't. Can you imagine that jiggly, fleshy fruit hanging from a tree?

[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 5 points 3 days ago

We NEED Tariffs! We DONT need Tariffs! This is 7D CHEESE!

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

lol he is selling this as "they begged me to delay it"

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

Shocked, yes shocked I am that a demented rapist who slathers his face with orange paint and is incapable of completing a single thought has been ineffective at leading the worlds largest economy.

load more comments
view more: next ›