this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2025
499 points (98.6% liked)

politics

26230 readers
2428 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
 

archive link: https://archive.is/hk7Bw

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

Magnets... how do they work?

[–] Smeagol666@crazypeople.online 3 points 2 days ago

This video gave me brain cancer, and I couldn't watch the whole thing.

[–] KonalaKoala@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Or Trump could become a real dumbass when it turns into "Trump, 79, Gets Confused Trying to Explain Navy to the Water". giggle

[–] Bob_Robertson_IX@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Good thing that nothing ever goes wrong with hydraulics.

[–] fox2263@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Hydraulic good because hit by lightning fine

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

Especially if hit by lightning. Totally fine.

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 days ago
[–] fonix232@fedia.io 9 points 3 days ago

Stable Fucking Genius.

[–] aarRJaay@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This sounds like a freaking Seinfeld bit "So WHAT'S the deal with MAGNETS?"

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)
  • Urge to share weird hot takes in public long after their hit NBC shows left the airwaves
  • Eaned far more than they’re worth
  • Too much interest in high schoolers
  • Unwavering support for genocide
[–] SoyTDI@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I think what he was trying to say is that the water was going to short-circuit the magnet.

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

Stable genius

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I always found it funny that friends and family who have been in the military have told me if I want to fly planes in the military, I should join the Navy instead of the Air Force and if I want to work on a ship to join the Coast Guard or Marines.

Only vaguely related... switching to magnets makes me think of top gun.
Officer: [in the midst of the MIG battle] Both Catapults are broken, sir. Stinger: How long will it take? Officer: It'll take ten minutes. Stinger: Bullshit ten minutes! This thing will be over in two minutes! Get on it!

[–] myfunnyaccountname@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Fucking magnets. We’ve only been using them for like 4000 years.

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The article says magnets discovered by Chinese in 200 BC so a little over 2000 years. I am not a historian to verify though.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 5 points 3 days ago

"Gets Confused Explaining Water to the Navy"

Did they get the wrong clip? I didnt hear him try to "explain water"

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 days ago

The idiot here isn't Trump

It's America

[–] foodandart@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I wonder if the DOD brass thought that “..Taking America back to when it was great..” meant we’d be using 1950’s technology as well.

Hmmm.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›