The former president’s authoritarian tendencies are alarming enough without inventing new outrages.

60 points
*

Yes he did:

“We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics… And it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard or really necessary by the military, because they can’t let that happen,” he said.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/could-trump-use-military-go-after-radical-left/story?id=114806253

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-suggests-hell-use-the-military-on-the-enemy-from-within-the-u-s-if-hes-reelected

permalink
report
reply
4 points

Dude looked at the Nixon admin’s response to political opposition and said “yeah that’s a good way to go!” 🤦‍♂️

permalink
report
parent
reply

Agreed. Even from the reason article itself,

it is clear that Trump, contrary to the gloss offered by the Times, was talking about rioting by “radical left lunatics,” as opposed to peaceful protests

Except that the quote that they give is this one,

I think the bigger problem is the enemy from within—not even the people that have come in and destroyed our country, by the way, totally destroying our country. The towns, the villages, they’re being inundated. But I don’t think they’re the problem in terms of Election Day.
I think the bigger problem are the people from within. We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics. And I think they’re the—and it should be very easily handled by—if necessary, by [the] National Guard or, if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen.

Which has no mentioning of rioting or violence. The implication is clear - he’d be willing to sic the military on nonviolent dissidents.

permalink
report
parent
reply
54 points
*

UniversalMonk@lemmy.world “Socialist Mormon Satanist” stats generated @ 10/21/2024, 11:43:45 AM EDT

  • Account created 74 days ago (8/8/2024, 9:21:38 PM EDT)
  • 6,059 contributions (= 1,892 posts + 4,167 comments)
  • 81.9 average contributions / day
  • 11.7 mins average time between contributions (assuming 8 hrs of sleep / day)
  • 82,007 downvotes accrued
    • -64,891 net reputation points
    • ~1.3 mins between downvotes on average
    • ~14.4 average downvotes / submission
    • 0.21 upvote to downvote ratio
  • 233,294 words written as comments, 57,206 words written in posts
  • ~79 mins / day writing comments (40 words / min)
  • ~32 mins / day making posts (40 words / min + 30 secs / post)
  • ~137 hrs commenting/posting in the past 74 days which breaks down to
    • ~111 mins / day
    • ~32.4% of a full time job
    • 11.6% of their waking hours
  • See the modlog for more info.

Top 10 duplicate submissions from UniversalMonk@lemmy.world (total 623 exact dupes and 321 fuzzy (70% or more similar) dupes found).

None of this takes into account time reading others’ posts/comments, or alts this user may secretly have.

lemmy.ml banned this user yesterday for being a troll. Isn’t it about time that lemmy.world did also? For Christ’s sake, there is an election going on, and it’s been beyond clear for two months that this user intends to sway it, and fully opposite anything resembling a leftist goal.

permalink
report
reply
29 points

Agreed, it’s absurd that such an obvious bot or shared account has gotten a free pass this long. If there’s a legitimate desire for discussion on these articles, someone else can easily post them, but this account in particular reeks of pushing a narrative in spite of the community’s desire for sincere discussion.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points
*

The mods are really pussyfooting around this guy. Just fucking ban him already.

Update: @UniversalMonk@lemmy.world was banned lmao.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

If the script I wrote to expose this troll/sealion doesn’t change any minds, literally nothing will.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Beautiful 😍

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

It’s heartening to get positive feedback like this, I appreciate it. I’ve been calling this guy out for a while and it disgusts me how often people defend them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

You’re doing a good job, keep it up!

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

There seems to be a new one who just showed up as well: @Dot@feddit.org

permalink
report
parent
reply
53 points

Poster is straight up defending Trump now. Mask off, I guess. No more pretending to post Jill Stein because he “found it interesting.”

permalink
report
reply
17 points

Yeah, it’s a bit disappointing and super lame. Used to be just a shit ton of random news, then a bit right leaning, now fully pro-Trump posts only.

Oh well, Boost to the rescue again with user tags. “Trump Schill”? “Would happily gag on Trump’s mushroom”? I wonder what the character limit is

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Do you think it’s better to block someone or add a note to them so you can still engage with their content? I’ve gotten into the habit of blocking people and I’m not sold on it being the best approach.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

I block outright racists and obvious low effort idiots, but for the most part I tag people so I can see how often they post, or if it’s consistently in one direction or pushing an agenda. Right wing keyboard warriors of various stripes are the most common, but it’s handy to tag people on the far left, or really anyone too rigidly one-dimension.

Kinda like checking your sources for news and quotes I guess? If I know someone’s trying to manipulate me, I can form a more complete opinion and understanding.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-20 points

Depends on how much they annoy you. Do you want to keep seeing their posts and comments?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-23 points

Let me know which one you decide, thanks!

permalink
report
parent
reply
-29 points

I’m not defending anything. I saw an interesting article and posted it. If you feel the article is incorrect, please write to the news org that produced it. Thank you! :)

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points
*

“We need to use the military on the enemy within if necessary”

“Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi are examples of enemies from within”

Seems pretty clear.

He wants to use the military against “left leaning lunatics”. Well if he refers to everyone on the left as a lunatic, then that’s everyone who disagrees with him. He sometimes defines the “lunatics” as the communist and Marxist in the party. But we already had McCarthyism once, what about second McCarthyism? Is anyone who votes left just a secret communist in disguise?

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Straight out of the fascist playbook; invent a boogyman that most reasonable people would dislike, promote violence and discrimination against this boogyman, then color all your opponents as boogymen.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

Posting more pro Trump garbage. Tell us again how you didn’t vote for Trump.

permalink
report
reply
-22 points

You are correct, I didn’t vote for Trump. Thank you! :)

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

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

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 470K

    Comments