this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
160 points (91.7% liked)

politics

19097 readers
3273 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A couple of nuggets from the article for any of you thinking that the Dems are any better:

Anduril is now building a “virtual border wall” for the federal government and Trump, who long campaigned on building a physical barrier on the US-Mexico border, abandoned that promise during his first term and now supports the exact solution Anduril is selling.

Key words being: "is now building" (under Biden)

From Anduril's blog: https://blog.anduril.com/president-biden-demanded-high-tech-capacity-for-border-security-805b7b5664b5

and:

Though HARPA was not created under the Trump administration, Trump reportedly reacted “very positively” to the proposal and was “sold on the concept.” In addition, before the proposal was known publicly, Trump had called on Big Tech, and specifically social media to collaborate with the DOJ to create software that stops mass murders before they happen by detecting potential mass shooters before they can act. However, Trump ultimately passed on creating HARPA, which was ultimately created during the Biden administration as ARPA-H, underscoring the bipartisan nature of this agenda.

It's a uni-party, folks. The article is worth a full read.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Pronell@lemmy.world 74 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Peter Thiel, for those curious but reluctant to read.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 26 points 3 months ago

Wow that wasn't worse than I thought. It's kind of exactly what I thought. But then I've been paying attention so I suppose that was kind of obvious.

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Doesn't that make Vance beholden to the gay agenda? Or some silliness?

[–] Pronell@lemmy.world 22 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Well you'd have to ask Vance, since at one point he thought he was gay, by his own admission.

But I don't like going down that road. I don't want to shame him for his potential sexuality. Just for his actual policies.

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I was more referring to Thiel backing him. And I agree there is no shame at all in being gay, but there is a strong element of hypocrisy and that is shameful.

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

Shame him for fucking a couch all day. But the fact that he's one of probably many, many, closeted Republicans is just kinda sad.