this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2025
119 points (96.9% liked)

politics

21175 readers
4712 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 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 61 points 3 days ago (1 children)

"DEI judge," influencer Jack Posobiec posted on X, suggesting that Barrett was a "diversity, equity and inclusion" hire, presumably because she is a woman.

1/4 of Americans right there.

Idiots.

[–] Misseuse@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I mean statistically women outnumber men. So if we’re hiring men we are hiring from a minority pool and it’s statistically unlikely we are getting the best people for the job. Men are DEI hires

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah but the requirement of the GOP hiring process for a Supreme Court Judge is they have to be against a woman's right to choose. So in that pool, men outnumber women by a significant margin.

You'd be correct only if you assume they're hiring based solely on a candidate's knowledge of the law.

[–] vegeta@lemmy.world 27 points 3 days ago

She has a face only a leopard could love

[–] frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io 16 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I hate that every day I go to work I wonder how many people around me assume I got my job through DEI or sleeping with the right people. One of my old colleagues apparently went on a tirade claiming that the women and minorities were only there because of affirmative action and were stealing opportunities from him. This was his second job at the institution, he was fired from the first for sexual harassment after making repeated inappropriate remarks about a woman who was his superior. He was so over the top, he had to be escorted out by police. Also, he was terrible at his job. Talked a bunch of shit and super smug, but never actually seemed to be doing any work.

[–] LoopingRiver@lemm.ee 6 points 3 days ago

Too bad he wasn’t marked as “not eligible for rehire” in the HR systems.

[–] workerONE@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

That sounds exciting

[–] cheers_queers@lemm.ee 14 points 3 days ago

LOL

anyways..

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

The qons are such sensitive snowflakes.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 6 points 3 days ago (2 children)

https://bsky.app/profile/mamasissiesays.bsky.social/post/3ljo7uhojp223

Sabrina Waterford might be realizing this isn't actually the world she wants.

I can see why people think she's just disgusted by the stench.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Sabrina Waterford

Yes.

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

Why? Isn't she a Trumpet bitch?

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

I'm sure we're still in a constitutional crisis but I'll take that over blind capitulation. The wider this chasm expands, the better.

Keep driving that wedge.

[–] blarth@thelemmy.club 3 points 3 days ago

Eh, fuck ‘em.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 2 points 3 days ago

I still think it's controlled opposition.