top 99 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 222 points 3 months ago (20 children)

I hope this guy has a very slow and painful death.

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Bone cancer eye sock spikes would be pretty cool.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    I think we are allowed to dream bigger

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I hope he gets something that makes him shit himself all the time, that he gets an embarrassing level of dementia, that it shows Republicans how shit they are, and he's rated as one of the worst presidents to ever live.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago*

    ⬜ something that makes him shit himself all the time
    ⬜ an embarrassing level of dementia
    ⬜ that it shows Republicans how shit they are
    ✅ he's rated as one of the worst presidents to ever live

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    What if he has a stroke and loses much of his voluntary muscle function, rendering him unable to walk, talk, or use his hands, but he's completely present cognitively so knows he's trapped in a broken, doomed body and has to see and feel the Haitian immigrants wiping his ass every day at the home his children put him in

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago* (6 children)

    Do you want a person who might not remember what he did, and/or is otherwise delusional, a slow and painful death?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Lma fucking o. Just because he may not remember the last 5 or 10 or even 25 years, the man has a lifetime of hate of prejudice following him. For example, the first building he ever controlled refused to rent to black people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (4 children)

    If a 6 year-old murdered 10 people, would you wish wt:thon a very slow and painful death? What if a dog killed 10 people? No in either case? Then what if it was proven that Trump, either now, or in the future, is/was [future tense] alive but had the mentality of a 6 year-old or a dog?

    How many blacks (and others) were unjustly, or mostly unjustly, incarcerated in federal prisons early January 2017 that Obama could have pardoned, but didn't?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    I'm ignoring all your points because he's been a grown man for over double what I've been alive and is a huge hateful piece of shit. I literally don't care about anything you typed tbh

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    I’m ignoring all your points because he’s been a grown man for over double what I’ve been alive

    So you want formerly-evil-now-senile-people to suffer?

    ​

    and is a huge hateful piece of shit.

    and if he suffers in his senility, this hate will be cured?

    ​

    I literally don’t care about anything you typed tbh

    Then why do you respond?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 103 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    Just remember this when he dies.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 70 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    His followers will screech about "civility" any time anyone says anything like that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 55 points 3 months ago

    Article is from May 2025 in case anyone is assuming he just said it. TBH, he'd probably say the same thing today though.

  • source
  • [–] 157 points 3 months ago* (70 children)

    Sociopath. Even if you hate the guy, if you’re a public figure like trump, the least you can do is muster a bit of empathy.

    But he can’t, because he can’t even fathom the concept of empathy. It’s completely foreign to him.

    Electing sociopaths is how you get war and genocide, as we’ve known for millennia. And we’ve given a total sociopath the levers of genocide, both abroad and at home.

  • source
  • hideshow 70 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 3 months ago (19 children)

    Not that I think he had much in the way of empathy prior to this, but he lacks a filter of any kind which is a symptom I had to repeatedly apologize for when my grandfather's dementia got worse.

    The dude has full on dementia, no one is doing anything and he will continue to degrade both himself and the reputation of anything associated with him as this keeps going.

    Funnily enough, dipshit donny might be the best publically perceivable evidence of the need for reform we will ever get.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (14 children)

    Reforms that are needed:

    1. Compulsory voting for all citizens
    2. Ranked choice voting system
    3. Age limits for politicians

    I'm sure there are more, but this is just off the top of my head.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Plenty of countries have laws that fine or otherwise punish people that do not vote, afaik this doesn't tend to lead to better functioning democracies. I think this is a thing where the carrot works better than the stick.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago*

    Automatic voter registration based on citizenship. Boom, solves a big percentage of the problem.

    You’d be shocked how much a bit of minor paperwork stops a large percentage of people from doing the bare minimum.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (10 children)
    1. I'd be less oppose if it's accompanied with NOTA options.
    2. What if A gets 26% of the vote, B gets 25%, C gets 24%, D gets 15%, and E gets 10%?
    3. What should be the age limit for US Presidents? and should the 35 be lowered to 18? Ditto for US VPs?
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago* (9 children)

    What if A gets 26% of the vote, B gets 25%, C gets 24%, D gets 15%, and E gets 10%?

    The standard method of ranked choice voting: E gets eliminated as they have the least, everyone who voted for them goes to their next ranked choice. Repeat until one person has over 50%.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    Please forgive any ignorance on my part, but would it be required that we'd know what the 2nd (and 3rd and 4th and so on) preferences of those who voted for E in the first choice?

    If so, and if such could be done, what if of those who voted for E on their first choice, in their second preference, half of them (i.e. half of 10% being 5%) voted for C, a third of them voted for B, and a sixth of them voted for A;

    meanwhile two-thirds of those who voted in their first preference for A, half of those who voted in their first preference for B, and a third of those who voted in their first preference for C, voted for D in their 2nd preference? —i.e. (⅔ x 26%) + (½ x 25%) + (⅓ x 24%) = 16⅔% + 12½% + 8% = 36⅚%.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Please forgive any ignorance on my part, but would it be required that we'd know what the 2nd (and 3rd and 4th and so on) preferences of those who voted for E in the first choice?

    Yes. Please look up "How ranked choice voting works" instead of asking randos on social media to explain it to you. The information is readily available.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (3 children)

    wp:Ranked voting

    (my bold)

    Ranked voting is any voting system that uses voters' rankings of candidates to choose a single winner or multiple winners. More formally, a ranked vote system depends only on voters' order of preference of the candidates.

    Ranked voting systems vary dramatically in how preferences are tabulated and counted. This gives them different properties with respect to satisfying various voting groups and adherence to mathematical rules.

    ...

    Some ranked vote systems do not use ranking to transfer votes but instead use ranks as weights. These systems are called positional voting. In the Borda method, the least-favored candidates on each ballot receive fewer points; the most-favored receive more points. The points on each ballot for each candidate are added together, and the candidate with the most points is elected.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    Glad you were able to find the answers on your own for the potential options.

    Seeing as Lemmy is not in charge of implementing it I didn't see the point of having Randos argue over which specific version of ranked choice voting to use, as I'm sure we can all agree that any version is better than what is currently being used.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Glad you were able to find the answers on your own for the potential options.

    I didn't find "the answers" just some info about it.

    ​

    as I’m sure we can all agree that any version is better than what is currently being used.

    I'm not so sure of that. Please be more specific in the type ranked choice voting system you'd favor.

    I suppose I rather half a parliament (or similar) be decided by proportional representation, and in the others, perhaps it's a run-off if the winner of a plurality doesn't get a majority.

    The one you suggested I suppose is okay too. 😁 🙂

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Please be more specific in the type ranked choice voting system you’d favor.

    any version is better than what is currently being used

    also

    I didn’t see the point of having Randos argue over which specific version of ranked choice voting to use

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    Here's a brief explanation of how preferential voting works in Australia: https://www.chickennation.com/voting/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Thank you. 🙂

    ​

    1st count

    Bamboot got 39.

    Floundra got 35.

    Aggy-Waggy got 20.

    Gort got 6.

    But why did Bamboot get 4 of Gort's votes while Aggy-Waggy got only 1, even though the latter got over half the number of the former?

    Shouldn't it be 3+2+1 instead of 4+1+1?

    ​

    and why in the 3rd count did Floundra get 16 of Aggy-Waggy votes, while Bamboot got only 5 or less than 1/3rd?

    ​

    Presumably in a run-off, it would be Bamboot versus Floundra;

    while in proportional representation, the Complete Scumbag Party, Discreet Scumbag Party, the [Gort Butterson Party], and the Nice Party, in a parliament of 100 might get 39, 35, 6, and 20 seats respectively, with probably the Nice Party being in a coalition.

    Even if it was 1/2 PR and 1/2 FPP, each system electing 100 candidates (hence a parliament of 200), and in the FPP vote, the Complete Scumbag Party won 51 of the FFP seats, the Discreet Scumbad Party won 38 seats (i.e. less than 75% of the former's number of seats, or conversely the former got over less than 35% the latter's number of seats), the Nice Party won only 8 (2/5ths of what they won in the PR count) seats, and Gort won 3 seats it would still be:

    name PR FPP %
    Complete Scumbag Party 39 51 45
    Discreet Scumbag Party 35 38 36.5
    [Gort Butterson Party] 6 3 4.5
    Nice Party 20 8 14

    We could have 3 possible coalitions:

    Complete Scumbag Party & Discreet Scumbag Party most powerful but least probable
    Complete Scumbag Party & Nice Party most probable
    Discreet Scumbag Party & Gort Butterson Party & Nice Party possible, but probably most unstable
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago*

    But why did Bamboot get 4 of Gort's votes while Aggy-Waggy got only 1, even though the latter got over half the number of the former?

    Because Bamboot isn't getting Gort's votes. Now that Gort is eliminated, all of the voters that voted Gort #1 now have their #2 vote counted as if it's their #1 vote.

    • 4 people that voted Gort #1 voted Bamboot #2.
    • 1 person that voted Gort #1 voted Floundra #2.
    • 1 person that voted Gort #1 voted Aggy-Waggy #2.

    This keeps happening down the choices until someone has a majority. People that voted Floundra #1 don't end up having their #2 vote counted because their candidate wasn't eliminated in the end. This is why it's not possible to throw your vote away have your vote taken away - if your favourite candidate is eliminated, your vote goes to your second favourite, then your third favourite, etc until someone has the majority.

    Not sure what it looks like in the US, but Australian ballot slips have all the candidates and you number them 1, 2, 3, 4, etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    I'd like to believe but do you really see a future where old (white) dudes in power will vote in favor of a reform where old dudes arent allowed to be in power because they are "supposedly" unfit for it?

    Yeah that wont be happening any time soon in my opinion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    They could vote for the legislation, maybe push for an amendment, that doesn't kick in for about 10 years.

    e.g. starting 1 January 2036, no person can be a member of Congress who has been in office for 10 or more years, consecutively or non-consecutively. This does not apply to any person who was a Congressperson at the time that this amendment was ratified; and years served before 1 January 2030 will not count.

    and/or,

    e.g. notwithstanding the aforementioned, starting 1 January 2060, no person can be a member of Congress who has been a member of Congress for 10 or more years, consecutively or non-consecutively.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    "they'll only vote for policies that benefit the country if it doesn't affect them" tells you everything about the people currently in power.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -40 points 3 months ago (43 children)

    Respect is earned while someone is alive and healthy, Biden has earned no respect.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 43 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    Respect and derision are not the only choices.

    e: for example, failure to even acknowledge is a deeper social slight, and one that stays through time, not something cheap and transient. But that requires a bit of sophistication.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago* (15 children)

    No. Basic respect for the life of your fellow human is intrinsic. Nobody should have to earn the right to live, jackass.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (14 children)

    When the actions they've committed throughout their life has led to the harm of others, there is no intrinsic respect.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago* (11 children)

    People that are able to say stuff like this are exactly why we have the situation we're having. If you can turn off your empathy for the "bad guys", all it takes is just misidentifying the "bad guys" once, either by mistake or on purpose or by being manipulated.

    Even serial killers or mass murders deserve some basic respect. You got to deal with them appropriately so they can't be a threat anymore, but once that's done, the respect should be the same as for anyone else.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (9 children)

    Did you grieve when Charles Manson or Jeffery Epstein died?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    No, why? I do not grieve for most of people's deaths.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    So your basic respect for them doesn't necessitate your grieving their deaths?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (4 children)

    Grieving one's death, and acknowledging that they have a horrible disease that will almost certainly lead them to a slow and painful death at their advanced age, are not the same thing.

    The thing about cancer, is that it doesn't care if you're a good guy or a bad guy. Cancer is random. Cancer is nature's Thanos-snap. One's actions leading up to a diagnosis are largely irrelevant.

    Cancer isn't a punishment. Though the people in this thread who seem to think it is, or perhaps want it to be, are failing a basic empathy test as spectacularly as Trump just did.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    You think the black men that got sent to prison because of his crime bill have any empathy about his cancer?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Why don't you go ask 'em and find out? Instead of just using black people as an argumentative scapegoat, that is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 19 points 3 months ago (19 children)

    Despite his many crimes, I am nearly sure Joe Biden has done more to deserve respect than you ever will.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    "If Biden deserves so much respect, then why am I still an asshole?"
    - Assholes

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Biden is a war criminal that prepped the way for Trump to come to power.

    If you feel any pitty for him, you should stop NOW.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Being a Democrat in name only, does not make you a decent person whatsoever.

    Mr hair sniffer, stall on Ukraine, drill in the arcticson, is not a good person.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    Also does not make them to blame for Trump above all the people who voted for Trump, and all the politicians actively supporting him and not reigning him in.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    Genocide is the mother of all crimes. Financing it nullify all the good thing you did. He also supported balkanizing Iraq.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Yeah and the other guy rapes children. What's the point of comparison in this scenario?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (4 children)

    You didn't brought trump raping kids in the comment I reply to. You don't seem like a good faith user. Israel rape children with usa diplomatic cover. Trump is also complicit with genocide so yeah i hope both trump and biden suffer

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Anyone that has an ounce of respect for him based on what he has done throughout his life and the harm he has caused on untold millions of people deserves no respect either.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    It's not about respect for his actions, of course they're terrible, it's about respect for a human being suffering. There is no real point to wish suffering on anyone, other's suffering never helped anything except satisfy one's vengeful fantasies/sadism. If someone is hurting others, you make them stop hurting others, but you still give them basic human respect, i.e. don't make them suffer needlessly etc

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    You have empathy for Trump's dementia?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Yes, I do have empathy for sick old humans. I wish Trump was safe in a nursing home or wherever, wouldn't feel the need for constant validation and would feel loved. He's quite obviously got massive internal struggles that make him do terrible things to feel less terrible himself, if he was doing better, I'm sure he wouldn't do any of the things he's doing and likely wouldn't be president or similar.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Neither have you. So get lost to the maga community on lemmy (if there even is one)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Incapable of believing that a critique of one piece of shit implies endorsement of the other piece of shit?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›