this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2026
381 points (98.2% liked)

politics

28737 readers
2355 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
 

Supreme Court ruled on Friday that Trump’s sweeping global tariffs, ushered in under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, were unlawfully imposed

On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Trump’s sweeping global tariffs, ushered in under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, were unlawfully imposed. Trump had used the act to charge huge levies on countries, including 50% on India, which was later reduced, and 34% on China.

By Friday night, the president posted on Truth Social that he signed an executive order enabling him to bypass Congress and impose a 10% tax on imports from around the world. “It is my Great Honor to have just signed, from the Oval Office, a Global 10% Tariff on all Countries, which will be effective almost immediately,” Trump wrote.

Less than 24 hours later, Trump said he was bumping up the tariffs to 15% “based on a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued yesterday.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] circuitfarmer 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't think "fuck directly with people's shit because you were handed an L" is a winning political strategy. Will it cost him? Hell no! We've never had a cult leader as president before.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's looking very much like it's going to cost him in the midterms.

[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not if he cheats, and he's definitely going to cheat.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't doubt it. However;

  1. If you're acknowledging that he needs to cheat then we're in agreement that he's paying a political price for the tariffs and other unpopular policies. If what he was doing was working - politically - the cheating wouldn't be necessary.
  2. Cheating elections isn't an on/off switch. The thing about putting your thumb on the scale is that it's a lot easier, and a lot less obvious, when the balance is mostly equal. A thumb on the scale might pass without notice. A knee on the scale tends to get attention. The more votes there are against him, the harder he has to work to cheat and the more likely he gets caught.
[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

100% agree on point one. Although he'd probably still cheat even if he was up in the polls. It's inherent to his nature.

On point two, getting caught doesn't seem to make any difference to him. He never faces any consequences.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Look at it this way; unless you honestly, truly, would take to a witness stand and say under threat of perjury that you believe the GOP could live stream themselves writing fake ballots and stuffing them in the boxes, you still think getting caught matters. We're only disagreeing over how much evidence there needs to be for it to make a difference. Which comes right back to my point; the more you need to cheat, the harder it gets and the more evidence you leave.

[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I'm not disagreeing with you at all. I'd like to think that getting caught matters, and in saner times it would, it's just that historically, it doesn't seem to with that bloke.