478
‘What is this, the Soviet Union?’: Senators rip Trump’s call to limit doll purchases
(www.independent.co.uk)
Good to see he’s focusing on real world problems.
this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2025
478 points (99.2% liked)
politics
26711 readers
2326 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
So, did he recently spout off about dolls and pencils again? Because this all happened in May:
Trump says U.S. girls 'could be very happy' with lots fewer dolls under new tariffs
If he did repeat the same nonsense it would be extra wacko this time.
He did. It's so weird that he uses the number 37, specifically, because every time I hear it, I think of Clerks, LOL:
So it's not like Donvict watched Clerks and had that number put into his head by Smith, it's more like Smith picked a "random" number for the script and landed on....37.
Maybe he's talking about the Shein pedophile dolls.
When his followers have to stand in line for whatever slop Walmart is willing to sell them that week, they'll blame Democrats.
and Immigrants
They'll say such ridiculous bullshit as "Immigrant shoplifters are causing the stores to raise prices" even though the prices are set by supply:demand equilibrium in order to maximize profits and therefor theft could not and would not affect prices because raising the price in the assumption of theft results in less sales and therefor less profit.
Well, sort of. When you give one man supreme power to do whatever he wants it kind of turns into a dictatorship.
It goes without saying that Trump, who is friends with that communist Mamdani would want to make America more like the USSR /s
I genuinely can't imagine how this pedophile billionaire could sound more out-of-touch and apathetic. Anyone who still approves of him is a fucking idiot.
That’s the point. He’s not talking about himself or his fellow swampdwellers. He’s talking about the plebs, who will have to get used to having less while working harder - because Trump and his oligarch buddies have taken it all.
Trump and his oligarch buddies have taken it all.
And they demand MORE.
Anyone who still approves of him is a fucking idiot.
🌏 🧑🚀🔫
Always has been.
No, it's the America you lot voted for.
How's it feel being great again?
the America you lot voted for
Every two years we vote. Every two years things get worse.
Clearly, the problem is with the people doing the voting. Couldn't possibly be something fundamentally dysfunctional in our democratic model.
I see it as a two part problem. One, the current party setup one party ratchets us towards fascism, the other obstructs attempts to go back for "bi-partianship." Secondly, I hear most swing voters consider themselves moderates and from experience along with other's inspection of them, they're only concerned about order until it affects them. In thusly they're essentially just a brand of conservatism. Sounds a lot like the typical liberal.
Secondly, I hear most swing voters consider themselves moderates
There's a joke about the average suburban Wine Mom voting for Pete Buttigieg every two years, while having political opinions consistent with Mao's Little Red Book. "Moderate" is such a moving target, precisely because its hedged in by who is actually running. I'm sure if you sample the NYC voting pool, you'll find people who voted for Rudy Giuliani in the '90s, Michael Bloomberg in the '00s/'10s, and Zohran Mamdani in '25, without much cognitive struggle. Hell, there's no shortage of Obama/Trump swing voters.
In thusly they’re essentially just a brand of conservatism. Sounds a lot like the typical liberal.
Most people don't care about politics until it affects them. And the art of political discourse is largely trying to get your audience to sympathize with your position by convincing them they are going to benefit from your policies / suffer from your opponents'.
So much of the modern capitalist system is predicated on people believing that they benefit from playing along and contributing their labor/intellect for a share of the spoils. And so much of the socialist system is predicated on people believing their neighbors have their backs in a real material way, so they should reciprocate in kind.
Move a liberal from a system that rewards subservience to a system that rewards solidarity and they're happy enough to change.
I voted for Kamala Harris. Before that I would have voted for Bernie Sanders.
Kamala Harris targeted Republican women for a good portion of her campaign, and dropped a lot of the very popular Democratic platform, resulting in millions of Democrats sitting this one out.
Do you think this is because they are stupid? Why would they do this if not to take a knee? And I still thought that Trump would lose, I couldn't believe that he would be re-elected. I'm never cynical enough.
Imagine if she ran on a $15 an hour minimum wage increase, helping many millions of our poorest Americans, with over 60% voter support (not Democrat). Our consumer economy would get millions of new consumers participating.
Ds and Rs are now 30% each, independents are 40% of the voters. Both parties know that they cannot win without a majorly popular independent issue. Why was this ignored?
Oh, almost forget, yes, I know, BoTh SiDeS and so on.
Are there some fundamental differences between Dems and GQP? Sure, some, but as a person who has taken an outside view of politics through expanding my political knowledge and understanding, when it comes down to it they only have surface level differences. When Madami was running for Mayor of New York the Democrat establishment threw every nasty thing they could to STOP him. Get this straight, they would have rather a MAGA win than an avowed Democratic Socialist. THAT tells me what I really need to know about the majority of the Democrats in the party.
At this point, the difference is mostly in stability. It's highly unlikely that Harris would have slapped a bunch of tarrifs around willy nilly, and she probably wouldn't be blowing up a bunch of ships near Venezuela (I wouldn't rule it out, but I would assume that the false flag operation would be more subtle).
US voting is 100% picking the lesser evil, at least for now. The current hope would be that democratic socialists gain enough standing to take over the democratic party, so that voters have meaningful choice. In an ideal world, we'd repeal things like citizens united as well
It's nice to find someone who understands nuances in conversation
BoTh SiDeS and so on.
One might argue the sides are Labor and Capital, but we only have representatives from the Capital Party to choose from every year
Agreed! Our "labor party" sold out a long time ago; our current choices are secular or theocratic capital.
Imagine if she ran on a $15 an hour minimum wage increase
To be extremely clear. THAT WAS ONE OF HER POLICIES
THAT WAS ONE OF HER POLICIES
Democrats run on $15/hr, win in a landslide (2020), and throw up their hands because they don't have Joe Manchin's permission to raise wages in the US Senate.
Republicans run on ending abortions and now abortions are fully illegal in a slew of states, with a national ban on the horizon.
I didn't watch her every appearance, but I did watch quite a lot, and minimum wage seriously got very little time compared to her pursuit of Republicans. Reporters and politicos who did watch everything agree. Abortion was in the forefront regarding their D platform, which has about as much support as higher minimum wage (over 60%).
If she had replaced her R outreach with campaigning for higher wages, and continued as she did with the abortion issue, she would have received many more D and independent voters. She needed them both to win, the "R strategy" was weird and stupid and in my opinion I think she was paid to do exactly what she did.
Her campaign undeniably made a fortune from somebody (over a billion dollars). Not only did she make more than anybody ever, she did it in just a few months. It's a radical and preposterous increase, right in the open, in public.
She immediately knew reaching out to Rs was a massive waste of precious time and that she would lose if she did so. It's a mathematical certainty, bOtH pArTiEs know that they need to court independents instead of their opponents to win a fed election.
I voted for her, this is not a Trump defense, he also is paid to do exactly what he does by "donors" (like Saudi Arabia and Musk and Bezos and Walmart and Russia and that guy from the Hercules sitcom).
And you're every so politely ignoring the states run by dems having higher min wages, to pretend that it's only Republicans getting shit done. Notably just like there isn't a $15 min national wage, there's also not a national abortion ban. Your comparison is poorly cherry picked.
I can't speak for everyone, but I thought thoroughness would be pedantic. I could have gone into much more detail, or at least typed out "FEDERAL minimum wage", but I had thought this was taken for granted in any FEDERAL election. So what do you do? Accuse me of "pretending" and "cherry picking", that's not nice.
So, for future reference, a President can only sign a federal minimum wage increase, they are unable to raise state, city, etc. minimum wages. I'll be sure to type that out into great detail next time. Ha, I'm kidding, ain't nobody got time for that.
You know my post would have had to be pages long for the wage increase if I went into detail, you could easily write a fat book about it.
Remember, 40% of voters are independent, Ds and Rs are at 30% each. It's to your advantage to be cordial, whatever party you are; hostility will NOT win elections. Not an accusation, just sharing a factoid (hint hint)
For the comment higher towards you I really did mean that as a general clarification. I would've worded it more strongly otherwise. I wasn't entirely sure if you realized it or not given your wording, so I wanted to make sure less familiar people reading on that were more clear.
The cherry picking comment was not to you, it was to their person it's replied to. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just misread the comment chain
ignoring the states run by dems having higher min wages
Which states have a living wage?
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(9 replies)
load more comments
(31 replies)
Maybe not the Soviet Union. More like Putin's Russia, as proxied by Cheeto McPedo.
Barely any difference.
No, it's a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
load more comments
(7 replies)
When asked to respond to the president’s call for parents to possibly limit doll purchases when approached while returning to his orifice. Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, a fellow Republican who has a 5-year-old daughter, quipped that he wished someone would say the same to her.
Appropriately funny typo, but the punctuation is fucked up, too. Does anyone proofread these pieces?
load more comments
(7 replies)
This is the United States of Consumerism gosh darn it and my child deserves at least 30 Chinese made toys.
Only soulless monsters don’t feel the warm embrace of conspicuous and gratuitous consumption
load more comments
(1 replies)
Pencils and dolls, so hot this holiday season of 1934.
view more: next ›