this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2025
120 points (99.2% liked)

politics

25872 readers
3437 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
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/36774531

Northern Vermont went all in on Trump because of his border promises. Then came the changes voters here weren’t anticipating.

By Will Bredderman
09/26/2025 05:55 AM EDT

top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 43 points 2 days ago (1 children)

“We needed change,” said Denis Boucher, a reluctant 2024 Fuckhead voter who said he couldn’t recall who he backed in 2020. “I don’t know if we needed this much change.”

Sure buddy. We know who you fucking voted for. Eat a dick.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

In his defense, maybe he was blackout drunk or stoned off his ass.

Not an excuse, but still.

Haha, very true. I shouldn't go straight to the worst possible scenario.

[–] MrVilliam@sh.itjust.works 46 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Why the fuck did people from northern Vermont give a shit about the border? Were they upset about Canadian immigrants or did they really think that Mexicans were hopping the wall and then hitchhiking a thousand miles?

[–] assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works 46 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I grew up in northern Vermont. There are a lot of people who simply don't know anything about what happens in the world - Vermont is very much like The Shire that way. The internet is unreliable and I grew up on DSL on copper lines from 1920, so FM radio is incredibly popular. Same with satellite TV. There's also a massive drug problem and large-scale unemployment, because Vermont (without me passing judgment here) is fairly anti-industry and doesn't have a lot of economic opportunities, especially up north in more rural areas like the NEK.

When all you have is people on the radio telling you the opiods ravaging your town are being smuggled from Canada and maybe 200 people in your town total who all listen to the same radio station, it's really easy to believe whatever you're told. It's just ignorance, not of the willful kind but the naive kind. VT is the second whitest state in the union and people will frequently literally almost never meet a black person, and so racism can be a real problem just out of pure naivity.

Vermont is, in many ways, the land that time left behind in the 40s and they're kind of only considered progressive because of UVM/Burlington and because they love weed, lol.

I do love aspects of Vermonters' heartiness and sense of community, but it has real downsides as well. /rant

[–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Still not as bad as NH though!

[–] IronpigsWizard@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

As a frequent traveler to NH, I have seen a Nazi flag or two and/or other sketchy supremacy flags outside a super rural house or two. I have never seen that in VT personally, which does not mean such a thing does not exist.

Rural NH does seem a bit more...different....than rural VT.

[–] normalexit@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Fox news was playing up illegal immigration (remember the caravan?), and people are susceptible to propaganda.

[–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Bring back the Fair Doctrine Act.

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

We should try it at the state level; there’s got to be something we can do.

[–] l_b_i@pawb.social 15 points 2 days ago

From the article, the claim is worry about drugs from Canada.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

A young man living at one trailer we visited, who was granted anonymity to protect himself and his job, fit the profile: After a few more years working on a vast maple operation — where he said he often put in 70 hours a week — he said he planned to return to his hometown in Mexico. He said he arrived a few weeks after the April raid, having flown into Rhode Island last year for a seasonal job in Newport. He then relocated first to New Hampshire and then to Vermont, pursuing rumors of work.

Not all immigrants hop the border wall.

[–] MrVilliam@sh.itjust.works 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Most don't, but most people staunchly anti immigrant don't know that.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 days ago

Of course, most immigrants are in the country legally, and are better behaved than natural citizens. Anti-immigrants don’t want to know that, either.

[–] WarlockLawyer@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Do these religious people just not read certain passages from the Bible? Like it is a fnord that they must skip over?

[–] Bo7a@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago

Never skip over the fnords. Your eyes need to always be open for them.

[–] danglybits27@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago

Bold of you to assume most of them have ever read anything of substance, including their bible.

[–] yesman@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I think it's weird for non-believers to have an opinion about true Christianity, or correct Bible interpretation. My policy is that anyone who says they're Christian is. And Christian character is how those people behave. I certainly prefer Liberation Theology to Prosperity Gospel, but I've no opinion about who's reading the Bible "better".

Many abolitionists opposed slavery because of their Christian faith. They said the Bible condemns slavery, and it does. Many slavers supported slavery because of their Christian faith. They said the Bible upholds slavery, and it does. Geographic location (North/South) seems more correlated to Christian practice than the Bible. My conclusion is that Christians can't find moral clarity in the Bible, therefore it'd be silly for anyone else to look there.

[–] Scirocco@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

I've missed your point, if there was one

[–] shawn1122@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Non believers can absolutely have an opinion on Bible interpretation. In fact one of Christianity's flaws and what has led to its balkanization into innumerable denominations is the idea that only a central religious authority can interpret the Bible for application to daily living.

Also if anyone who says they're Christian simply is one then that's not really a true religious philosophy. It's more a club with no real entry requirements.

There is one central belief in Christianity and it is that belief in Christ is the only path to salvation/heaven. A good person, the best person even, will go to hell if they have heard of but do not believe in Christ.

Christian doctrine has spread this message for millennia, and it and other derivative philosophical thought, has been used to justify countless atrocities around the world.

That should tell you or anyone reading most of why the world is the way it is today.

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 1 points 2 days ago

Religion is open to interpretation just like art. If someone interprets art and feels empowered to be a shitty person then they or the art is wrong. I don't have to "believe" anything particular about the art to arrive at that conclusion, the same is true for religion.

[–] swab148@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago

Now I have Fallout Boy going through my head