this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2026
226 points (97.5% liked)

politics

31622 readers
2691 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump floated nominating Ted Cruz to the Supreme Court for a future vacancy on the nation's high court, joking that the Texas Republican senator's confirmation would earn unanimous Senate support because senators from both parties would like to see him gone.

Trump, who has mentioned Cruz previously for the Supreme Court, suggested the third-term senator again at an Oct. 27 midterm campaign rally in Lubbock, Texas as the president discussed what he might do if he gets to nominate a Supreme Court justice for a fourth time over his two White House terms.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I suggest we just float Ted Cruz. The destination doesn't really matter as long as he's floating away. Space maybe? A ridiculous number of balloons?

[–] Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

On the Potomac river, maybe. Would need to empty him or wait a few days after throwing him in first, though.

[–] jfrnz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Idk, that sounds harmful to the river.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A new low for the kakistocracy.

[–] MangioneDontMiss@feddit.nl 2 points 21 hours ago

Ted Cruz AND Nikki Minaj... what a fucked up time to be alive.

[–] DonJefe@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Another reason to make sure Dems win the Senate in the midterms.

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

not in this lifetime

[–] likebudda@reddthat.com 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I can only imagine what Clarence's demands for retirement are. 9 figures minimum with a better RV than the one Colbert offered.

[–] MunkyNutts@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

~~Colbert~~ offered

John Oliver

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

~~John Oliver~~

English Colbert

Live action Zazu.

[–] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 90 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Does a position on the Supreme Court offer discount flight prices to Cancun for when you get heat for your job? Asking on behalf of a shitty Texas senator.

[–] SpikedIguana@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

I thought Texas' problem was lack of heat?

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What heat? Justices are appointed for life and don't have to answer to anyone anymore apparently.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Dozzi92@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago (2 children)

joking that the Texas Republican senator's confirmation would earn unanimous Senate support because senators from both parties would like to see him gone.

Hate him or really hate him, sometimes he says shit that's funny. It's amazing how he has absolutely shit on Ted Cruz in particular, and Cruz just continues sucking up.

[–] barnacles@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

Yeah that's objectively hilarious

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

How many people does it take to screw in a light bulb with Ted Cruz? 1 because no one else is there to help.

[–] CrimeIsLegalNow@ani.social 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I get what you were going for but that portrays Cruz in a positive light and the people refusing to help negatively.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Please forgive my sin. You're right.

[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Maybe "how does Ted Cruz change a lightbulb? He books a flight to Cancun." Or something lol

"how does Ted Cruz change a lightbulb in a winter storm"

It doesn't get changed, he's in Cancun.

[–] Gpennyhigh@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Why it was critical to elect Dems, the court is fucked due to ignorance. From Socrates to Sagan, they warned about this with a population that can't think critically, just stuck in dualism. Ubi dubium ibi libertas!

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 43 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Fucking do it.

Everyone in the Federal government hates Cruz, it's been the one issue everyone agrees on across the aisle

If trump puts Cruz on the SC, it virtually guarantees a 2/3 majority to drastically overhaul the SC, and motivate everyone to get it done, just to get rid of Cruz.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Cruz gotta get 51 votes in the Senate where everyone hates him to be confirmed tho.

[–] blitzen@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 days ago (3 children)

You don’t think he can get 51 votes to leave the senate?

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

Like a "fuck you, gtfo" vote for a lifetime appointment to the supreme court. Lol., no I didn't think of that.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 9 points 2 days ago

joking that the Texas Republican senator's confirmation would earn unanimous Senate support because senators from both parties would like to see him gone.

I fucking resent that he made a joke that was actually funny 😡

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] noahm@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago (7 children)

Reason number 86,384,028 why dems need to take the senate this year. Rs would support this, even if nobody likes Cruz, because they’d be terrified of what MAGAts would do to them if they voted against the president’s nominee.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] subverted_per@lemmy.blahaj.zone 32 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Someday someone is going to punch Ted cruz in the face and it will be the most watched video on the internet.

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 days ago

Punch him right in the face with a 12ga slug.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

JFC the US is cooked.

[–] NekoKoneko@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Well, now we have an exact valuation on what Ted Cruz thinks his wife is worth.

[–] sunbrrnslapper@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago

Oh god I hope he dies in a fire before that

[–] Nastybutler@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Fingers crossed Diaper Don won't get to appoint any more justices after the midterms.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Just more confirmation that everything Trump does is revenge against America for making him kill Epstein to keep everything quiet.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.org 3 points 2 days ago

Wow if I was on the Supreme Court atm I would be worried. "Future vacancy" uttered by fascists sounds like a threat.

[–] Sir_Gkar@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

He already put the high priest of Nurgle in charge of public health. Why not put the Zodiac Killer on the Supreme Court?

load more comments
view more: next ›