this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2026
662 points (99.1% liked)

Political Memes

12291 readers
2053 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

1) Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

2) No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

3) Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

4) No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

5) No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Dana Bash on CNN calling the BS out

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] finley@lemmy.zip 127 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Him: You’re not a scientist

Her: NEITHER ARE YOU ^(emphasis added)^

And then he continues to barf up the same conspiracy theories and lies on repeat that have been swilling around (disproven/unproven) for the last 15 years

[–] Racoonwithbenefits@lemmy.zip 59 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

The only sane thing ive heard him say is, exercise is healthy and you should eat non processed foods.

But this is a pretty well established fact..

The ret of the shit he says is just weird

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 52 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

The rest of the shit he says is just weird

The rest of the shit he says is actively dangerous to your health and mental wellbeing.

[–] nullspace@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (4 children)

There's gotta be a word for when people say baseline obvious shit like eat healthy and exercise before going off the deep end with pseudoscience bullshit. It's like they go, "I'm normal, but also [thing a nornal person wouldn't say.]"

[–] rbos@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Motte and bailey. Make wild claim, retreat to safe claim when challenged, go back to wild claim.

Jordan Peterson is the master of it.

[–] derek@infosec.pub 18 points 1 day ago

Correct and correct. Only commenting to add a wiki link.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy

When it feels like someone is spouting impenetrable bullshit look for this connection.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That's how religion works. "Be nice to each other! Otherwise the guy who is his own dad but also a ghost and still only one person will be mad at you!"

[–] ickplant@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

all I’m hearing is that Jesus’s pronouns are they/them as the holy trinity.

[–] AmyAye@nord.pub 2 points 1 day ago

Its basically a variant of "As a black man...."

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Pipelining? Rabbit-holing? Trojan horsing?

[–] jballs@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

I appreciate the type of person that corrects a typo when quoting someone. It requires being in a very narrow band on the spectrum.

[–] 14th_cylon@lemmy.zip 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

you should eat non processed foods

in heads of these morons, this equals to unpasteurized milk :D

[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's fun when you see the morons figure out that if they boil their unpasteurized milk, the risk of consumption goes down... absolutely zero awareness.

[–] 14th_cylon@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

the big pasteur hate this one simple trick... 😆

[–] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 day ago (15 children)

you should eat non processed foods

It's kinda true... But less than you'd think. I get that it can be a convenient shorthand, but even the scientific field of nutrition can't agree on a good definition of processed foods, let alone ultra processed foods. As soon as you break it down to "you should eat a lot of vegetables, legumes, and whole grains, and not too much sugar, meat, salt, or saturated fats" you actually remove any predictive power that the "ultra processed" label has, so we can understand this concept much better in terms of the basic nutritional guidelines which have changed very little over the last 50 years except for some better understanding of the role of unsaturated fats. Meanwhile, on the contrary, totally unprocessed raw milk, minimally processed beef fat etc., which are favourites of the MAHA crowd, are extremely unhealthy. So even there his advice is quite dangerous if you actually look in to it.

[–] FrankFrankson@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (5 children)

"Processed foods" has the same energy to me as when people say food is bad because it has "chemicals" in it.

I start with ingredients and I end up with a prepared meal that I processed. We need to identify and specify the processes that causes problems in food instead of giving that food a label that could be applied to any meal you create.

[–] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Imma remove the "toxins" through my feet with this sticker for whatever the fuck reason.

It changed color, that's how you know it's working!

I feel the same way when someone says a certain food is 'organic'... well, yeah, pretty much everything we eat is organic. Even the main ingredient in Roundup is organic.

I get the need to be able to market 'clean' food in a way to differentiate it from everything else, but using a term that is scientifically incorrect is poor marketing.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

Preservatives and high sodium is probably the better term(s), because that's what people usually mean when they say processed foods. Like have a butcher cut instead of Oscar Maier salami slice

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LeonineAlpha@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day ago

It's also very difficult statistically to remove the co-morbidity factors:

populations that eat more "processed" foods !especially in the US! are poor, in toxic environs, stressed, over-policed, incarcerated, discriminated, unstable housing healthcare employment, using "coping" mechanisms, in a food desert, multigenerational defecit of various "health skills", no "free" time for cooking and exercise, etc etc etc

If they had healthcare, housing and union jobs ... stats wouldn't be near so bad for them

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

No, this is crap.

"Scientists can't agree therefore it's not true" has been bogus through smoking and lung cancer, fossil fuels and climate change, and now ultra-processed food (UPF) and all-causes mortality and obesity.

A good rule of thumb is that if you made it in your home from real ingredients it's probably much healthier than if some company did food science on it until it human testers said "yeah I'd love more of that one". It's not a coincidence, it's not even malice, it's just they're selecting for overeating.

The malice is when the food industry tries to get you to believe that their products are healthy, that there's nothing to see or be concerned about with UPF, and the malice is also when they're lobbying and suing governments the world over that tell you to avoid UPF.

Yeah, unpasteurised milk and other crap is bonkers anti-science nonsense, but so is dismissing the correlation between larger quantities of ultra-processed food and all-causes mortality. It's real. Don't spread their lies that it's not.

[–] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A good rule of thumb is that if you made it in your home from real ingredients it's probably much healthier than if some company did food science on it until it human testers said "yeah I'd love more of that one".

That's right, and exactly what I said. It's a good rule of thumb. It's not, however, a well defined scientific category. The reason the rule of thumb works is that if you cook something yourself from ingredients it's probably got more fiber, more vitamins, less sugar, and less fat, than the commercial alternative. Not because it has fewer processing steps done to it.

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

It's not the processing, it's the preservatives and other edible non-food junk they put in to make it last longer and keep customers coming back for more and more and more.

It's called food science, and it works. It works very well indeed. Way too well for our health. You test for moreishness and you manufacture the ones the panel loves and wants more of. Result? Food that people really want more of. Its not magic and it's not deliberately bad, it's just that the inevitable result is the obesity epidemic.

[–] Exatron@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You know that food science shows that there isn't nearly as much of a problem as you claim, right, sparky?

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

I don't think you know what food science is.

Food science is about testing and developing new products. It's not longitudinal or population health and disease studies. It doesn't show anything about the correlation between ultra processed foods and all causes mortality because it simply doesn't study mortality in any way whatsoever.

[–] Exatron@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm sorry you don't understand science, kiddo. Scientists not agreeing just means that there isn't an answer yet, no matter how emotionally charged the issue makes you.

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Claiming that the science is contentious is a standard industry tactic for dismissing it. Its what vaccine skeptics and climate change deniers do, and it's what the tobacco industry did over lung cancer.

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Tangent.

This is why I hate when people feel they have to call themselves 'Socialists' in political arguments. Instead of dealing with the actual issues, you end up talking about what Trotsky had for lunch at the Fist International.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

That sandwich was a sign of problems to come dammit!

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

You see? According to the Third Volume of the Soviet Approved autobiography of Rosa Luxembourg it wasn't a sandwich at all, but a knish!

Now we must debate the point, or be accused of revisionism

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 0 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

First we must define the limits of various traits to firmly understand exactly what counts as a knish. I will take the anarchic position as I had to look up what a knish is and now I'd like to engage in some conquest for that bread

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

The really sad thing is that I've heard worse unironically

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Yeah, unfortunately I've dealt with both the extremes of leftists, and I really don't know who I find more insufferable, the overly academic navel gazers or the "only get intoxicated and smash, no read or unionize" rabblerousers

Fortunately I've also known plenty of folks who know Proudhon from Trotsky and recognize that the eternal struggle for justice is both intellectual and physical, that we can and should continue striving for a better society and discussing what went wrong and how to improve things as well as trying new things and doing what we can to make the world suck a little less

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 day ago

The ret of the shit he says is just ~~weird~~

Dangerous

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

and you should eat non processed foods.

Pasteurization is a process.

That alone has prevented countless deaths.

[–] the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

Yeah I always felt that "Proccessed" foods have a bad reputation for no good reason. The fact that something might have enough sugar, salt and so on to kill a cow is what makes it unhealthy not the fact that it was "processed".

[–] DisasterTransport@startrek.website 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Cooking is a process. Hell, cleaning, peeling, and slicing are all processes. Clearly there's a level of processing that's OK. But they never actually talk specifics, so it's impossible to tell where they draw the line. Is canned food okay? Salted nuts? Cheese? Discussions about UPF are different; those people usually define what they're talking about. But the MAHA people are incoherent.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Until we get large cases all suing him direct for his harm he won't stop. A single large case will sink him, no one care about him. Trump and Co are only with him because he needed the votes and Harris wouldn't allow him to join. Get a judge to rule it, bankruptcy can't get out of it and poof... He would be so dead broke the entire U.S. billionaires would say wait? A Kennedy can't afford a room?

(If you don't think so, look at the state of the Giuliani family.. and that's when his side won)