this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2025
97 points (99.0% liked)

politics

26192 readers
2547 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
 

A Guardian investigation finds the US soda and snack-food industries, threatened by RFK Jr’s movement to change Americans’ eating habits, have turned to a group of well-connected strategists, shadowy pollsters and ‘anti-woke’ influencers

Major US soft-drink and snack-food corporations are waging a coordinated campaign that aims to pit Donald Trump’s Maga faithful against Robert F Kennedy Jr’s Make America Healthy Again movement, a Guardian investigation in partnership with environmental watchdog Fieldnotes has found. Their goal is to stymie the Maha-led effort to curb Americans’ consumption of soda and ultra-processed foods.

To carry out the plan, the companies have turned to a partially formalized network of for-hire pollsters, strategists and political financiers with deep ties to the national Republican party – several of whom have taken steps that obscure their connection to the effort and to one another. In the process, the industry has also been aided less directly by a loose coalition of free-market ideologues who have previously worked to advance Trump’s deregulatory agenda.

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] boydster@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 week ago

They're trying to stop MAHA...

Yay!

...from doing the only beneficial tasks they had planned

Oh. Of course.

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Excellent, let the GOPers divide and fight amongst themselves. How can we encourage more of this?

[–] credo@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

This is shitheads being strategically shittier. It’s not like they are going after RFK Jr directly, or pointing out any of his shitty ideas.

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 week ago

It’s like cancer that grows so much that it too gets cancer.

Good MAHA policies? This is actually shocking.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

I can remember how all the regressive dumbasses reacted to Michelle Obama suggesting kids exercise and eat better. Or the - gasp - planting of a garden at the WH. I mean, can you even imagine? Gardening is SO ELITE!

As well as the collective freakout over Bloomberg talking about curtailing the sale of bucket-sized soda portions. Failin' Palin had a Big Gulp to "own the libs". 🙄 I mean, sure, let's normalize drinking 32 ounces (plus) of sugar water. For freedom! Straight outta Idiocracy.

So when it comes to doing all the worst of things for "freedom", I can easily see the RWAs opting for an "all of the above" option. Even if RFK's stopped clock is right about things like soda and ultraprocessed foods, they'll reject that, calling it "woke" or whatever dumbfuck nonsense baby-talk they use, but willingly embrace things such as anti-vaccine and pro-Ivermectin quackery like the jagoffs that we all know them to be...