this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2026
151 points (98.7% liked)

politics

31805 readers
3322 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
 

Hours after a US judge paused construction on Donald Trump’s proposed 250-foot (76.2-meter) arch in Washington, the White House on Friday shared new depictions portraying the project as a tribute to the nation’s military heritage, the latest attempt to rebrand it amid mounting opposition.

Trump has increasingly turned his attention to a series of major projects in Washington, both before and after his Republican Party suffered massive losses in Tuesday’s midterm elections that cost the party control of Congress.

all 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cruseo@piefed.world 44 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Oh, it’s a military tribute is it? That explains why so many veterans groups are suing to stop it. Because they feel too “honored”.

These are the only triumphal arches I’ve ever seen (in person), and they were certainly well earned:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldiers%27_and_Sailors%27_Arch

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Square_Arch

The one at Washington Square Park is almost 74 feet high, and the one at Grand Army Plaza is 80 feet high. The one that Trump wants to build is more than three times the size. That’s fucking bananas, especially since he did abso-fucking-loutly nothing to earn it.

Edit: for reference: the Arc de Triomphe in Paris is 167 feet, and the Arch of Triumph Pyongyang, North Korea is 197 feet.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The Iraqi one on Airport road is pretty cool, not quite an arch, but giant like scimitars crossed. To commemorate the deaths of over a million people in a war that achieved nothing.

Even that was more deserved than our president getting a triumphal arch. For beating the two most unpopular woman candidates the dems could force on us. What a victory!

[–] cruseo@piefed.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I have seen that arch. Pictures of it anyway. And, from an architectural and design standpoint, it is pretty cool. I’m not particularly into Middle Eastern art styles myself, but it is a pretty cool… Memorial Gateway? It’s not quite an arch, but Kinda. It’s definitely very representative of the culture in Iraq, though.

And what a fucking waste that war was. And the one that followed. And the one that followed that one. If nothing else, it should be commemorated… For the lives lost.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 21 points 2 days ago

It's not just a rebrand. It's an attempt to invoke National Security Concerns (TM) in the arch lawsuit. And then they'll say the the judicial branch should not scrutinize the National Security determinations of the Executive branch.

[–] sportsjorts@lemmy.zip 10 points 2 days ago

The Arc de pedo.

[–] celeste@kbin.earth 11 points 2 days ago

Gotta honor the dead by casting an enormous shadow over their graves. They could make it less grandiose, but its purpose is to fluff Trump's ego, so they can't alter it in any way that would fix the main problems people have with it.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

A military tribute that people in the military are protesting? Hm.

Also, The Professional Left read off part of this excellent piece about the message Democrats should send to these criminals:

https://www.offmessage.net/p/2026-midterm-winners-what-we-should-hear-pardons-ballroom-rob-sand-iowa-amy-acton-ohio-mary-peltola-dan-sullivan-alaska-james-talarico-texas

Speaking directly to Trump, Democrats can declare the end of the line for his vanity projects, which will be litigated, defunded, and investigated. If you’re a contractor building the ballroom, prepare to stop work. If you’re a contractor hoping to land a vanity project, think twice.

[–] NullPointerException@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Let him build it, then change the name to Obama, just like he did to the JFK Center.

Oh, and remove all the golden shit he puts there.

[–] fonix232@fedia.io 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] fonix232@fedia.io 2 points 2 days ago

Not to be confused with the ObaMarch protests

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca -1 points 1 day ago

Obama doesn't deserve a goddamned triumph either, none of them do in our livetimes, or our parents' lifetimes.

[–] Malica@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

It's in the way of the airport, it's dangerous

[–] Akasazh@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

They already named a beach in Normandy after that guy.

/Kenm

[–] TryingToBeGood@reddthat.com 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No, as I said in my comment on the proposal, it’s a monument to trump’s ego.

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

When asked who the arch was for, he literally responded with "me".

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe 7 points 2 days ago

A tribute to draft-dodgers.

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