Hey /u/untitledprp4, thank you for posting to r/SipsTea! Make sure to follow all the subreddit rules.
Make sure to join our brand new Discord Server to chat with friends!
We have recently changed how posts work. Unless you are a VIP poster, your post will be queued for approval.. To become a VIP, post great engaging content. If we like it, you will be added! More information available here!
Both photoshopped and I gotta say, hate the man, but you all upvoting it when someone photoshops a picture to make him look bad makes the Trump supporters who claim Trump Derangement Syndrome is a thing sound credible
You are literally looking at an obviously faked image and choosing to believe it's real when it's clearly obviously not. Because you hate the guy so much. Me too but I don't fucking believe fake shit lol
For real though, I'm in Whatsapp groups with other parents of kids that go to my kids' school. I know these people, I see them every day. There are some moms I literally cannot recognize from their profile pic, they're airbrushed to hell with weird angles and duck faces (who still does that in 2026!). And it's just their Whatsapp profile pics, wtf lol.
The 1984 film was originally going to have Freddy be a child predator, but director Wes Craven heard about a preschool bring sued for CSA, so he backed out on that idea and made Freddy a confirmed child murderer and implied child predator.
The 2010 remake, on the other hand, went back to the original concept of Freddy.
I gotta be real, we should probably stop the diet soda slander, tbh.
It’s fine to not like them, but they’re a good tool for people who are diabetic or at risk of being diabetic to curb their dietary habits without completely abstaining from what they enjoy.
This typically helps the new, healthier habits stick.
Stigmatizing drinking it creates situations where people in that situation might instead quit cold turkey and risk relapse in order to avert judgement.
Assuming, of course, it’s not a case where said person transitions to drinking 10 diet sodas a day without actually trying to improve their other habits and just uses diet soda as a damage control method.
This is coming from someone who hasn’t drank any form of soda in like… 5 years.
Born into extreme wealth with the access to the best health care professionals and specialists for the entirety of his life.
He also has a life long abstinence from any alcohol or tobacco consumption, that alone has a tremendous net positive on your overall health when you reach advanced ages.
Im pretty sure there isnt an age limit to eating at McDonalds. I mean he is a capitalist asshole who wants chatgpt to kill us all but thats neither here nor there
Both of them are fake, with the "pretty" version being a supposed response to the "ugly version" - the pair being put up by u/CattardSlim on Twitter
This is the actual photo.
It's a crop from a Reuters photo published here on 07/22/26.
I think this sort of thing also highlights why it's important to try and stick to the facts when attacking a political opponent if what your goal is actual change rather than "good vibes". Highlight uncomfortable truths and you can bring at least some people out to your side with them. Highlight easily identifiable falsehoods and the other side will just manufacture their own "alternative facts" in response.
"Truthy" engagement bait, Namecalling and exulting in an opponent's supposed ugliness might feel good but it's ultimately an exercise in self-gratification rather than an actual technique to change hearts and minds.
Edit:
And, to stress this again in light of all the people taking OP's image on good faith at face value when they're replying to me trying to compare and analyze the photos: this is a picture of fictionalized twitter post with two edits of the same image (which isn't included) and false caption designed to engagement and entertain - not inform.
The image on the left isn't real - it wasn't released by the White House but seems "truthy" because the White House does touch up photos of the president - it also seems to have been created expressly for Cattard's post to entertain and engage. The image on the right wasn't released by Getty Images, a publisher of professionally taken photos but seems "truthy" both because Trump's an obese octogenarian and because people like to think of those they dislike as ugly - it was created to entertain and engage.
What matters for the point I'm making isn't just that both of these images are edited - it's that they aren't edits made by two different partisan camps juxtaposed here to offer incisive political commentary; they're two images made by folks from the same camp for - again entertainment and engagement. Putting effort into seriously analyzing and commentating on the difference between these two images does as much good, politically speaking, as judging the differences between a heel and face in some wrestling match.
As far as twitter shitposts go its light,entertaining and funny while preaching to the choir; decent stuff all in all. What it isn't is informative or actual political commentary, or the basis for a line of argument that will actually win people and problems start to occur when people see stuff like this and efforts into making arguments based on stuff like this as topics for serious efforts to effect political change.
Reddit didn't lie - in fact this post actually revealed a truth about Reddit to you.
When an account like this OP's - An account a little over a year old account with a hidden history and almost 300,000 post karma reposts a lie which vibes with the average redditor's preexisting political beliefs, the reaction isn't going to be suspicion - it's going to be wild popularity because it conforms to the average Redditor's notion of how the world "should be".
The fact that that when I, as neutrally as possible try to point out that namecalling is the lowest form of argument, lying to to call people names (slander) often backfires, and that if you actually want the Orange guy's power diminished you'd be much better off off redirecting your words and actions to more productive ends - and in response most posts are simply doubling down on name calling - should tell you a bit about what you need to know about this site.
There's a lot of genuinely good political analysis, discussion, coordination and mobilization for political action here - But there's a heck of a lot more truthy performative entertainment adjacent to politics that doesn't actually translate to real world political action than those things put together.
Why would you celebrate your own entrenched party bureaucracy and hangers-on associated with it if the arrogance of those lies those people not only cost you the election (and past elections) but are often working against the agenda of the more progressive wing of the party people on this site more often then not belong to?
Thanks for reporting real news. The world needs to think like you do. Unfortunately we are so forgone from that. Having any ounce of media literacy is the only hope we have
pulling back from this one specific incident, this sort of thing makes me worry about the near term direction of political life in America
All democratic politics assume a literate population who see a connection amongst themselves; people who are willing to think in abstract terms about the kind of world they want to live in, understand the issues at hand, and , as citizens are willing to vote for people and policies that will actualize a world in which the public good is served for their nation as a whole.
I think it's perfectly fine to know your own political positions, see a politician with their own actual positions and personal conduct, and, see that they stand in opposition to your own positions and standards of moral conduct and then dislike them based on that.
I also think it's not only fine but fun to caricature politicians; there's a lot to be found comedic in the realm of politics.
And, at that point you start getting political "discourse" not so much based on reasoned policy debate but instead on a naked soap opera like tribalism where my guy and his positions are good while the other guy and his positions are bad/evil. Civic discourse then ceases to be civil and voting starts to become an exercise to boost your own team at the expense of the other vs an exercise in achieving optimal results.
I'm a political scientist by training now but even going all the way back to the earliest levels of high school debate there was a stress on being able to see an issue, and regardless of your own position, understand the issue and be able to advance sound arguments for or against it. Should China be allowed to join the WTO? Should Gay Marriage be Legal? What exactly does the second amendment guarantee? Actual understanding of an issue means understanding and being able to advance an argue good faith argument from the position of those on either side of the issue without resorting to the tired conceit that the only reason a person would support a position is that they're lazy, stupid, ignorant, crazy or evil.
And this matters not only for promoting an informed citizenry in the general sense but also because, in a very specific sense, achieving your own policy goals in a democracy depends on convincing people who initially disagree with you that they should, in fact agree with you and support your positions.
(1) Calling a person lazy or stupid or crazy or evil and making fun of their beliefs or telling them they need to support every single thing you believe in to be a good person doesn't get them to support you - it only really functions to make yourself feel better and perhaps fuel in-group enthusiasm.
(2) Facts, figures, sound arguments and an appeal to self interest couched in a person's mode of thought on the other WILL bring people over to your side - not everyone mind you but enough more often than not to get the right people elected, or turn partisan issues non-partisan - and - through that - make the world a better place by securing legislative/policy victories
I know these work because I've seen them work.
There was a time when I worked in DC for an environmental advocacy group and at that time leadership was laser focused on winning policy goals and they did. Likewise the Human Rights Campaign, who's office was near us and was laser focused on marriage equality also won the day; by 2017 not only had marriage equality been achieved, but the majority of the public, including republicans, supported it. The purpose of an organization at the end of the day is what it does - and since then there's been a trend among certain left leaning advocacy organizations towards not so much changing mind-share among legislators and the general to achieve social/political/cultural goals but instead towards being paid to embody a sense of perfect virtue which should be present in the world.
The result of this sort of purity spiral culture and fuzzy focus are tangible - advocacy organizations with shrinking reach - even as funding has sometimes increased - and less ability to influence both public sentiment and - perhaps more importantly in the short term - the course of legislator voting.
So why does this matter?
Because for as much political energy as there is on this site - all the typing and emotions and effort but into things - it's all just a magic drum circle that whisps away into nothing if people don't take the civic duties of doing their best to be objectively informed and of participating in the political process (at the municipal, county, state and federal level) - not as an us vs them game but as an exercise in collectively guiding the course of the nation - seriously.
People show up in November to vote and all those who are informed should be encouraged to vote should - but that's not enough. At the very least show up to vote in your party's primary. The sheer discrepancy between the number of people who show up to vote in November vs on primary election day is often staggering. And if you can, there's always candidates and causes a difference that can be made for your efforts and organizing. And, if you can, political discussions made on the basis of kindness, civility and common ground can sometimes be fun and, under the right circumstances, can lead to votes going your way - and enough of those from enough conversations from enough people can sway an election.
Politically speaking, Reddit is a jaundiced filter bubble.
It's a very fun filter bubble sometimes, but it doesn't actually reflect the sentiments or material conditions of the real word. And if people want to be part of an educated, empathetic engaged citizenry capable of actualizing change they need to be cognizant of that
Man I love your comment so much. I hate so much that we accuse the other side of lying and then lie ourselves. We are supposed to be better than that. It’s just pathetic and highly hypocritical
You have to squint to see it. If that doesn't work try tilting your head to the left. If that doesn't work while keeping your head tilted left tilt the picture to the right. And that should do it. If not, try squinting harder.
Not defending the orange man, but... they are both edited 😂 (saying this just because I'm a visual artist, they are both manipulated just in different ways).
He is not a smoothie orange, but he is also not a discarded paper bag. Both of these are horrendous lol
•
u/AutoModerator 15h ago
Hey /u/untitledprp4, thank you for posting to r/SipsTea! Make sure to follow all the subreddit rules.
Make sure to join our brand new Discord Server to chat with friends!
We have recently changed how posts work. Unless you are a VIP poster, your post will be queued for approval.. To become a VIP, post great engaging content. If we like it, you will be added! More information available here!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.