politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I find it quite strange that "old and weird" seems to work better than "corrupt and criminal".
Probably for 2 reasons:
quote "all politicians are corrupt and criminal" so this tactic doesn't land (look at the dem senator from NJ)
few people know convicted felons but they do know "old and weird" people, so they can better draw personal parallels
I think the "weird" attribution has a way of infecting his supporters as well.
If you support a criminal, that doesn't necessarily make you a criminal. If you support a corrupt politician, that doesn't make you a corrupt politician.
But if you support somebody weird? Well that makes you weird. Trump's weirdness infects you. It's the cheese touch of politics.
For a decade now there has been a certain crowd who considers Trump’s criminality and general disregard for truth to be cool in a “gangster” way. Gangsters are leaders.
Weirdos, not so much.
Some were weirdos but they were the creative types of weirdos, not old pervert and couch fucker type of weirdos.
I feel old for remembering the cheese touch... that book was out in elementary school
It's also a plausible way out. Someone can convince themself that Trump was not as old and weird 10 years ago, so they did not make a mistake voting for him then
The one that we're forcing out, yes. Not as fast as we got rid of Anthony Weiner, but they're out.
The worst Dems have at the federal level might be Pelosi making stock trades. You know, like half of congress, but for some reason only she (rightly) gets attention for it. Maybe we should include more people than just Pelosi in that conversation.
Yeah, the nj guy is getting replaced with andy kim who is infinitely better.
Yes, that's probably how it is - pretty sad tho.
A decent number of people also know people who got railroaded into bullshit legal problems.
I think it's because for so long they've relied on Democrats/people on the left (I say that because it's not just in the US, it's become the right-wing tactic all over the place) being serious and arguing in good faith, IE: they'll just say the wildest shit that's blatantly untrue, and people on the left tend to bust out the facts and links to long explanations of why that's false, and they just counter it with more nonsense until their opponents get tired and quit, then they proclaim victory. But if you just go "you're weird, fuck you" and then refuse to follow up on it they kind of don't know what to do with it.
Also, the amount it's pissing them off means it's working, everyone keep doing it!
I specifically remember Trevor Noah having an opening monologue to the Daily Show some time just prior to or after Trump having taken office about this exact topic. Essentially he was saying it allowed Trump to control the narrative. Every time he lied, the left leaning media would be off digging up facts and statistics to come back and says "ah ha ya! Look at this!" But by the time they get back to respond, he's gone off and changed the topic and made another blatantly false condemnation of some group of people. And so the cycle repeats itself.
Noah's proposed solution was the same as a child having a tantrum: ignore them. When things go wrong, make it clear why it's a result of his policies or rhetoric. Stop playing politics like you're playing them with a competent adult. You're not.
Yeah it's a bit like dealing with the school bully I think. They want to make people flustered and upset because it makes them feel big and gets them attention. But if you give them even a little bit of their own medicine they can't handle it at all.
Hmm, I wonder if commenting that in that strange Lemmy place c/conservative would have the same effect lmao
Ugh, what a weird and creepy place that is
Well, if it were that easy, the right would've been beaten a long time ago. If Kamala ever gets a chance to debate Trump (spoiler: he will never debate her) she isn't going to just respond to everything he says with some variation of "you're weird; fuck you".
It's because it's a fascist movement.
Fascism is organized around a strong leader who supposedly embodies the values of the movement. A fascist leader isn't a leader who's thoughtful and fair, they're strong, determined, filled with righteous anger, etc.
Corrupt and criminal can be twisted into those characteristics. It's not "corruption", it's taking advantage of suckers. Something you have to be clever and ruthless to do. It's not "criminal", it's ignoring laws meant for lesser people.
On the other hand, a fascist leader's image isn't compatible with weakness and strangeness. Fascism is all about claiming the national identity is under threat by "others", immigrants, intellectuals, homosexuals, etc. The fascist leader needs to be seen to embody all that's good and right about the true national spirit. But, if they're seen as weak and weird, that's not something anybody wants to associate with.
To add to that I'd like to quote Ian Danskin (aka Inuendo Studios) from his guest lecture about Gamergate at UC Merced:
https://innuendostudios.tumblr.com/post/660337457916706817/i-was-invited-to-give-a-talk-on-gamergate-over
Great quote. It explains why they're especially sensitive to the idea that their position is not normal.
exactly. In the next paragraph Ian even has some examples of how that works in modern day American conservative political culture:
Honestly the whole talk is worth a listen. It's depressing because, well, it's about gamergate but it explains so much (and it's probably one of the parts of his alt right playbook series of video essays getting shared the least on social media
Yeah, that's really interesting. I think on the left there's more acceptance for being weird. In fact, I think that's one of the things the left fights for: the freedom to not be normal. If you're not hurting anybody, then nobody should care what you do.
This is probably what has led to the MAGA people being so deeply weird. The right is used to their neighbours policing them and keeping them from drifting too far from normal. The left generally doesn't care too much about normal. So, when the MAGA movement made the Republican base so weird, their neighbours were caught up in it, so they weren't criticizing the drift away from normal. The democrats didn't really care so much about the lack of "normality", but were instead focused on all the actual bad shit, like refusing to confirm Supreme Court justices, banning muslims from entering the US, etc. So, now pointing out how far from normal they've drifted is really having an effect.
You have to love the irony of the far right considering themselves the “silent” anything.
Its really fascinating. Their image is to embody what is "normal", "natural", "right". They're bullies, claiming they're better than everyone else, and using those differences to push that superiority.
It turns out the most effective method to combat bullies is to.... bully them. Point out how abormal, unnatural, and inferior they are. Its such a core element of their existence that they fall apart without it.
I'm not proud of it. But also, I'm not crying about it.
It's not even necessarily bullying them back, it's more refusing to be bullied.
Beating up a bully can be an effective strategy, but it's risky, you might lose the fight. And, since it's a fight they want it's one they probably think they can win.
Laughing at a bully is attacking them where they're weak. It's defusing the fight by making people not want to back them, and by doing that making them want to retreat.
I see it more as calling out that the emperor wears no clothes. Don't play by their rules. Expose the farce!
The media have been complicit in this. Treating Trump like a serious candidate helped him win the election.
It was creepy how many times they said the words "strong" and "strength" during the Republican convention. They worship strength. Might makes right.
Yeah, the whole thing about a coup attempt and trying to overthrow our democracy wasn't landing... but "old and weird" is somehow catching on?
i think corrupt and criminal works in messaging toward independents; old and weird works against republicans.
I think at least some of it is because republicans already call democrats corrupt and criminal. When the dems come back and make the same accusations it just looks like bickering. Ideally the substance of such claims would matter but current political discourse in the US prioritizes sound bites and quips
And they’re not even being real about it.
I actually felt a strange sort of relief when I opened this article and saw the headline. But after reading it…that’s it? Why can’t they come out and talk like real-ass people? We get it, you’re professional politicians that are soooo smart. But level with people, for fucks sake.
Just in the middle of a typical dem speech, even if it’s scripted, go “off script” like:
Democrats have just decided that “decorum” and appearances are still somehow the way to go. Be fuckin real with people. Don’t give us the form letter politician shit. That is obviously where we’re at as a country. The sooner they learn that the better chance they’ll have.
We need David Tenant to go on some social media platform and say to the world, "Doesn't Ex-President Trump look tired?"
The whole schtick the right wing is selling is trying to claim that they are the normal Americans.
When you point out that it is weird as hell to worship a reality TV star while wearing diapers and fake ear bandages, they are forced to look in a mirror and realize that actually, no, they are not the normal ones.