this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2024
1108 points (97.3% liked)

politics

19159 readers
4277 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Something is wrong with this split-screen picture. On one side, former president Donald Trump rants about mass deportations and claims to have stopped "wars with France," after being described by his longest-serving White House chief of staff as a literal fascist. On the other side, commentators debate whether Vice President Kamala Harris performed well enough at a CNN town hall to "close the deal."

...

Let’s review: First, Harris was criticized for not doing enough interviews — so she did multiple interviews, including with nontraditional media. She was criticized for not doing hostile interviews — so she went toe to toe with Bret Baier of Fox News. She was criticized as being comfortable only at scripted rallies — so she did unscripted events, such as the town hall on Wednesday. Along the way, she wiped the floor with Trump during their one televised debate.

Trump, meanwhile, stands before his MAGA crowds and spews nonstop lies, ominous threats, impossible promises and utter gibberish. His rhetoric is dismissed, or looked past, without first being interrogated.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AshMan85@lemmy.world 211 points 1 week ago (9 children)

because most major media supports trump.

[–] undergroundoverground@lemmy.world 131 points 1 week ago (7 children)

You mean the ones whos mega-rich owners are being promised massive tax cuts by trump? Those very same ones?

I'm shocked to my core. I'm glad I was sitting down when I read your comment.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 34 points 1 week ago

But but but there's no direct physical evidence of these major media owners handing giant round bags of cash with big dollar signs on them to trump personally while they twirl their moustaches!!!

Don't you see - we can't know if they support him or not!

/s obvs christ some people on here are russian trolls or steadfastly refuse to understand a goddamned thing

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

A lot of them aren't just in it for the tax cuts but because they like the ideology.

[–] undergroundoverground@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (2 children)

What if they disguised their sociopathic greed as ideology?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And the few sources that may not be owned by Trump-backing Nazis still have to have their horse race. They want to make it seem close to get clicks and sell ads.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago

Trump is the best thing to happen for News Media since 9/11.

And they would do anything to have another 4 years of people obsessively watching/viewing/clicking all day every day to see what insane thing hes done to the country next.

[–] bradinutah@thelemmy.club 13 points 1 week ago

Weird 34 is their headline-grabbing fat cash cow.

"Moo for us! Cha ching! Yeah!"

[–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 week ago (3 children)

The truth is not better but there's some nuance. Major media do not usually care about being for or against fascism. They care about clicks, and following "journalistic ethics" that boil down to Enlightened Centrism™ and bothsidesism.

Their billionaire owners don't even have to interfere (most of the time). The system self-selects to make money through a shared set of beliefs in what constitutes "proper journalism". This makes journalists, as a profession, ontologically incapable of fighting against fascists. They truly, honestly, firmly believe that "Fascist about to win US Presidency" is not a statement of fact.

It's the same ideological pitfalls that makes Serious Media pit science against whichever anti-science fad is trendy right now. Vaccines, "climatic skepticism", etc. anything goes and the journalists in charge truly genuinely from their heart believe that is a fair and balanced approach.

Not to say there aren't actual conspiracies from time to time of course, but even actual independent traditional journalism has generally failed to accurately report on the rise of fascism.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 108 points 1 week ago (16 children)

I'll take the downvotes, but a large part of this is because she's a woman. "One candidate (a man) can rant about gibberish while the other (a woman) has to be perfect." doesn't just apply to politics, this sounds like every office I've ever worked in.

[–] sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world 44 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

a large part of this is because she’s a woman.

the slogan I've seen on some shirts, "Good thing we are only looking for equality and not revenge" comes to mind.

[–] Notyou@sopuli.xyz 28 points 1 week ago

As a straight white man, I wouldn't mind wearing a shirt that says "Good thing they only want equality and not revenge" and let people guess who it is referring to.

[–] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

the slogan I’ve seen on some shirts, “good thing we are only looking for equality and not revenge” comes to mind.

Jesus Christ, I love that so much.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] themachine@lemm.ee 95 points 1 week ago (14 children)

It’s obvious that there is a double standard but it’s too late to point it out.

Time is up.

If people are “undecided” they aren’t going to even consider media fairness or maybe even logic at this point.

It’s Donald Fuckin Trump. Rapist. Fascist. Liar. Cheat. Insert hundreds of other negatives and reasons why he should not have power and be in jail.

It’s voting time. That’s all that’s left. He won the media and the narrative enough to make it a race at all. Pointing it out now is fruitless - he got away with that shit for his purposes.

[–] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 34 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It has been pointed out for as long as Trump is running against any candidate but it didn't change a thing. If anything, the double standard only got worse over the years.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 27 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I was hopeful when media figures started to ask themselves how to better cover Trump after 2016. NPR and On The Media had some decent journalism panels where they dug into the problems with obeying long-standing rules/norms to cover a candidate that weaponizes them. I saw a possibility for real reflection and maybe a significant course correction. That door slammed shut like 2 fucking years ago, and they've played EXACTLY the same game over this campaign. I knew we were fucked when a reporter came on after the Biden-Trump debate to say, essentially, "...and some of Trump's supporters have claimed, without evidence, that Joe Biden has died."

That's it. That was the end of her coverage. They can't even bring themselves to open their eyes long enough to observe unequivocally THAT THE PRESIDENT IS NOT DEAD. If the American experiment fails, a shitload of blame will lay at the feet of the media, who have long since abandoned their pursuit of "T"ruth in favor of the toxoplasma of rage.

[–] FoxyFerengi@lemm.ee 14 points 1 week ago

I completely forgot about this until I read your comment. My grandmother whole-heartedly believed Biden was a clone or had been replaced by a doppelganger by the middle of his first year as President, and that he had died of covid. By then she had stopped watching FOX and moved on to OANN.

[–] Evil_incarnate@lemm.ee 18 points 1 week ago

It's weird that there's a person that you can call a liar, rapist and con man and not be afraid of being sued for libel or slander, and lots of people think he'll be great at running a country.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 60 points 1 week ago (17 children)

One side must bring peace to the middle east, the other side is allowed to tell Israel to kill Palestinians faster.

And before someone comes defending their stance not to vote for either genocidal enabler, why aren't you trying to save as many people as possible? Are you ok with more people dying because of your ideals? Enjoy living with that choice if he wins.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] auzy@lemmy.world 50 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

She passed the bar exam and operated as a lawyer for years independently defending special assault victims and others victims. She never went bankrupt and has been successful

Trump boasted you need to be "quite" smart to win golf club championships during the debate with Biden, he went bankrupt multiple times and raped women. He can't even hang onto lawyers

Yet Republicans are now calling kamala incompetent

[–] 34dfg4g13@lemmings.world 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well of course Kamala is incompetent to them, their goal is to destroy America and only Trump can deliver that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] graeghos_714@lemmy.world 49 points 1 week ago

One side expects their candidates to hold some standards, the other side doesn't care. It's like watching a sporting event with a homer who only sees the world based on how it effects their team winning or losing. Fairness doesn't come into play, the other side is always cheating and getting favored media exposure.

[–] bradinutah@thelemmy.club 42 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Don't forget the racism too!

[–] Talisker@lemmy.world 39 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (20 children)

Weird that this has to be explained this late into the game but…

Trump is running on the promise of enacting fascism and using state power to mete out retribution to the ‘undesirables’ that his voters blame for their lack of power. To this end there is nothing he can say or do that will make them not vote for him. He is promising power and as long as he wins his promise is kept.

Kamala is running on a platform of ‘not fascism’ and to that end she does need to provide a coherent alternate worldview to mindless retribution. It’s not enough for her to walk the middle of the road and say as little as possible. She needs to give people a diametrically opposed worldview. She needs to be capable of explaining why fascist retribution isn’t good or helpful. She can not just be a diet Republican. She needs to have coherent answers to their obvious bullshit.

Hope this helps. Horrifying that the people who are a decade into Trumpism and ostensibly responsible for stopping it don’t seem to have the slightest clue what motivates it or how to counter it.

[–] b_n@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (23 children)

She has been talking about a different way of doing things though, I got the feeling she talked about many policies in the debate that people have ignored.

Non American here, but it really feels like there is nothing she can do to shake the non-trump thing. Lemmy is full of "Trump bad", but I'm missing the "Kamala good". Its as though no one wants to say it, and it feels like it always comes back to Israel. That is understandable too, however she is not a one policy candidate, however it feels like that is how its reduced.

Honestly I get the feeling that its either:

  1. People being very opposed to one policy enough that its blinding them
  2. Literal trolls trying to make enough noise to make it a trump vs. Non-trump to disenfranchise the voters

I want to see the "Kamala stands good on policy X" posts here. They should exist but where are they?

No I dont condone the Israel shit, but there has to be more to it. That's too simple.

load more comments (23 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 38 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yes, that's the advantage of leading a cult.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Notyou@sopuli.xyz 33 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is it too much to ask her to go on a 10 minute rant about someone she showered with had the best vagina and every single lady that showered with her spoke highly of how great her vagina is?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] esc27@lemmy.world 30 points 1 week ago

"liberal media" outlets are either actually run by conservatives or so obsessed with trying to appear balanced, they end up downplaying Trump and highlighting Harris issues. Combine that with the pure propoganda from conservative media, and the whole industry has a strong conservative slant...

  • Real news: Trump praises Hitler
  • "liberal media": Trump praises WW2 leader, Harris eats pizza with a fork
  • Conservative media: FORK GATE 2024!!! Harris campaign in shambles!
[–] taiyang@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I had a thought about this; fascism exists because there are evil but effective ways of swaying people. By scapegoating immigrants and providing propaganda, he's doing exactly what other fascists have done (including Hitler) to great success.

It's like any other good vs evil things, the good guys always have extra hurdles to deal with, like a super hero who has to save civilians and can't just sucker punch the baddies. Too bad this is reality, and the good guys aren't guaranteed to win...

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

it also shows how complicit media is in fascism and how any law that would enforce factual reporting by bringing conduct before a jury to decide whether intentional lying occurred by a celebrity or media platform would undermine fascistic lies.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Gorillazrule@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 1 week ago (3 children)

To me it seems like less of a double standard and more of a representation of the divide between Americans.

Trump gets plenty of criticism from all around. Including from the same people that are also criticizing Harris. But his voter base is in full support of the stuff he's spewing, and will believe anything he says wholesale. Even if it's crazy, or unsubstantiated, or demonstrable lies.

The people who make legitimate criticisms of Harris are not supportive of trump. But them criticizing Trump will not change Trump. He already has unwavering support from a large number of people. Why would he do anything to gain the support of someone who is willing to call him out on his bullshit and hold him to an actual standard? And it's not going to change the minds of any of his cult-like voters. However they do have hope that by criticizing Harris they might see her actually make changes towards becoming a candidate they wholesale fully support. Not a candidate that they are forced to choose because of the alternative. But a candidate that they actively want to be elected. These criticisms might also be persuasive to other Harris supporters and call them to be vocal and advocate for her to change as well.

So it's less of individuals having double standards and treating the candidates differently, but the two polar opposite standards that the voter bases have.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 week ago

Problem with that is, she's getting the pull from both sides, the far left and the disTrumpled right. She can't do enough of what either wants without losing the other, and she needs both to pull off a strong enough win to save democracy. So she's walking a tightthread while dodging spitballs.

Meanwhile Trump is splashing about in his pigsty, slinging mud and shit, which his people gleefully eat and smear all over.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] soul@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

I'd love nothing more than to see her just spend an hour straight laying into Trump and Vance with f-bomb strewn attacks and continuous heavy-handed insults. I think she'd probably convert some Republicans if she did that.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Can we stop putting up articles stuck behind paywalls please?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Centrists look on Trump's base and wonder why they can't have a mindless cult too.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JDPoZ@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's not that she needs to be perfect, but - unfair or not - she DOES have to make a case for a bunch of disconnected dipshit "undecided" voters and clearly show how she will tangibly improve their lives.

She already has my vote, but pretending people rolling their eyes at "I am going to add a Republican to my cabinet" is somehow a "purity test" isn't compelling. The day she replaced Biden on the ticket she should have had been shouting "we're going to bring our healthcare system up to modern standards and stop the barbaric practice of being the only major country on Earth with no universal healthcare solution" or "we're going to remove medical debt" or "we're going to tax all those billionaires like Elon Musk who are literally getting away with naked political corruption."

Yeah... I agree it's not fair... but whining about "fairness" instead of doing EVERYTHING you can with the hand you've been dealt in order to stop the lying McDonald's cosplaying fascist from slipping BACK into the office he almost toppled last time is absolutely insane.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Doesn't anyone feel like this has been the case for a long time with anyone versus Trump?

Actually, let me back that up, this seems to be a major Republican thing actually.

Democrats will follow the rules and try out an exemplary candidate up for President (most of the time).

Republicans will skirt the legality of everything possible to win with a candidate who embodies the worst human instincts and activity.

Maybe I'm the only one who feels that?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

This is a feature not a bug in a slaver's system.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (4 children)

It's the image that each candidate has crafted. Harris is running as an ultra-competent bureaucrat who will follow all the rules. Trump is running as an angry old fart who will break them.

Fascists in the media lionize Trump because they love the idea of a Rebel Billionaire breaking all the rules to MAGA.

And because so much of the media is owned and operated by fascists, you get a stark Trump bias.

But what are Dems going to do about it? Break up these mega-corp news conglomerates? Prosecute flagrant violations of election law by billionaire media magnets? Threaten these oligarchs in any conceivable way?

No. They're just going to get strung around by the nose, then complain that The Low Information Voter didn't see through the bullshit filling up their screens and airwaves.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›