this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
116 points (93.9% liked)

Asklemmy

44425 readers
1828 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Why are the journalist bending over to Musk?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] morgunkorn@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 hour ago

because the police has army grade weapons and vehicles and will wreck dissidents like its Tien An Men 2.0

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 14 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Because rules and decorum are what "good people" think is most important to protect rather than people and actual morals.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 5 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Funny thing about most leftist activist groups is they won't take a hard stance because they are afraid it will dry up the money spigot by 'looking bad'.

And of course the virtue signalling and purity tests that inevitable result in them become taking fascist stances towards groups they don't like.

[–] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 8 points 2 hours ago

Deomcrats have the center while republicans have the far right and to more than half a degree the far left (granted the more than are the true crazies who are so far left they go right and then the fifty is just the virtual effect of if I can't have far left I will accept far right over center). The center wants a functioning government that runs by the rules set down by the consitution. Unlike some on the right who feels the constitution is frozen at the way society was at its birth the center looks for change by using the mechanisms of change put into the government. So many will protest but rightly view rioting as just hurting the common man. Musk and friends don't live in neighborhoods that have ever been burned down by a riot. Its never even reached their gates. This is why luigi had such broad appeal. It was an action that did not hurt any innocents.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 37 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (4 children)

You've asked two different questions.

  1. Why don't the democratic voters actually riot
  • First, riots are illegal. I think you mean protest.
  • Protest what? He was just elected president. A bit more than the majority of the electorate made this choice so we all have to deal with it. It's called democracy.
  • He ran a relatively transparent campaign. So far, all he's done is sign executive orders we all knew he was going to do. A majority of Americans voted for these actions.
  1. Why are the journalist bending over to Musk?
  • Why aren't they calling his nazi salute a nazi solute? Fear.
  • I read an article saying Jon Stewart was the only one the mentioned Musk's salute. I watched the segment and, while he did mention it, he did not call it a nazi salute. He tried to, in Jon's funny way, make an excuse for what he was doing.
  • I suspect there are legal reasons for not calling this a nazi salute. Likely defamation.
  • There's also people / organizations (like the ADL) who, for whatever reason, need to be kept in the good grace's of these powerful people or who need to maintain their seat at one table or another.
[–] seang96@spgrn.com 1 points 35 minutes ago (1 children)

He lost the majority vote so technically not a majority of voting Americans voted for him.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 2 points 12 minutes ago (1 children)

That's a bit concerning that you have this fact mistaken.

Trump: 77,168,458 49.9%
Harris: 74,749,891 48.3%

https://www.reuters.com/graphics/USA-ELECTION/RESULTS/zjpqnemxwvx/president/

[–] seang96@spgrn.com 1 points 1 minute ago* (last edited 1 minute ago)

Ah your right it was just a extremely close gap after all the tallying was done. Shows how bad memory can be.

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 5 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Every single part of this comment just screams "It just wouldn't be proper!"

And I'm sorry, but I can't seem to care about what's "proper" when half my friends now have reasonable fear for their lives, not just "comfort of living" just because they are lgbtq+ living in deep red country.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 1 points 59 seconds ago

No one said anything about proper.

I answered the questions posed. I didn't add any other context or inject my feelings into it. If you want to have a discussion about the ramifications of this person being elected, that's another conversation. I'd be happy to engage with that and I'm sure you and I would be in agreement.

[–] djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

Protest what?

Didn't stop Republicans on Jan 6. The truth seems to be that one side is willing to do anything to gain power, and the other is unwilling to do anything to keep it.

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 4 points 1 hour ago

I don't think there's any contradiction there, though. The Dems aren't rioting because they accept legitimate outcomes, while the Republicans are only accepting favorable outcomes. No one is rioting right now because the Dems accept Trump's win as legitimate and the Republicans accept it as favorable.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Most telling move IMO is how they sidelined Tim Walz for being 'too radical'.

All he was doing was talking facts and smack. Democrats can't have that! It's not decent!

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago

First, riots are illegal.

Only if you lose. Get your man in power by any means necessary and he will pardon you.

Protest what? He was just elected president.

Trump losing in 2020 was the only reason needed for a riot.

If you can't even get people to care enough to lift a pen and mark a ballot (or press a button on some machine), how do you get people to riot?

[–] communism@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 hours ago

Cause they're spineless

[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 44 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

You want the real answer?

Inertia.

Think about the scene in Fight Club where the homework is to go out and start a fight. It isn’t easy. Most people have never hit another person their entire lives. Men who punch walls or tear their shirts off to throw down with someone over perceived offenses are not the normal. That’s tail of the bell curve behavior. If it wasn’t, people would be fighting in parking lots everywhere you go.

The inertia of most peoples lives is to avoid conflict. This is why only a handful of people in any building you happen to be standing in are suited to leadership roles.

Now, if you can get one of those guys in the right conditions to stir up a mob hive mind then the game changes. Until then, most people will be propelled forward by inertia and conflict avoidance.

[–] Josey_Wales@lemm.ee 24 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

This is 100% correct.

Also don’t discount the economic system working as intended. If I get off the hamster wheel to “riot,” my family quickly loses basic necessities.

Once my best alternative to a negotiated resolution moves off that reality (meaning keep my head down and my family will get through this) more options become available. The system is designed to keep a critical majority on the wheel.

[–] SDK@midwest.social 6 points 1 hour ago

This is exactly the reason these Natalists are “pro-forced-birth”. Childless adults are a threat because they don’t have to think about their minor dependents before revolting. They want everyone tied down with families so we can’t even consider getting off the wheel.

[–] paultimate14@lemmy.world 13 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

Nearly 78 million people voted for this, and another 90 million stayed home and said they didn't care.

The whole point of democracy is to allow everyone to express their opinions through votes instead of violence. So either the election was rigged or the country wanted fascism.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 49 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (2 children)

Why are the journalist bending over to Musk?

Because performative protest like wearing pussy hats isn't actually as effective as general strikes or direct action.

The McResistance fades because that's all it ever was.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

It's also far less effective than building a strong politician coalition, as Trump and his supports did.

Frankly if I went to a MAGA rally I'd probably feel more accepted and welcomed than I by my fellow Democratic voters. And this is why Trump got so many votes this time. His supporters are enthusiastic, energized, and generally welcome to anyone who is angry and upset. Democrats kept chiding the voters they should be so lucky to have a black female president in such a great economy and if you weren't supporting them you were a bad person.

Frankly as a white guy from a working-class background, all the D have done for me is alienate me for 20+ years now. And tell me that I should vote for them anyway.

Ok, you’re right in this sense. However, I meant beaten badly in the sense of expectations vs. reality. If you followed any media, it was supposed to be a slight edge for Kamala, or at least a good chance for an upset. In the end the R’s got president, senate and congress. And the outcome was clear after the first few hours, unlike something like Gore vs. Bush.

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 4 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

God all the fucking rich elite throwing literally abortion themed parties around the DNC meeting before the election was so fucking tone deaf and the exact kind of thing people will use against the party in an election and yet they still went through with it because performance is all that they know.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Yes. Democractic establishment throws elections away rather than tries to win them. And frankly the professional elite base of the party is more than happy with it and thinks if you disagree with them you're an uneducated sexist/racist.

[–] tyo_ukko@sopuli.xyz 37 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

There was a lot more demonstrations and outrage during Trump's first term. I think now everyone is just exhausted and over it. Dems got beaten pretty bad in the election, and are probably very demoralized after this outcome. Maybe it will add up to a landslide in the next senate/congress election, maybe not.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Depends on how badly he fucks up the country.

We won't get legit progressive reform until there is another depression or world war.

[–] sparky1337@ttrpg.network 29 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (5 children)

They weren’t beaten badly, it was barely a 1.5% margin. Electoral votes….different story. But even then, this illustrates that a few more votes in key states would have had a drastically different outcome.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 56 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

I think they mean "beaten badly" as in "lost control of all three branches of government" not so much "Trump landslide vote."

The person you responded to even said "Dems got beaten pretty bad" not "Harris got beaten pretty bad."

By the metric of losing the house, losing the senate, losing the judiciary, and losing the presidency is a pretty deep blow.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tyo_ukko@sopuli.xyz 20 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Ok, you're right in this sense. However, I meant beaten badly in the sense of expectations vs. reality. If you followed any media, it was supposed to be a slight edge for Kamala, or at least a good chance for an upset. In the end the R's got president, senate and congress. And the outcome was clear after the first few hours, unlike something like Gore vs. Bush.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world 9 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Thats still beaten badly. The election is entirely about winning electoral votes, and the dems failed that. They didn't win votes in the right places and lost votes compared to the last election.

The entire presidential election campaign is always about winning electoral votes and that means winning votes in swing states.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I find this line of thinking so defeatist. Yes, we all know the electoral college is the system, but all also know it's a sham and almost every honest person hates it because it undermines the idea of democracy. Imo the day people stop thinking the popular vote is what should count is the day we all collectively gave up on democracy.

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

It's truth, though. I don't like it either, but we know the popular vote is currently meaningless. I'll champion any cause that wants to change that, but there's zero chance of that happening while the GOP controls the house, the senate, the courts, and the presidency.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 1 points 33 minutes ago

Your line of thinking however prefers to dismiss talks about the popular vote as though what people are thinking in the country broadly is off topic or irrelevant. How the hell do we change this if no one is ever allowed to mention the topic without a naysayer reminding us the popular vote is meaningless?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Nemo@slrpnk.net 26 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Because for many people, political unrest is the problem they're trying to avoid, and their problem with the new administration is that it is a catalyst for unrest.

Someone mad that our 45/7th President upsets the applecart isn't going to go flip an applecart themselves in protest.

[–] nitefox@sh.itjust.works 12 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

British and France tried to appease Hitler for peace sake too during ww2, and look where it got them. You shouldn't sacrifice freedom and rights for peace

[–] Nemo@slrpnk.net 13 points 4 hours ago

I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying it's happening.

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 10 points 5 hours ago

peace without justice isn't peace. justice without peace isn't justice.

appeasement doesn't work because you attempt to trade justice for peace, but that just erodes your peace. the justice system claims to provide us justice, but violence is sown all throughout it, meaning it cannot give us justice as true justice is restoration from this system

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 9 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Because liberals are cowards.

[–] reagansrottencorpse@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 hours ago

That's the real answer.

[–] Kyle_The_G@lemmy.world 16 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

A lot of people are pretty pissed at the dems for not doing enough too. They're so obsessed with being a party for everyone that they've become a party for no one, theres a huge divide between what people want and what they're doing. They need to unify, organize and take some stances even if it pisses some people off. I think a lot of people are just demoralized and "politically homeless" as in they just don't identify with either party so what is the point? What would be cool is if a bunch of randoms ran third party on their own ideas and formed a coalition but good luck with that

[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 15 points 6 hours ago (4 children)

To what end? People were warned. People lived through 4 years of this. People remember the shortages and inept handling og COVID. People voted for this.

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