417

Voters don’t have a clue about how much worse Trump’s second term would be (www.inquirer.com)

submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by mozz@mbin.grits.dev to c/politics@lemmy.world

123 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This BTW is how you involve in the story the reality of what the voters think, which is an important portion of election coverage, while still upholding your basic journalistic responsibility to communicate to people what's actually going on.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago

I'd recommend you exit the right-wing media loop - it's well established that it is designed to provoke fear and disgust responses that'll burn you out pretty quickly. It'll also fill your head with the kind of transparent nonsense that would motivate you to vote Trump, but that's a different issue.

[-] TheRealKuni@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

I’m not sure that commenter actually supports Trump or if they were using that as an example answer to the question.

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 5 points 6 months ago

Yeah the way I presented my pretend survey was pretty confusing I think. The three bullet points were meant as the three possible answers, by way of explanation of why the polls about "are you better off etc" look the way they do. I am not a Trump supporter, no.

[-] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

My mistake.

this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024

417 points (94.8% liked)

politics

18898 readers

3958 users here now

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.
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.
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

• 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