1225
Democrats immediately start calling Trump too old
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2024
1225 points (98.3% liked)
politics
19120 readers
2106 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.
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Is it just me, or has Newsweek been putting out a lot of content about how Trump is losing and doing poorly, despite most polls saying otherwise?
Beware this source. It's one step away from a tabloid.
It provides a false sense of security for the left even though they should still definitely be worried. The past week is reminiscent of 2016 when everyone thought Trump was a joke candidate and Hillary was going to crush him.
That's one thing to remember, troll factories don't just shove out the same piece of propaganda. They try disenfranchise, disinterest, and even guide the people they don't want to win towards candidates and policies they know will play into their hands. Kamala Harris is certainly a good candidate - for democrats. She's not likely to influence Trumpers, and a more traditional candidate might have been more popular with anyone who really was undecided. A better option might have been to appeal to times when politics wasn't as divided, and I have even joked that someone like John Kerry with Mitt Romney as VP would have been a sure win.
Kamala's a very traditional candidate, if we're talking about her record. Trump, on the other hand, is the only President in US history to've never held public office or served in the military before being elected. Very non-traditional.
It's the left who is dividing us by having the R's run a convicted felon! I don't understand how anybody doesn't understand this !!
If the voters that mattered bothered to look at records, there would be no Trumpers. Sadly, I feel it has to be shoved into their face in the most traditionally stereotypical matter. Harris might seem to be doing good, but here is how good Hillary was doing before she lost to Trump: https://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/23/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-presidential-polls/index.html
The problem isn't on the left, it's on a weighted and loaded electoral system that favors those most likely to be susceptible to misinformation.
Anyway, since it's beside the point as Harris seems pretty set, I just hope it does not play out like Hillary versus Clinton and hope that she gets elected. This times are different, but so is the degree to which people have bubbled themselves within their social networks and the most able to discern it are those who own them, who are basically in the same league as Trump and quite capable of shoving money and influence into them.
Reddit and even Lemmy is notorious for this.
Trump this, Trump that. Trump is a pedophile. Trump has 34 felonies. Trump had sex with a pornstar. Trump called veterans losers.
Does that all matter when Trump is still polling among the American working class who felt left out from globalisation and had to compete for underfunded and limited infrastructures and resources with immigrants, who themselves are also trying to get better lives as the American working class?
Not one from these articles mention why Trump still has support: it's because those from the Rust Belt, whose jobs were outsourced, literally have nothing left to lose. They are pinning their hopes to a conman who says things that disenfranchised salt-of-the-earth wants to hear. But most of the media do not mention this. Instead, they paint these disenfranchised people as racists and ignorant. Sure, some of them are, but people who feel insecure become desperate cling to any lifeline-- even coming from a devil. So the people are tricked to vote against their own interests. But the media never mentions this. Why? Because they themselves are part of the elites who have their own economic stake. They have houses now worth ten times than what they initially bought them for, and they don't want someone further left to be elected to alleviate the housing crisis. That's why Bernie Sanders was never given a chance by the liberal Democratic Party.
And imo, and this is a hard to swallow pill, is that even normal middle class is complicit to growing right wing movement for not acknowledging the economic anxiety and disenfranchisement of the working class with constant and endemic NIMBY-ism. "Oh those poor homeless people. I want affordable housing for them but I don't want them built close to my neighbourhood because it will depreciate the value of my property." I admit, I am guilty of it. I should join protests and show solidarity with the working class but I haven't joined any in my life.
Excuse me for the rant but the corporate media is definitely trying to hoodwink the public by not mentioning the actual cause of rise of racism and bigotry, and the public is none the wiser because their only source of information is from the same corporate media who do not tell them that housing and job insecurity is what made Trump and far-right in Europe gaining votes. Here in Europe, the media and politicians acknowledge the issue of immigration and stating it's important to separate the genuine racists from those with "genuine concerns". Jeez, what might those be genuine concerns, I wonder? Is it lack of jobs and housing? How come the media and politicians never say what those actual genuine concerns are?
You can call Trump, Le Pen, Sweden Democrats, Orban, PiS, Meloni etc. racists and fascists, but if people don't have jobs and housing, does the name-calling ever matters? Gee, how come people from Rust Belt, the de-indutrialised Northern France, England and Western Sweden voted for the far-right? And here comes the Principal Skinner meme moment: nah, they're ignorant and racists. Totally not because of decades long neoliberalism and austerity, despite UN report warning that lack of public investment fuels the far-right.