1090

MAGA is straight up losing it after Taylor Swift’s Harris endorsement (newrepublic.com)

submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

378 comments fedilink hide all child comments

“F you, Taylor Swift!” shouted Megyn Kelly, “and f all of the people who want to see these children have body parts chopped off.”

For those not fluent in Republican crazy-speak, Kelly’s meltdown was triggered by Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Kamala Harris the night before, barely one hour after Trump all but face-planted on the debate stage. Kelly was especially triggered by Swift highlighting her appreciation for vice presidential nominee Tim Walz’s support of LGBTQ+ rights.

…

Other right-wing commentators, like Ben Shapiro, took another approach: making fun of Swifties. “Note: if you vote for a particular candidate because your favorite singer is doing so, please don’t vote. You are too stupid to vote,” wrote Shapiro on X. Meanwhile, Elon Musk, the richest man on the planet, threatened to impregnate her.

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

[-] BlackPenguins@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

She has 284 MILLION followers. And the Swifties are also like a cult. Granted a more sensible one. But people will support her through anything. And many of those supporters are gen z and just entered the voting pool. The GOP does not want a huge influx of voters.

[-] masinko@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

I've seen some graphs / extrapolations where if young voters (18-24) voted at the same rate as older voters (55+), Harris would win by a pretty sizable margin.

That almost never happens, but Swift has a huge influence on young voter turnout.

[-] Sweetpeaches69@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

I don't know how much more sensible of a cult they are, honestly. It's hard not to see the merit in Ben Shapiro's statement, even though I absolutely hate that little rat. Still, at least this cult of personality is actually good for democracy, and is against Trump.

[-] BlackPenguins@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

As long as they aren't committing treason for her. The bar has been set pretty low lol

[-] UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 months ago

No, it's still pretty hard to see any merit in Shapiro's comment. Instead of the singers opinion to vote for an actual politician trying to help, he (a TV spokesperson) wants to get you to vote for a TV personality.

Maybe if he wasn't trying to elect the wannabe dictator he would have some merit, but because he wants to elect the wannabe dictator he doesn't.

[-] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Don't miss the reality of what he's saying here. He's not saying that you should make your own decision about who to vote for, he's just saying that you shouldn't listen to her.

He still wants you to listen to him, and vote in lock-step with whatever he spews out.

[-] uienia@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

There is no merit to Shapiros statement because he is voting for Trump. Anyone doing that forfeits their right to call anybody else stupid.

this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2024

1090 points (96.8% liked)

politics

19096 readers

2780 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

• 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