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

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

Objectively, she has a net worth that pisses off quite a few liberals because we tend to think having billions of dollars is millions of people living in abject poverty.

Good that you noticed.

By all objective measures, this woman is a really damn good singer.

There's no such thing as objectively good singer.

That said, my initial comment didn't make my opinion any more "objective" than yours - one subjective opinion against another.

The numbers I cited above, taken from Billboard are very objective numbers based on how often songs are bought and streamed. While it’s very subjective for individual viewers (and I agree, she’s not my cup of tea either!), the objective fact is that Swift speaks to a lot of people, and your personal disdain for her doesn’t change that fact one stinkin’ bit.

Disdain? Could you stop whiteknighting please?

It’s a very Salty Rightie thing to do to come in an attack a woman with some serious musical awards and accomplishments and say just because he didn’t like her, she’s no good.

You have a weird mind.

Anyone pulling this crap right now really looks defeated, humiliated, and just plain utterly SAD, a sad sack of a bitter and scorned rightie angry that a pretty girl rejected their Emprah and endorsed the other side.

I don't live and don't vote in the USA ; that aside, Trump winning would mean existential risks for part of my family.

Now, what does it say about you - to pull all this shit out of your imagination without any real reason whatsoever?

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

I don't live and don't vote in the USA

Sure, here on the Internet where the Men are Men, the Women are Men, the Children are FBI Agents, SURE you're not a deranged trumper shitting on the lady who your side tried to coopt a few weeks ago, and nobody, and I mean nobody knows I'm a cat.

I don't trust you and you shitting on Swift is doing you no favours. If you don't like Swift, you move on. That you didn't and continue to attack anyone who questions your silliness suggests that you're more than non-appreciative of her as a singer. Hell, I don't like her as a singer. But I'm not going to act like a bitchy MAGA idiot by shitting on her music on a thread about how she is making bitchy MAGA idiots lose their shit by endorsing the other person. :)

[-] Malfeasant@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

nobody knows I'm a cat.

Actually I was thinking you might be tasty...

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

Now, what does it say about you - to pull all this shit out of your imagination without any real reason whatsoever?

Also

That you didn’t and continue to attack anyone who questions your silliness

... is a normal reaction, behave like a moron - receive all kinds of insulting responses. Just admit it and move on.

[-] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

There's no such thing as objectively good singer.

I'm gonna stop you right there, chief. Singing ability is measurable, and quantifiable. You absolutely can be objectively good or bad at it. This isn't a statement of personal taste, it's a matter of basic observation. It is possible to dislike a song, and conclude the singing is good. It's possible to like a song and conclude that the singing is bad.

You can be wrong about a person's singing ability if you are unable to separate your personal preferences for singing with an objective look at things like a singer's pitch control, consistency, emotionality, and flexibility.

Musical preference is a subjective thing, but musical theory is much less so.

With that said, Taylor Swift is objectively an excellent singer. I'm not a huge fan of her music, but I don't have to be to know that it's true.

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

I could say that singing ability differs between various things that can be called singing in various cultures, and anything depending on spectator's evaluation (pleasure) is subjective, but these are obvious, so whatever, hold a cookie

this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2024

1090 points (96.8% liked)

politics

19096 readers

1825 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