1027

Something is wrong with this split-screen picture. On one side, former president Donald Trump rants about mass deportations and claims to have stopped "wars with France," after being described by his longest-serving White House chief of staff as a literal fascist. On the other side, commentators debate whether Vice President Kamala Harris performed well enough at a CNN town hall to "close the deal."

...

Let’s review: First, Harris was criticized for not doing enough interviews — so she did multiple interviews, including with nontraditional media. She was criticized for not doing hostile interviews — so she went toe to toe with Bret Baier of Fox News. She was criticized as being comfortable only at scripted rallies — so she did unscripted events, such as the town hall on Wednesday. Along the way, she wiped the floor with Trump during their one televised debate.

Trump, meanwhile, stands before his MAGA crowds and spews nonstop lies, ominous threats, impossible promises and utter gibberish. His rhetoric is dismissed, or looked past, without first being interrogated.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] themachine@lemm.ee 91 points 1 day ago

It’s obvious that there is a double standard but it’s too late to point it out.

Time is up.

If people are “undecided” they aren’t going to even consider media fairness or maybe even logic at this point.

It’s Donald Fuckin Trump. Rapist. Fascist. Liar. Cheat. Insert hundreds of other negatives and reasons why he should not have power and be in jail.

It’s voting time. That’s all that’s left. He won the media and the narrative enough to make it a race at all. Pointing it out now is fruitless - he got away with that shit for his purposes.

[-] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago

It has been pointed out for as long as Trump is running against any candidate but it didn't change a thing. If anything, the double standard only got worse over the years.

[-] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I was hopeful when media figures started to ask themselves how to better cover Trump after 2016. NPR and On The Media had some decent journalism panels where they dug into the problems with obeying long-standing rules/norms to cover a candidate that weaponizes them. I saw a possibility for real reflection and maybe a significant course correction. That door slammed shut like 2 fucking years ago, and they've played EXACTLY the same game over this campaign. I knew we were fucked when a reporter came on after the Biden-Trump debate to say, essentially, "...and some of Trump's supporters have claimed, without evidence, that Joe Biden has died."

That's it. That was the end of her coverage. They can't even bring themselves to open their eyes long enough to observe unequivocally THAT THE PRESIDENT IS NOT DEAD. If the American experiment fails, a shitload of blame will lay at the feet of the media, who have long since abandoned their pursuit of "T"ruth in favor of the toxoplasma of rage.

[-] FoxyFerengi@lemm.ee 12 points 1 day ago

I completely forgot about this until I read your comment. My grandmother whole-heartedly believed Biden was a clone or had been replaced by a doppelganger by the middle of his first year as President, and that he had died of covid. By then she had stopped watching FOX and moved on to OANN.

[-] Evil_incarnate@lemm.ee 16 points 1 day ago

It's weird that there's a person that you can call a liar, rapist and con man and not be afraid of being sued for libel or slander, and lots of people think he'll be great at running a country.

[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

It’s obvious that there is a double standard but it’s too late to point it out.

For this election, sure, but there is still a good reason to acknowledge the double standard that has been ongoing for decades now that it is comically blatant. It might be acknowledged by low information idiots in the future.

[-] orclev@lemmy.world -5 points 1 day ago

A lot of people are answering undecided on polls in protest over Harris support for the Israeli genocide but intend to actually vote for her due to the significantly worse threat posed by Trump. She could massively improve her polling numbers by just committing to stopping arms shipments to Israel and imposing sanctions on them.

[-] SolNine@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 day ago

This is highly unlikely to cause a statistically significant difference in the polls. Having this strong of a view point on the matter is largely isolated to a specific demographic of younger, progressive voters, who are notoriously difficult to reach and accurately account for via traditional polling methods.

It registers as the 15th most important issue via a Gallup poll, and that doesn't account for which "side" the individuals polled support.

Of the 30% of the population saying it is an "extremely important issue," it gives no indication of what their desired resolution is.

On the extreme end of the spectrum, consider that 30% of our nation is in a death cult that believes Israel plays a role in their eventual salvation, not to mention how many people are blatantly racist and view anyone with darker skin as a terrorist.

I am registered, politically active, not difficult to locate and have had the same phone number for 20 years, yet, I MIGHT have been polled once in that time!

This isn't to say there aren't those who are doing as they say, but it is not likely to move polls one way or another.

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 day ago

That's actually a pretty idiotic way to "protest."

Wow, we've got inaccurate polls. Good job?

[-] orclev@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Well, the poll is accurate in so much as they really don't "support" Harris and her policies. If we had a proportional voting system they would be voting for her near the middle of the pack with Trump of course in dead last. She's just the second worst choice between the two choices we're given.

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

She's just the second worst choice between the two choices we're given.

"Best choice". Seems way easier to say.

[-] Nougat@fedia.io 1 points 1 day ago

Arms deals to Israel are codified into law. President can’t just “stop” them.

Talk to Congress.

this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2024
1027 points (97.6% liked)

politics

19107 readers
3525 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS