37
top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] dugmeup@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago

Good people of Lemmy, news is news.

Stop down voting news. Please.

Don't force Lemmy to become the echo chamber that led to the great MAGA divide

[-] downhomechunk@midwest.social 12 points 8 months ago

You mean that down arrow isn't an "I don't like this so I don't want to see it" button?

/s

[-] MyNamesNotRobert@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

If a news article gets downvoted hard enough, the event in question gets cancelled. Trust me bruh.

[-] jeffw@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I upvote news. I downvote when someone attempts to post the same article 3 times within a few hours (edit: okay, 3 posts over 6 hours, but that’s still a lot in one community about the same topic)

[-] return2ozma@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

It's me, hi, I'm the problem, it's me.

But yes, it's turning into Reddit's politics echo chamber where any bad Trump news is at the top and anything critical of the actual party that can do something for us gets downvoted to hell.

[-] idiomaddict@feddit.de 1 points 8 months ago

If it helps, the votes are completely irrelevant outside of that post

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 12 points 8 months ago

Moreno's work email was linked to a short-lived profile that sought "Men for 1-on-1 sex" on an adult dating website in 2008.

Sounds on brand with Republican males.

[-] return2ozma@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Where have I heard this pied piper strategy before?

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 12 points 8 months ago

Yeah, there's totally no risk with this strategy and I can't think of any time this went horribly wrong in the past.

[-] jeffw@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

You can think of a couple times it went horribly wrong, but if we’re objective and look at the track record, it worked pretty well for dems in ‘20 and ‘22

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 months ago

It also worked extremely "well" in 2016 where the Hillary campaign was able to position Trump as the GOP nominee and leverage that vulnerability to lose an election. DNC political consultants ah wicked smaht.

[-] Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Two big differences though: 1. Right now the practical benefit of having a moderate instead of an extreme GOP senator from Ohio are very small. In the end, all GOP senators will vote with the crazies. That’s of course completely different for the presidency. 2. Dems are very unlikely to win Ohio and need every advantage they can get.

I think in this case the risky strategy is completely warranted whereas in 2016 it was just stupid.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

it was the best strategy. the absolute best.

So much better than any strategy that has ever come before.

(excuse me while I bleach my keyboard)

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

Two years ago, the party spent money on ads propping up MAGA chuds like this, then gleefully cut the funds of progressive candidates like Michelle Vallejo in the general.

Democrats' leadership prefers the hard right fringe of the opposing party to progressive candidates within its own.

[-] JoBo@feddit.uk 5 points 8 months ago

They did it with Trump in 2016. That and a few more examples here.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 8 months ago

Because this strategy worked so well with cheetoh-boy. Couldn't read it. Paywalled. Oh well.

[-] lando55@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

Site is cancer anyways.

Trump's preferred candidate just won the Ohio GOP Senate primary — and Democrats are thrilled

Bernie Moreno, a former car dealership owner, won the GOP Senate primary in Ohio on Tuesday.

It's a victory not just for Trump, but for Democrats, who spent $3.1 million in the final days of the race on TV and digital ads designed to boost Moreno's profile with GOP primary voters.

It was the latest example of a tried-and-true tactic that Democrats have employed in recent years, meddling in GOP primaries to try to elevate the candidate who they believe they're most likely to beat.

Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican who endorsed Dolan, called Moreno the "weakest candidate" in the race after the Democratic spending became public.

Related stories

Moreno scored Trump's endorsement months ago, but had faced tougher than expected competition from State Sen. Matt Dolan, a more Trump-skeptical candidate. Frank LaRose, the current Ohio Secretary of State, came in third.

It was enough to convince Trump to travel to Dayton for a rally, where he made the now-infamous "bloodbath" comments.

In the final days of the race, Moreno and Trump's allies relied primarily on the former president's endorsement in making his case to GOP primary voters.

"President Trump wants Bernie," South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem told rally attendees on Saturday, saying the endorsement "should be enough reason" for them to support Moreno. "You're gonna want President Trump in Ohio a lot. He's gonna come here a lot if you get Bernie to be the victor on Tuesday."

But Moreno is emerging from the contentious primary with potential vulnerabilities.

In the final days of the race, the Associated Press reported that Moreno's work email was linked to a short-lived profile that sought "Men for 1-on-1 sex" on an adult dating website in 2008.

Moreno's campaign has blamed the incident on a prank by an intern, and his high-profile supporters have largely dismissed the story as a smear.

The former car dealership owner has also faced several lawsuits stemming from his time in the industry, including being sanctioned by a Massachusetts judge for shredding documents that may have been relevant to a wage theft lawsuit he was facing.

[-] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 months ago

Most of the people trump has endorsed have fallen face first, the orange pissant won due to an archaic election system that doesnt exist for any other office. Not to say there arent other problems mind you.

this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2024
37 points (77.6% liked)

politics

19096 readers
1999 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