217
So, CNN didn't actually do any background checking to make sure they were talking to actual undecided group members.
It's run by a republican. It's right on brand for them.
I hate that "he owns a big rifle" is basically a dog whistle only associated with these troglodytes now. I like firearms myself, but I like human rights too. :(
the dumb thing is they didn't even need to bring up the gun photo. he posted plenty of pro trump shit that is convincing enough.
Right?! That was completely irrelevant.
It wasn't even a "big rifle", it was an AK and this was their reasoning:
An owner of such a weapon is unlikely to be undecided, as Kamala Harris has expressed support for banning assault weapons. Rosado's social media history, reviewed by MeidasTouch, reveals that he has been posting pro-Trump content for years.
She ain't banning shit, Trump's the one that was just banning shit on his own by executive order.
Like, not even talking about if she should or not, or if she says she will. It's just realistically not going to happen.
Also, "undecideds" are usually either people who don't know anything about the political landscape and blow with the wind or people who do that have issues they favor that don't neatly fall into the traditional alignments of the parties and haven't decided which issue is more salient in this election. It turns out this guy was a partisan, but someone that really likes guns and really likes reproductive choice would be a pretty mundane reason for someone to be "undecided".
The real world is a lot more nuanced - VT is a liberal stronghold but it's extremely pro (sensible) gun access and most of our politicians (including ye olde Bernie Sanders) have a much more moderate and nuanced view on gun ownership.
I hate this framing of "extreme" and "moderate".
Vermont is honestly on my short(er) list of places I'd prefer to move to if I needed to for exactly that reason.
Unfortunately they also salt their winter roads, which means it would destroy my classic cars no matter how hard I try to wash and undercoat them. So while it's "in the list", it's only a backup option.
CNN? You mean Faux Lite?
No shit.
A liar telling lies for his favorite liar, who would have though dishonest people would pull this kind of dishonest stunt for Trump.
Well damage done, just like they wanted.
Welp, some random guy on CNN just said he’s voting Trump so I guess he’s convinced me. Trump it is!
/s
The sad thing is that this is likely how some people’s thought process actually works 😬
Things are so bad for Trump that the diehard MAGA people are describing themselves as undecided?
this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
217 points (96.2% liked)
politics
18870 readers
3857 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.
- 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.
- 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