They're useful tools, as is the Lincoln Project, for example. Once the existential threat in Trump is gone it'll be back to business as usual and their MO will be "oppose meaningful change without enabling a monster to take advantage of us again" again in no time. Trump is such a unique and unhinged threat that they resent what they've created, and in an equally unique moment of self reflection, created the Never Trump movement. But longtime allies to leftists, or even liberals for that matter, they absolutely are not. There's no ambiguity around it.

1: You are "poking the bear" because everything you post to this community is pursuant to getting Harris to lose the election, either through pro-PSL or Green articles (via the Spoiler Effect), or through explicitly anti-Harris articles. That's the pattern behind your posts, it obviously doesn't matter how reputable a source is to you so long as you can flood Lemmy with this content. "Take it up with them" is a copout for your behavior because you choose to post their articles here.

2: You clearly don't know what astroturfing even means. What could pro-Harris posts even astroturf for?

3: Repeatedly posting articles about getting Harris to lose the election and arguing in bad faith in defense of why that's actually good for advancing socialism in the US is toxic because it's literally incorrect. And when pointed out, you say you don't actually think a second Trump term would be all that bad for you. It's patently obvious what you're trying to do on here, you're trying to get leftists on board with neo-fascism and accelerationism to enrich yourself.

For everyone else reading, this is the mask off moment of this poster's true intentions with the incessant propaganda.

Screaming hot take, apparently: If you know about Project 2025 and are fine that it might actually happen if Trump wins because it won't affect you, then you just might be a horrible person.

You need to go back on your meds

OP posts anti-Biden articles like it's their job so if an article says he's not enough of a Christian for secular office it's fair game so long as it makes him look bad.

Unfortunately not a new pattern in auto racing - tobacco and later crypto sponsorship out in the open. Sketchy shit, and every "attempt" to ban harmful advertising has loopholes that completely circumvents the initiative. See: Mission Winnow (Marlboro) and whatever Sauber's title sponsor even is.

E Jean Carroll

Yeah, I don't usually like arguing semantics but the serotonin thing grinds my gears since there's so many causes and treatments to depression and serotonin isn't even involved in many situations.

No

He doesn't just "give a platform to everybody" for the sake of free speech, that's not how free speech works when you're a host and/ or owner of a media company. He hosts a certain crowd because he wants to. It's his show.

Literally all media is biased. If someone tells you that they are unbiased or if some other show is, they are lying. Rogan is friendly to capitalism and drug legalization, and there's nothing wrong in disclosing it (even if I don't personally agree with the former).

Yeah, the wording of OP's question is dumb for this reason. What person on this planet has done literally only evil things? A better question would be more like "What billionaire is genuinely a good person and why?" Personally the size of my list of "overall good" billionaires is a rounding error but at least the thread would be more interesting.