44
The polls are suggesting a huge shift in the electorate. Are they right? | Politico
(www.politico.com)
this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2024
44 points (77.5% liked)
News
23300 readers
3423 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Genocide AND human decency VS an end to democracy and just not caring about anyone outside the border short of a migrant caravan.
I think you left off the part of the second candidate encouraging more genocide along with ending democracy.
Not encouraging, just not standing in the way of it happening.
no one is promising to end democracy
Didn't one candidate say they would literally be a dictator..."but only on day one." I find it hard to trust anyone who ways they'd be a dictator any amount of time, and then stop. Dictatorship and democracy are polar opposites.
with the rise of executive power from executive orders, every president is a dictator say one, rolling back previous administration policy and implementing their own.
That's not what a dictatorship is. A dictatorship is where one person (the dictator) has almost complete control over the government with few, if any, restrictions. Executive orders can only be within the President's authority, and can also be overturned by Congress or the Supreme Court. To link executive orders to a dictatorship shows a misunderstanding of executive orders, dictatorships, or both.
Also, in the quote of being a "dictator for just one day," executive orders were not mentioned, if I remember correctly. And no democratic President should ever think of themselves as a dictator or wish they were one.
no one is accusing trump of being a knowledgeable statesman.
That was actually you who linked them, not him. And they shouldn't be linked. Executive orders are not a dictatorship. But let's say he meant, even though he's famous for saying what he means with no filter.
Even after campaigning for it, holding the office for 4 years, presumably keeping an eye on his successor for 4 years, and now campaigning for it again? You'd think he'd know the basics of what is a democracy, what is a dictatorship, what executive orders do, and what do the different branches of government roughly do...you know, the basics that were taught in middle school, and elaborated on in high school. These aren't niche laws or obscure cases we're talking about, but what should be common sense to the common man...much more so for someone who's running for the job. Willful ignorance is not an excuse, especially at that level...if that's what this is.
i think he's a dummy, and he may be operating on my folksy definition of "dictator". my assumption is just as valid as yours.
so it's dumb to say it that way, but i don't believe he ever said he's planning to "end democracy" or even meant to imply that.
they are literally creating policy by dictate. your pet definition seems crafted to exclude this obvious use of dictate.
Someone who "dictates" is not necessarily a dictator. These are not my "pet definitions" but accepted definitions of what a dictator/dictatorship is in the political sphere. It's called context.
No one in the government should say "I'm going to dictate policy that I have control over, but this policy can be overturned by the other two branches. Thus, I'm a dictator." That's not what that word means. You are trying to use a nonspecific definition out of context to justify defending a wannabe dictator.
can you substantiate this claim, that governing by dictate is not an accepted definition"in the political sphere". while we're on it, what do you define as "the political sphere"?
Because it's context. No, I don't think there's an official "when talking about X, only this definition of this word can mean this" book. But I honestly feel like you're arguing in bad faith or being obtuse on purpose. For example, I feel like you're arguing "a bad story came out about republicans...how do we know they meant members of the GOP? One definition is "favoring, supporting, or advocating a republic," so just maybe they're talking about people who like the game (or characters in) Star Wars: The Old Republic... that's about republics, and they never mentioned party...now that we're on about parties, maybe they meant a rave?"
If you're not doing that on purpose, let me assure you that when people are talking about a leader of a government (as the President is) and the word "dictator" comes up about them, no one ever means merely someone who dictates. They always mean leader of a dictatorship.
Relating to politics, especially members of/in charge of politics.
Insurrecting against a country because they voted for someone else is a pretty solid promise on its own.
Yes, along with hundreds of other facts.
He literally told you he would not accept the election results unless he won. You have every reason to believe he was and is trying to overthrow the government, but you are deliberately ignoring them.
"All the evidence is fake" only works on you far right guys.
Nah