this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
726 points (97.0% liked)

politics

19135 readers
2248 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

All due respect but I think this frames the debate in the wrong context:

  • Trump performed as expected, and remains the same if not better in the polls.
  • Biden performed FAR worse than expected, and not only had a poor debate performance, he confirmed to 50 million people what was already shown to be on their minds, an immutable vice called not just age but senility.

This notion that, "If we just cover One More Scandal, we'll get him this time!" to me is the definition of insanity.

So the real question we must all ask ourselves is this: How do you convince the low-info apathetic battleground swing-state voters who hate both candidates and will decide this election? So far, Biden has only lost them as his Presidency has gone on, and to me, that debate sealed the deal.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This notion that, “If we just cover One More Scandal, we’ll get him this time!” to me is the definition of insanity.

It's not about "this time we'll get him" it's about objective reporting. Trump was expected to lie is NOT a reason to not shout from the rooftops that he's lying.

How do you convince the low-info apathetic battleground swing-state voters who hate both candidates and will decide this election?

Nothing but lots of hope. Facts and logic sure ain't doing it.

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

But let's be clear: they both are being covered simultaneously. The difference is (1) Media knows where people are at, and it being covered won't even change much, as I already pointed out while (2) the only thing that CAN change is for the other guy who we expect to hold the moral high road and recognize the right course of action to change.

I think it's far, far less likely that an undecided low-info swing voter goes, "Wow, I saw Trump lie again. That's one lie too far. I'm going Biden." than it is, "Wow, a fresh face of the Democratic party who isn't ancient; sure let's try something different."

Nothing but lots of hope. Facts and logic sure ain’t doing it.

Well, I appreciate your candor.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago

Well, I appreciate your candor.

🙂