this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
1029 points (97.8% liked)

politics

18870 readers
3738 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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
 

She set a tone at the very start when she walked right into his space to shake his hand and made him almost pull back into himself in response. She was in charge and never stopped being in charge. 

Harris also managed what neither Joe Biden nor Hillary Clinton nor any of the 2016 Republicans managed to do which is successfully bait Donald Trump and get under his skin. Within a few minutes Trump was visibly angry and not in a way that empowered him but in a way that made him lose focus, go down rabbit holes and generally go off onto damaging tangents. Spittle anger, not righteous anger, shall we say.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 16 points 6 days ago (1 children)

And yet, none of it will matter because anyone who had even been considering voting for the racist cheeto is infinitely entrenched and bound by their own logic.

[–] jhymesba@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

Indeed, and note that Harris didn't even attempt to go after his voters. The target is the middle and the squishy left, a reminder of what the stakes are in this election. She made it clear he was a petulant child, only caring about himself and the things important to him, and invited voters who want someone who doesn't just care about themselves to come out and vote for her.

Hopefully it's effective, because Trump has Project 2025 ready to go, despite his lies saying he knows nothing about it.

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 16 points 6 days ago

This headline, it makes Vladimir feel very jealous, da?

[–] chemicalprophet@lemm.ee 1 points 6 days ago

But anyone with a fifth grade education or better could have at any time…

[–] jasonkozdra@lemmy.world 0 points 6 days ago
[–] MisterCrisper@lemmy.world 225 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Kamala Harris dominated the debate despite the fact that she was given about 5 minutes less time to speak!

It's disappointing to see how the media invariably accommodates Trump. Contrary to the rules of the debate, when Trump continued talking after his time was up or demanded to respond to a point Harris made, they often let him by not muting his microphone. This added up to right around 5 minutes of extra speaking time on prime time television for him to spew his lies. The one time Harris tried the same thing she was shut down by the moderators. If there is any silver lining here it's that Trump probably made his debate performance worse by talking more!

I was glad to see some push back and fact checking by the moderators in regards to Trump's most egregious lies. Today MAGA is complaining that the debate was rigged and the moderators were against Trump due to the fact checks while they should be thanking ABC for the special treatment that allowed Trump extra air time.

Go Harris/Walz!

On the other hand, she actually originally requested his mic not be muted, probably because she knew he'd hang himself.

[–] Infynis@midwest.social 118 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The one time Harris tried the same thing she was shut down by the moderators.

And she didn't even put up with that. She just waited until her next turn, went back, said her part, and then answered the new question. Trump was basically incoherent by comparison

[–] Landless2029@lemmy.world 84 points 1 week ago (6 children)

And she only did it to counter a bold face lie he said about herself.
Not 10 minutes before she stated that she did not ban fracking, will not ban fracking and made the tie breaking vote in favor of fracking.
But he still says "shes going to ban fracking if elected" like dude WTH. Are you paying attention?

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Cornpop@lemmy.world 157 points 1 week ago (1 children)

As soon as she said small crowd size and low energy people leaving early he lost it lol

[–] Bustedknuckles@lemmy.world 80 points 1 week ago (8 children)

It was such obvious bait, I was a bit shocked that he took it!

[–] CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world 86 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

I wasn’t shocked at all (except the general shock that a person like this has ever come close to the presidency). Particularly in recent years, I’ve seen him take bait so many times which wasn’t even intended as bait, but it triggered him. And because it slightly grazed his fragile ego, priority number one for him is to go on an ego-defending tangent that only confuses and undermines any points he could have made about the actual topic.

Harris knew that as long as she peppered her responses with a trigger here and a trigger there, he would be unable to help himself every time. And that’s what we saw.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 157 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (46 children)

As one who is 100% on the democratic side, I think Harris obviously won the debate.
But I'm very curious about what Republicans think? Do they think Trump made a good response saying he didn't need a plan because he isn't president?
I was a bit disappointed Harris didn't attack him on the fact that it's been more than 8 years now since Trump said he would come up with a better healthcare plan. Stressing the 8 years, and the result being still nothing. So a concept of a plan for Trump seems to mean he has NOTHING!

But still, do Republicans view this as Trump did OK?

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 121 points 1 week ago (9 children)

From what I've been seeing around the internet, Republicans are convinced that the debate was rigged. Harris was given the questions in advance, the moderators were biased, etc. etc.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 137 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So they are making excuses for Trump, which can only mean they could see that he lost.

I also heard that Trump was alone against 3. I guess because they called out a couple of his lies, especially the insane bit about emigrants eating peoples pets in Ohio.

So apparently some Republicans are not happy with how he did in the debate.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 89 points 1 week ago (1 children)

She actually prepared for the debate! And she's actually competent at this sort of thing! Totally rigged!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] 2pt_perversion@lemmy.world 91 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (11 children)

I checked twitter. Generally they think Trump won. They also think the moderators were a Harris' team and it was 3 vs 1. They think he owned her with the "I'm talking now" line. There's also a conspiracy theory that Harris was wearing earrings with speakers in them.

But no debate was going to change the mind of people already in the maga cult anyway.

For 'undecided' voters I've seen this didn't move the needle much but Harris was slightly ahead.

The biggest win is probably for already dem leaning voters being more excited to get out and vote rather than not voting - especially with Taylor Swift encouraging them to register and vote now.

The main thing I think is that she demonstrated she can hold her own.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (44 replies)
[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 105 points 1 week ago (22 children)

I'm still stuck on this thing about how undocumented immigrants are coming to America to eat dogs and cats, but in the process are being forcibly sent to American Prisons which are actually a front for experimental sex changing drugs creating a squad of latinas-who-used-to-be-latinos with the goal of sending them to dominate women's sports, and the existence of transpeople like myself are an elaborate hoax to manufacture consent for this program.

Do I understand that correctly, that is actually what Donald Trump unironically believes?

[–] Triasha@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

He can't hold a thought that coplicated in his head.

load more comments (21 replies)
[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 99 points 1 week ago (20 children)

The mood in r/conservative seems to be fairly in agreement with this headline. Kind of delicious to creep on lol

load more comments (20 replies)
[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 96 points 1 week ago
[–] scops@reddthat.com 83 points 1 week ago (10 children)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›