Election 2024 Part III: Out with the old!

[Birdjaguar]

Bezos cancelled the paper's long endorsement tradition of making an immanent endorsement of Harris because he did not want to offend Trump.

 

[Gorbles]

But we all need to wage the obese crusade.

Three for three!

 

[Joij21]

But often the real reasons they like Trump is because they were already (quoting you), "a Bigot, racist, sexist,

So you don't believe it's possible for a Democrat to change party affiliation let alone change their vote without them first always being a bigot, racist, and sexist beforehand?

 

[lymond]

Why?
And a followup: Why is it important that Washington Post endorse someone?

to me, it sounds like Bezos recognizes that it isn't in the interest of a paper to side with their readers...or at least, to try and side with what it thinks its readers want...

1) Bezos has owned the paper for about 10 years in its 150 year history
2) He's being a coward cause he fears reprisals from Trump, if he wins. Trump has threatened everybody.
3) The endorsement is from the Editorial Staff. They've been blocked by Bezos

And lastly, it is imperative that every institution with the power and voice to do so stand against the clownshow and imminent danger of a second Donald Trump presidency.

 

[Takhisis]

the US is (…) NOT a democracy.

Yeah, we know that.

 

[choxorn]

Why?
And a followup: Why is it important that Washington Post endorse someone?

to me, it sounds like Bezos recognizes that it isn't in the interest of a paper to side with their readers...or at least, to try and side with what it thinks its readers want...

It's not, in the grand scheme of things, that important that newspapers endorse candidates and there's reasonable arguments to be made that they shouldn't be endorsing anyone ever, but the fact that the decision was made this close to the election, and the reasons why the decision was made, is what makes it bad. Bezos doesn't care what's in the best interest of the Post, he just cares that it gives him money and personal influence.

 

[Takhisis]

Trump is almost an 2:1 favorite by now..not looking good.

Who's placing the bets? (not that they're always a reliable indicator anyway)

 

[Farm Boy]

Three for three!

<waves> Hi, oh reader of wonders.

 

[Ajidica]

Let me get this straight: Democrat voters are boycotting a newspaper for....not taking sides, for being neutral?

I mean, that's what media are supposed to be.

Yes, we should all aspire to be as neutral as Solomon and cut the baby in half.
Would it be neutral for a newspaper reporting on the Russian army shelling its way through Ukraine to include Russian claims of Ukrainian bioweapon labs and Ukrainian NATO-nazis - in the interest of being neutral?

I'm not sure how the Editorial section works in European papers, but in America, the Editorial / Opinion section of the newspaper is separate from the newsroom. It is similar to a lawyer giving a closing argument to the jury. The independent newsroom reports on the facts with independence, fairness, and neutrality. The Editorial team fits it into a closing argument ' what does it all mean'.

 

[Ajidica]

BTW, the US is a "Constitutional Republic", NOT a democracy.
Yes Virginia, there IS a difference, and a reason for it.

The Dominion of Canada is also, well, a Dominion of the British Crown; but somehow I don't think you are particularly bothered by what an elderly inbred German thinks about your pretty-boy Prime Minister putting on blackface, or said elderly German's program for the Dominion is.

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

1) Bezos has owned the paper for about 10 years in its 150 year history
2) He's being a coward cause he fears reprisals from Trump, if he wins. Trump has threatened everybody.
3) The endorsement is from the Editorial Staff. They've been blocked by Bezos

And lastly, it is imperative that every institution with the power and voice to do so stand against the clownshow and imminent danger of a second Donald Trump presidency.

See this just sounds like you're owed something for subscribing to a newspaper by having them validate your opinions.

I imagine WaPo would have still given you the same news as always without printing Trump propaganda pieces. But obviously you don't feel that that's as important. Alright then.

 

[Strong Reaction]

Trump denies knowing comedian who told crude joke about Puerto Rico: 'I have no idea who he is’

Former President Trump sits down with Fox News Sean Hannity to discuss the controversy over a joke a comedian told about Puerto Rico at his Madison Square Garden rally.

www.foxnews.com

So awesome that Trump immediately throws Hinchcliffe under the bus. Its entirely plausible that he does not know him, but given that he was just on Rogan's show Joe had to have something to do with getting Hinchcliffe the MSG rally gig.

This is golden too,

"I don't even know who put him in, and I can't imagine it's a big deal. I've done more for Puerto Rico than any president I think that's ever – that's ever been president," Trump claimed.

Fact: when ever Trump makes a hyperbolic claim, i.e. best ever, greatest event in the history of mankind etc. its a guaranteed lie, but everyone knows that don't they?

 

[Sommerswerd]

So you don't believe it's possible for a Democrat to change party affiliation let alone change their vote without them first always being a bigot, racist, and sexist beforehand?

*sigh* Are you effing serious?!?

I'm going to go back to reading all the thoughtful comments on the thread (thanks @Akka and @Gorbles and @Birdjaguar ) and thinking about thoughtful ways I can respond, comment, thank them, etc.

This thread is having a really good discussion. Your post is just... I'll just say it's not contributing and leave it at that.

 

[reddishrecue]

Wow.. Kamala Harris has a lot of votes here Idk who could've won. I voted too early to tell.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Don't worry, you're far from being the only one.

I'm not worried. I miss things sometimes. I'm wrong sometimes. I offend sometimes. I enjoy discussing things with all of you because I learn from it. I'm enriched by it. I'm not worried about being wrong. I'd be more worried if I was thinking that I was never wrong. Then I'd be worried about what I was missing. Thinking you're right all the time indicates a high probability that you're missing something.

 

[SemiLazyGamer]

See this just sounds like you're owed something for subscribing to a newspaper by having them validate your opinions.

I imagine WaPo would have still given you the same news as always without printing Trump propaganda pieces. But obviously you don't feel that that's as important. Alright then.

This isn't the problem. The problem is the rich having an oversized effect on our elections.

it's also kind of hypocritical especially since WaPo has had the tagline "Democracy Dies In Darkness" for years.

 

[Strong Reaction]

Wow.. Kamala Harris has a lot of votes here Idk who could've won. I voted too early to tell.

I did too, and even though some time has passed I still don't have a good read on who will win.

 

[Kyriakos]

Garbage day ^^

prompted by Biden, who simply isn't good with words at all:

"I don't know the Puerto Rican that I know, or Puerto Rico where I'm, in my home-state of Delaware, they are good, decent honorable people, the only garbage I see floating there is his supporters".
In other words, Biden very likely didn't mean to phrase it like this.

 

[Voidwalkin]

Our country is split between people who think you should be mindful of social inequities when you speak and those who don't want to be expected to do that.

I personally believe it'd be more accurate to say many often don't agree that the censorious are mindful to begin with.

Most of those the censorousimpact will never be censored nor criticized directly. They don't register accounts. On nearly any online forum, a ratio of at least 5/1 reader/poster is present.

When X rebukes Y with an ism over a matter shrouded in ambiguity, though, all the readers sympathetic to Y's position are similarly offended.

For an example: on other forums I was present on in Sanders running against Clinton, accusations Sanders was sexist or racist were not unheard of. They were often spurious and made not simply about him, but his voters.

I remember reading, just reading, the comments on a Guardian article that made that case. It got very ugly. Toxic, truthfully.

At a certain point, if the likes of Bernie Sanders cannot successfully navigate those seas without those accusations, one begins to wonder if the problem is the captain, or the sea itself. The pieties, the groupthink, the conventions, at any break with dogma, it was attack, attack, attack, and usually with the perilous danger -isms that jeopardize continued membership in the group.

I still see those crop up from time to time, even on subreddits not particularly far left.

It has the effect of shocking the internal narrative many readers have about the left. In that state, long-held beliefs are prone to be discarded more than typical. It's often the only time such discarding occurs. I call this left-skepticism: belief in the moral authority is damaged. From there, some return. Many view a right wing youtuber and think "ya know, those people I knew before have gotten toxic and dogmatic, I no longer feel secure there, I have no trust, and I'm turning to these people who I believe more likely to accept me". That'd be that.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I've noticed that Trump lovers never talk about Trump. All they talk and post about is how bad Biden is. I guess that they don't realize that Biden isn't running for president. Perhaps they are not so bright.