this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023
589 points (96.4% liked)

politics

19148 readers
2683 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
 

Over the last few days as most of the media was blathering on about Joe Biden's "bad week," Donald Trump was stepping up his campaign and appearing at various venues saying things and behaving in ways that should have made journalists' ears perk up, wondering if he's lost more than a step. He was wildly dishonest and incredibly self-destructive — even for him.

It started with an interview with Megyn Kelly for her Sirius XM show last Thursday, the first since shortly after Trump crudely insulted her back in 2015 during the first presidential primary debate. Trump seemed to expect a friendly, Fox-like, interview and she gave him plenty of softballs and expressed her agreement with much of his nonsense. But she did ask some probing questions about his legal troubles and once again he more or less confessed to his crimes. He must have said the words "Presidential Records Act" a dozen times, reiterating over and over that he had every right to take any document he chose. And he slipped up continuously, providing the prosecution plenty of fodder:

When the special prosecutor presents this case to the jury they will be told exactly what is supposed to happen with classified documents and they will understand how utterly ridiculous it would be for a president to secretly declassify documents and not tell anyone that they've been declassified.

Over the weekend he spoke at the Christian right "Pray, Vote, Stand" summit in Washington and mocked President Biden mercilessly over his alleged mental unfitness and then said this:

The spooky background music and his bizarre delivery made that downright chilling. He also said:

Any normal person would have just corrected himself for misspeaking but he can never admit he did anything wrong so instead he twisted himself into a verbal pretzel that had it been delivered by Joe Biden would have resulted in a national call to check him into a nursing home immediately.

He later appeared at the Concerned Women for America conference and was a little bit sharper but repeated nonsense such as his silly claim that you need ID to buy a loaf of bread, another sign that he simply cannot retain information. He has certainly heard by now that this is silly and could easily substitute something like "you have to have ID to travel on an airplane" to make his point but he can't do that. Once he gets something like "low flow showers" or "windmills cause cancer" in his head there's no getting it out. That's not normal.

The final segment of his week-end odyssey was the highly anticipated interview on "Meet the Press" which was filmed earlier in the week. To say it was infuriating would be an understatement. As he always does, he ran circles around the show's new host, Kristen Welker, and basically made a mockery of American democracy by demonstrating that an incoherent con artist is going to be the Republican nominee for president — again.

For every viewer who saw that he was completely unfit to be president there is another who got lost in the overwhelming rush of words, or what's known to rhetoricians as "the Gish Gallop," a tactic designed to "defeat one's opponent by burying them in a torrent of incorrect, irrelevant, or idiotic arguments."

And he once again showed he is completely oblivious to the legal damage he is doing to himself every time he agrees to answer questions about his cases. Here he confesses that he only listened to lawyers who told him what his own "instincts" told him was true. When pressed he says that the decision about whether the election was rigged was his alone, although he dances away from Welker's question about whether he was "calling the shots."

Watching these events is intensely frustrating and I think it's even more difficult to watch now than before. Trump is no longer a first-time candidate taking the political press by surprise. Neither is he the president whose office confers such immense power that even a dolt like Trump is automatically given more deference than he deserves. Today he is just another candidate for president and he doesn't deserve to be treated with any more respect than any of the others. In fact, he deserves less since he is a criminal defendant in four different cases and was recently found liable for sexual assault to the tune of $5 million.

The man sat in all the interviews and appearances and made it crystal clear that he believes he is above the law. In fact, with his endless blathering about how he can do whatever he wants with classified documents, he makes it clear that he believes he is the law. And yet, the befuddled yet eager media is treating Donald Trump with the same consideration they always did, before they knew how disordered and his mind was and what a danger he is to American democracy and the rule of law.

I had thought after the widely criticized CNN Trump town hall everyone understood that you simply cannot allow Trump to ramble incoherently to cover for his unwillingness to answer the questions. They have to find another way to cover him. And yet there he was this weekend on "Meet The Press" doing exactly that. And in spite of the interview being pre-taped, they aired it as if it was live and only put a fact-check on their website after the fact. For every viewer who saw that he was completely unfit to be president there is another who got lost in the overwhelming rush of words, or what's known to rhetoricians as "the Gish Gallop," a tactic designed to "defeat one's opponent by burying them in a torrent of incorrect, irrelevant, or idiotic arguments." That's what Trump does, however unconsciously, and the media aids and abets him by treating him as if he's just another politician.

The Guardian's Margaret Sullivan wrote about this problem last week:

Trump is covered mostly as an entertaining sideshow – his mugshot! His latest insults! – not a perilous threat to democracy, despite four indictments and 91 charges against him, and despite his own clear statements that his re-election would bring extreme anti-democratic results; he would replace public servants with the cronies who'll do his bidding. "We will look back on this and wish more people had understood that Biden is our bulwark of democratic freedoms and the alternative is worse than most Americans can imagine," commented Ruth Ben-Ghiat, author of Strongmen, and an expert in authoritarian regimes.

She says the solution for journalists is simpler than we think:

Remember at all times what our core mission is: to communicate truthfully, keeping top of mind that we have a public service mission to inform the electorate and hold powerful people to account. If that's our north star, as it should be, every editorial judgment will reflect that. Headlines will include context, not just deliver political messaging. Overall politics coverage will reflect "not the odds, but the stakes", as NYU's Jay Rosen elegantly put it. Lies and liars won't get a platform and a megaphone.

I wish I had more confidence that this would happen. At this point, I think we just have to fervently hope that there are enough people in this country who can see through that cacophony of BS and vote as if their future depends upon him never holding office again — because it does.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Ok, ok, now look...

There are/were a fuckload of people that hate[ed] Hillary as a candidate for president.

I was one. (I wanted Bernie, fwiw.)

I knew Trump was a dipshit dumpster-fire that would never rise to the station of the office, but holy shit, I never expected Hillary to lose to him, and voted Jack Johnson because it reminded me of the Futurama episode.

Apparently, I wasn't alone, given the shitload of people who protest voted, wrote-in Darth Vader, or fucked up and voted Green Party.

Either way, we fucked up. Bad.

Also, I believe there is a large swath of previously-ignorant voters that just thought Drumpfsterfire would manage to act like an adult once behind the Resolute Desk. My mother was one. I didn't believe that, but I hoped, and I sang along with the South Park kids with "Put It [Twitter/Phone] Down."

At least my mother didn't require much reprogramming .

They were wrong. I was wrong. My poor, impressionable, boomer mother was wrong, and she laments it daily.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It is really sad when you cant vote for the people who best represent your interests because then the orange nazi gets elected.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's a big reason why we need ranked choice or approval voting. This way, you could vote for the third party candidates that you like the most and still include a major party candidate as a fallback.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Right on.

But I think people have to get used to using it for smaller, less important things first ."What restaurant should we go to?" And such like. Otherwise the entrenched interests it would oust have easy FUD ammo against it.

For that smaller stuff the mechanics of the system bog people down, so simple voting's easy count wins in the calories/decision evaluation. Maybe some apps that make it easy to do would be helpful. Or some popular board games using it as a mechanic. Discussion forum comment rankings based on it?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

It's sad but it was also perfectly well known at the time that that's exactly how it works.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

The rich and powerful will always have their thumb on the scales. It's been true for every society in human history and will remain true for every society to come. No system is immune from corruption. You've just got to pick the least bad option and fight for every milimetre that you can whenever the opportunity presents itself.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I was similar to you. I hated Hillary as a candidate - wished for Bernie instead as well - and I hated Trump too. The only Republican nominee I thought reasonable at all was Kasich. I was very conflicted. As I explained to my wife, Hillary is the devil we know whereas Trump is a complete wildcard. He was clearly an idiot but I find it hard to believe anyone could have predicted just how awful he would prove to be. So in the end despite hating Hillary we voted for her. She was certainly far more qualified. I can't help but believe a whole lot of others would have voted for any other Democrat but her.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Damn, i mean, i fucking supported Bernie and i hated Clinton but voted for her anyway because that was the only fucking logical thing to do.