224
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2024
224 points (97.9% liked)
politics
19145 readers
4637 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
He was bad before, helped make the pandemic what it was (is), but this would have been a shining point in an otherwise terrible presidency. Like you said, it was an almost trope level question in crisis, one that any leader knows how to approach, and he went sideways. Anyone with any empathy towards others who supported him should have walked away then.
Literally two words like "stay strong" would have been infinitely better. And that was literally the very first thing that popped into my head. I'm sure I could come up with something a little more meaningful given a few seconds of thought.
I think the corporate news have done incalculable damage wrt trump but one of those things they've done is refused to present him for what he is - demented, a narcissist, and with strong sociopathic tendencies. That's not even addressing the adderall and/or coke. snif
The 'normalization' program is the default for a couple of reasons but they simply are unable to buck it AT ALL and he's so far off the scale of normal we get this disonnance between their reporting and what he is.
Personally I think the biggest issue beyond the obvious "this sure will get us a lot of views/clicks" is that some outlets try to maintain the perception of "balance"
"Well we CAN'T call them deranged maniacs hell-bent on destroying democracy, or people will say we're biased!"
"but sir, they ARE deranged maniacs hell-bent on destroying democracy"
"yes, but if we TELL people that, they'll decide we're biased"
Considering the NYT editor said that almost verbatim, I’d agree