408
Fox News buried Mike Pence’s refusal to endorse Donald Trump
(www.mediamatters.org)
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 19 Mar 2024
408 points (97.4% liked)
politics
18992 readers
4283 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.
- 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.
- 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
Actions like this create such a huge problem when trying to convince conservatives that Donald Trump is a unique and unprecedented danger.
It's one thing when I, a progressive, say that I did not like the most recent Republican president. My conservative neighbors expect me to say that, and therefore ignore the criticism. But it's not just me saying that; it's also Mike Pence, John Bolton, John Kelly, Bill Barr, and Chris Christie. That is a unique level of criticism leveled at their own party's president. But my conservative neighbors don't know that.
Trump has been called "dangerous" by his own:
yet your typical Republican voter will insist that it's just people on the left disliking a Republican president, just like any other Republican president.
Someone may comment that we all live in our own echo chambers, but the damn near impenetrable conservative bubble has no equivalence on the left. If conservative media doesn't want their audience to know something, conservatives will not know it.
If they're anything like the people in my town, they will just say that those advisors are all RINOs and not real Republicans
Trump seems pretty good at appointing RINOs to advisory positions.
This, and as far as I can tell, the only way to avoid being called a RINO is to completely eschew any kind of critical thinking and absolutely toe the party line regardless of how asinine or nonsensical.
I can think of a few other ways to avoid being called a RINO that doesn't involve abandoning critical thinking or toeing the Republican party line. Tacking a "(D)" behind your name, for example.
The don't thing is that the term RINO was initially coined for people exactly like Trump.
There's a pretty big left-bubble when it comes to the laws governing the use of force in self defense.
Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, Ryan Gainer, Michael Brown... Challenging the consensus (even with video evidence and legal citation) invites insults, threats, comment removal, bans...
I'd put that bubble up against the "Trump" echo chamber any day of the week.
Edit: That vote count demonstrates my point.
Disagreement is completely different from what I was talking about. People on the left are aware of the fact that those individuals claimed self defense; most disagree that it should have counted as self-defense. The fact that you saw their opinions in the first place -- and they saw yours -- shows that. If you think their opinion is wrong, or if they are too unwelcoming to your opinion, that's a separate issue. I'm not even talking about the merits of either argument here, I'm talking about the fact that people on the left at least tend to know what point they are disagreeing with. Non-conservative news outlets will at least report "George Zimmerman Claims Self-Defense," or "Popular Progressive Politician Receives Criticism from Own Party." Right-leaning news outlets outright shelter their audiences from such information.
In my experience of trying to reach out to conservatives, as our culture of respectful disagreement expects me to, I am constantly blown away by the fact that a typical conservative has no idea what the objection to their worldview even is. Trump got elected almost eight years ago at this point, and they will still drop something like, "So what exactly do you people not like about him?"
There are levels to echo chambers. America's Republican voters are sheltered in an iron dome, where dissenting ideas don't even get in at all.
I'm not talking about disagreement. I'm talking about contrary opinions and arguments being actively suppressed in left-leaning forums.
I'm talking about posts and comments being removed, solely because the expressed opinion is unpopular among leftists. I'm talking about people being quietly suspended or banned for suggesting a jury's not-guilty verdict was appropriate.
No, I am not referring to simple disagreement. I'm referring to the left being broadly sheltered from dissent on self defense laws, which is deeply troubling, because legal professionals and informed, layperson jurors regularly side with those dissenting opinions.
We don't even see the self defense laws in left-leaning states drifting toward the opinions held on the left, but presenting their current state is essentially a bannable offense in left-leaning forums.
I stand by my assertion that the left's position on self defense is a massive echo chamber.