When Obama elected to reinflate the housing bubble rather than provide affordable housing it set the stage for biden's loss. But the modern housing bubble began with Clinton.
It continued through multiple neoliberal administrations because those people value markets over anything else.
They were tricked by a propaganda machine. They may have been willing participants but had they known everything they never would have voted against their own interests. Yet every country in the western hemisphere, South America, Africa, Asia, and well everywhere doesn't have anti propaganda laws. If you're rich you can buy influence in any neo liberal country. Why is that?
Swisscows is still around. Good alternative
In the US it's legal for corporations to create propaganda outlets which stream nonstop lies designed to get sensitive individuals to vote fascists. It's impossible to have democratic elections and have completely disinformed and propagandized voters. Yet even after killing hundreds of thousands of conservative voters the courts have sided with the propaganda outlets.
Democratic values work really well. Things like public education, transparency laws, public discourse, and campaign finance reform all have been good for society. And it's why the conservatives (and to some extent the Liberals) oppose them. Stronger democratic controls on social media would be a big step away from fascism.
This is a popular misconception on the right. Regulation with democratic controls is better than letting privately held propaganda machines drive the public into fascism.
While no platform can deliver The Truth, it is the role of journalists to deliver context and accurate data. And social media helps deliver both well researched content and pure drivel. We need regulation and democratic controls of regulation.
Fox News argued that it's their constitutional right to spread malicious lies and half truths. And the courts sided with them. Even when those lies killed countless numbers of people. In canada Pollievre wants the same thing: media that is run by the "free market" (meaning all propaganda). I think politicians will have to choose between what donors want and what services the public good. And being politicians you know how they'll vote.
In all fairness, a fringe economist told him that. Navarro still hasn't been able to successfully explain to anyone why tariffs won't raise prices. He gets as far as "they can't raise tariffs on the largest market in the world" as if there weren't high tariffs on the us before.
I doubt anything interesting will turn up but let's be fair: when the government does illegal stuff they destroy the documents. The stuff that we get usually gets misplaced and rediscovered.
Hilariously the FBI announced that they have 2400 pages of newly discovered material which by accident was not part of the disclosure process and was unknown to anyone in government.
https://apnews.com/article/jfk-fbi-trump-newly-discovered-files-0bd8ad5569f5fa3ed92b8ee9b795c9e7
Guaranteed to either not get released and not contain anything interesting.
The article mentioned that SAIF is a non profit health insurance company where the executives are reasonably paid and don't have massive security teams
Food conglomerates had tried to sell a more efficient vision of the kitchen to working mothers:
Less food prep time meant more time for family and career. But it also meant more sales of processed food and the extinction of the skills required to prepare food.
The children of the seventies and eighties were among the first to experience this change toward preprepared foods.
So far all anti propaganda laws were passed in totalitarian states to suppress dissidents. But I think a good start would be to look at pre-existing limitations on free speech. Can you shout "fire" in a crowded theater just for funsies? No? Then we've already got a public safety caveat in our right to free speech. So you can't say something that will kill people IF IT IS A LIE. There are also time place and manner restrictions on free speech. So we agree there is a time and place where you can criticize the state. So we sort of believe that during public emergencies, such as during a pandemic, you cannot spread lies about the pandemic.
There are ways to prove lies.