he's knee deep in illegality imo. he's sucking up to trump because he'll get some favours that will keep him out of legal trouble. twitter is a loss leader for his goal of getting trump elected. it was never intended to be a profitable endeavour.
really excellent piece on where we are right now in terms of the absolute nonsense coming out of the far right/grifter space
What we’re witnessing online during and in the aftermath of these hurricanes is a group of people desperate to protect the dark, fictitious world they’ve built. Rather than deal with the realities of a warming planet hurling once-in-a-generation storms at them every few weeks, they’d rather malign and threaten meteorologists, who, in their minds, are “nothing but a trained subversive liar programmed to spew stupid shit to support the global warming bullshit,” as one X user put it. It is a strategy designed to silence voices of reason, because those voices threaten to expose the cracks in their current worldview. But their efforts are doomed, futile. As one dispirited meteorologist wrote on X this week, “Murdering meteorologists won’t stop hurricanes.” She followed with: “I can’t believe I just had to type that.”
Not to be Johnny know-it-all but the stubbornness with which conservatives cling to delusions about the climate is no greater than the liberal bulldog grip on the premise sufficient clear, public reasoning produces rational government in the collective interest.
incredible the curve that this utter fuckstick gets graded on. in the last 2 weeks alone, he has publicly and repeatedly:
and the above weren't singular off the cuff comments - he's repeated most of them in different interviews 2-3 times. feels like when trump speaks, the words of nazi gollum Stephen miller come spilling out verbatim. Ive never seen the tactic of 'flooding the zone with shit' employed so effectively
the idea of supporting this because he's some kind anti-establishment peoples champion simply doesn't wash. he's going to install a start-up oligarchy that will be far shittier than the old one, and put the absolute dregs of society in charge to oversee it
the funny thing is, it is easy to see why the media wants him back in office. from 2016-2020, literally every day there was some new disaster or scandal or crazy story, and it led to countless articles and interviews, and lots of spots on tv for these journalists to be the stars of the show. it was a minute by minute "oh my god what will happen next!" vibe and it led to lots of books and notoriety for the journalists. then, 2020-2024 happened, and the minute by minute monitoring for scandals/disasters pretty much disappeared. the only thing that got tons of coverage was....obviously the trump court cases and whatever ghoulish shit the supreme court was passing. there wasnt a scandal every day in the white house briefing room, or covering some insane interview biden gave where he was convinced a secret society was harvesting the brains of americans or whatever.
so these journalists that are helping to sanewash trump's craziness are doing it for THEIR own benefit. they think 4 more years of trump is going to be great for business, more clicks, more tv interviews, more books. what they dont realize is, eventually the state will come for them too and they wont be doing interviews, they'll be imprisoned for writing a negative article about trump once he feels hes sufficiently insulated and he can do whatever he wants without repercussion. and given the decisions SCOTUS has handed down the last 2 years, he must believe hes almost there.
mdgoonah41 to be honest, I think most of the liberal media eventually realised just how daft they were in that original Trump run and won’t play along. You see now in a lot of interviews with Trump and Vance people are asking them serious questions.
The problem is the damage is done. The far right has destroyed the credibility of media and institutions. Right now this week we see people questioning everything. Whether it’s government intentions, or climate change. There are no longer any anchors for fact or reason.
that is how the NYT is currently covering trump's plans for ethnic cleansing, fwiw
they havent learned anything or adjusted at all
Yes. There is certainly a style issue. These papers as a rule do not use judgmental language in reporting, only in their opinion pieces. So they will not call Trump a racist or misogynist, etc in their headlines. They will tiptoe around it.
So there is one part where you need to just report the facts - what the hell did the guy say. And people themselves need to have the wherewithal to see that someone who saying that women should have no governance over their bodies, or the law should be overturned, or dark people are intrinsically savage is a faulty individual. i'm fine with the news separating reporting and opinion. the public needs to do better as well.
Claudius the media had already destroyed most of its credibility on its own. trump and his allies just put the final bullet in. the newer and more worrying problem, is that - in the pursuit of pleasing big techs algorithms - the much lauded independent/online media has speed run to the same level of impotency, except instead of taking 60 years its taken about 10.
Claudius They will tiptoe around it.
But it's false. Trump isn't interested or obsessed with genetics. He doesn't know anything about genetics, nor is he interested in learning. He's interested in eugenics. These aren't equivalent. Neutrality does not mean reporting falsehoods to sanewash public figures. They posted this right next to a story trumping up Kamala's weak answers to uncomfortable questions as avoidance, rather than the very equivocation they afford Trump for his racist idiocy. NYT is a good for nothing rag, although my wife likes the word games.
One of my relatives is a huge trump fan. When he sends me messages I get a guage on what’s hot in maga world. Recently it has been transgender talk. Framed as child abuse. Pediatric mutilation he calls it. Aghast at the concept of puberty blockers.
Burnwinter might have to disagree with you on that Burnsy. I've heard a lot on the former, but not really anything on the second part. What is this "clear, public reasoning" you speak of? Never heard of the stuff.
Also, I'm fairly liberal in my views, but I think generally the public aren't to be trusted. Morons, the lot of them.
Aid to several communities impacted by Hurricane Helene was temporarily paused in parts of North Carolina over the weekend due to reports of threats against Federal Emergency Management Agency responders, amid a backdrop of misinformation about responses to recent storms.
Some FEMA teams helping disaster survivors apply for assistance in rural North Carolina are currently working at secure disaster recovery centers in counties where federal workers are receiving threats, a FEMA spokesperson told CNN on Monday.
“For the safety of our dedicated staff and the disaster survivors we are helping, FEMA has made some operational adjustments,” the spokesperson said in a statement. “Disaster Recovery Centers will continue to be open as scheduled, survivors continue to register for assistance, and we continue to help the people of North Carolina with their recovery.”
On Saturday, FEMA workers had to halt their work in Rutherford County due to reports that National Guard troops saw “armed militia” threatening the workers, according to the Washington Post, which cited an email to federal agencies helping with the response, verified by unnamed federal officials. It’s not clear if the threat was credible.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/14/us/fema-helene-north-carolina-reported-threats/index.html
47% of the country is on board for this. i dont want to be here anymore.
Supposedly Kamala is going on Fox News and Joe Rogan, internally they must be really worried if she is taking risks like that.
it would be funny if she did rogan before trump. the entire spectrum of online right wing grifters have been gradually colonising that podcast ever since he relocated to Texas, and have been endlessly lobbying to get trump on there. I remember him saying a few years back he wasn't interested in having him on and had turned down a couple of requests from his team, but he has gone off the deep end with musk lately. can't imagine him having kamala on and not trump
I thought Trump recently said he would be going on?
What does she mean by "Protect cryptocurrency investments so Black men who make them know their money is safe"? Saw Obama the other day saying more black men need to come out for her, am guessing this is in reference to the tweet below. Am guessing this is an area where they think they can claw back support
lol. The crypto thing is weird. Black men are disproportionately investing in crypto because they feel disenfranchised. The Democrats need to focus on the core issues of why they (like a lot of other demographics) feel left out and left behind. This is an insane party at times
i think the 'losing black men' narrative will turn out to be just that, a narrative. there is an element of red pill types online who are chirping alot, but represent a demogrpahic that historically don't actually turn out at the polls. most of the top pollsters have her support among black voters at the same level as Bidens 2020 numbers, around 87%.
Gazza M i think the 'losing black men' narrative will turn out to be just that, a narrative. there is an element of red pill types online who are chirping alot, but represent a demogrpahic that historically don't actually turn out at the polls. most of the top pollsters have her support among black voters at the same level as Bidens 2020 numbers, around 87%.
Your probably right but this tweet by her campaign and Obama specifically mentioning it indicates they think they need to solidify this demographic. Maybe internally their polling has worried them?
Claudius lol. The crypto thing is weird. Black men are disproportionately investing in crypto because they feel disenfranchised. The Democrats need to focus on the core issues of why they (like a lot of other demographics) feel left out and left behind. This is an insane party at times
That statement comes across as quite patronising I thought, why do black men need to be reassured their investments are safe there? Like you say really weird statement.
One thing about US elections nowadays is that the polling numbers can be way off the mark. Must admit at this distance I have no gut feeling whatsoever about the "real" sentiments of turnout and preference.
Burnwinter i dont think polling is inherently bad, i think people just do not understand the basics of polling, and more specifically, probability and things like margin of error. a poll that has a margin of error of 5% that shows trump +1 could be anything from trump +6 to harris +4. thats a really broad range of outcomes. too many people only look at the top line number and dont understand the specifics. polling also is not really "scientific" when the core of your sample is derived from people answering a phone call from an unknown number in the year 2024
mdgoonah41 Sure people are illiterate concerning estimation, but I think polling is also generally less accurate since the advent of the internet and especially social media. Sentiment is more volatile and less uniform than it was once.
Actually (at least in the US) sentiment has hardened. 49% of the vote will be democratic. 45% of the vote will be republican. So pollsters are trying to figure out what that remaining 6% will do. And these people are not "centrists." They're low information, low engagement, low probability voters. Who don't answer the phone and who don't tell the truth. But everyone else's mind was made up a long time ago.
RowJimmy agree with this. people are only undecided in the sense that they havent decided whether or not they are actually going to vote.
RowJimmy Interesting. What's your source?
Obsessively trying to understand how my country can be about to reelect a sociopath whose fascism is only tempered by his short attention span.
I read a lot of "how to understand the polling" stuff. I like Nate Cohn in the NYT. It's not my field, and my technical abilities in statistics are weak. But I think I've developed a better sense than most people of the fact that a 60% probability only differs from a coin flip if you get to repeat the exercise fifty times.
hoegan just ends up agreeing with his guests.
RowJimmy Fair enough. Of course polling numbers (eg "57 to 43 with a 5% margin of error") can't be transformed without further modelling into reliable election victory odds at all, and especially not in the US due to the madness that is the college system.
Burnwinter the term sometimes used is “calcification” to describe this hardebining of most of the electorate in one camp or the other.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/09/16/midterms-2020-election-polarization/
Qwiss yep. peter thiel was on his show recently and he just nodded along with everything
, despite thiel being a conspiracy-tards wet dream. no questions about palantir or its CIA connections, nothing about his connections to JD Vance. he nibbled at Epstein stuff but seemed to back off once thiels sweat levels spiked. he doesn't really hammer his guests often
based on all the polls over the last week or so, and the scary reports about early voting in places like nevada, it looks like we are getting 4 more years of trump. not sure what will be left of this country after that, but i can virtually guarantee that dems will learn zero lessons, and they will actually move even further to the right than they already are. truly bleak, soul crushing stuff.
