Project 2025's unpopularity continues to grow: New poll shows 57% with unfavorable views of it compared to only 4% favorable
Project 2025's unpopularity continues to grow: New poll
You're viewing a single thread.
And yet when piecemealed liberals and Republicans will completely embrace the aspects of project 2025. The same way they're doing KOSA which originated with the HF
Removed by mod for good reason!
This account is forty six days old now and has made three thousand six hundred and thirty four submissions in that time.
That averages out to one every eighteen minutes and thirteen seconds twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week since this account has been created.
I've just posted some more articles, so please update the stats. Thank you!
Your submission count is 53.59% of Alyson Kennedy’s 2020 presidential campaign’s votes so far.
It’s 0.0045% of Biden’s 2020 votes.
So see? You have nothing to worry or be mad about!
Also, did you count the submissions I just posted a few minutes ago?
Please update your stats because I'm going to post some more stuff right now. Thank you for thinking about me every day, friend!
If you continue your average of 79.2 submissions to Lemmy a day your submissions will surpass the 6,791 votes that Alyson Kennedy got for running as presidential candidate for the Socialist Workers Party (United States) on November 2, 2024!
Eh. I disagree, but I can take my lumps.
Good on ya for respecting mods, but bruh, not everyone here who is not voting for harris, is paid to post by someone. Actually about half of the country isn't voting for Harris. And they're not getting paid to dislike her.
That's true. But...
We know there is an extensive campaign by the Russian government to divide the left and attempt to get Trump re-elected. And given the nature of our current electoral system, there are only a few reasons why someone would try to get people not to vote for Harris:
I mean that. I think the majority of people playing that particular game are paid to. Doesn't mean they all are, of course, but it's impossible to ignore the massive uptick in content from them right now, especially from shiny new accounts and from accounts that have been mostly inactive until now. There just aren't that many third-party true believers or Republicans who want to spend all day, every day, pretending to be abrasive leftists.
There just aren’t that many third-party true believers
Me and most of the people in my social circle. Look at the campaigns of socialist Claudia De la Cruz and the crowds of people showing up at her demonstrations. You think most of those people are getting paid?
And how do you think people just magically get paid to start posting articles? The reason I am asking is because I get accused of this DAILY. lol
Me and most of the people in my social circle.
That's a statistically insignificant blip unless your social circle is, for example, Delaware.
Look at the campaigns of socialist Claudia De la Cruz and the crowds of people showing up at her demonstrations. You think all those people are getting paid?
No, of course not. I was referring specifically to online, where a single person can operate thousands of bots spamming nonsense. You can't do something like that at a physical event.
That said, her rallies attract hundreds of people at best. Harris' rallies attract tens of thousands of people, with thousands more standing outside. And De la Cruz is polling in the low single digits. She's barely a statistical blip. Yet online forums are absolutely flooded with support for her and for Jill Stein.
And I know people like myself get accused of getting paid daily. And why? Because we post news articles about third parties. Not everything is a conspiracy.
And also, to your point, if these third parties are such a statistical blip, then you have nothing to be worried or angry about. So why even get mad at posts that aren't pro-harris?! Such small statistical blips shouldn't affect the outcome of the election at all, right?
What about new accounts posting pro-democrat articles. Are they agents of the democratic party being paid to post articles too?
Given the much greater size of the population that plans to vote Democrat, not likely.
Let's take this out of the realm of politics for a sec, and bring up a topic nearly everyone can agree on: Chocolate. A full 90% of Americans like chocolate and prefer it to other candy categories. (Seriously, look it up. Americans fucking love chocolate.) Now imagine if you went to a candy discussion forum, and found that there was a flood of similarly-phrased and comments from a bunch of new accounts, all extolling the virtues of gummy bears and denigrating chocolate as a candy choice.
Would you find that believable? Or would you suspect some gummy bear aficionado had set up bots to spam the forum?
But is everything a fucking conspiracy?! I mean, a full HALF of the country is not voting for Harris. Half.
Are there some people paid to promote? Yeah, I'm sure there are. For EVERY party. I just don't think it's nearly as much as you do.
Also, it would be a total fucking waste of money to pay someone to shill on Lemmy. Lemmy hates third-parties with a passion anyway.
People hate me so much, that when I have posted non-political posts to say a science community, within 30 seconds there will be 10 downvotes. And not from the science community, because even they get confused why so many downvotes so fast.
Why? My name. And why? Because I posted third-party articles.
I'm very proud to vote third-party, but the amount of bullying and false accusations I get from Democrats are much more hateful than what I get from Republicans. I mean, Republicans hate me too, but nothing like the Democrats on Lemmy. lmao
And I promise you, any slight motivation I had for even considering switching to Democrat, was obliterated by the comments and hate I get here. I'll never vote for Harris now. I don't care what happens. lol
I don't hate you. I think you're incredibly naive, and I think you've likely inadvertently consumed Russian propaganda specifically designed to split the left in the United States, but that doesn't make me hate you.
It just makes me sad.
I have a couple kids, as I mentioned, both LGBTQ+. People like you, I don't think you intend my kids harm. But your vote will potentially boost Donald Trump. And your rhetoric online, if successful, would further boost Donald Trump. And Trump is a direct threat to my kids.
So no, I don't hate you. But I'm scared of what you and people like you could do to my kids in the name of ideological purity.
You think everyone that's not voting for Harris is "shilling." Dude, you are shilling for Harris all the time. lol
And neither are the folks you're accusing. Funny how that works, right? Lol
Glad to see you're finally coming around and realizing how paranoid it was starting to sound, accusing so many people of being Russian agents or being paid by them. Whew! Thanks, friend.
Liberals are so desperate to smear anything that's a threat to their privilege in society and a perceived threat to the breadcrumbs that get tossed to them.
goddamn the rock hard edge on this one, it’s sooo cooool.
Historically Low Faith in U.S. Institutions source
This is so self-evidently preposterous I don't even know what I could add to further refute it.
What do you think people hate about it, the name? Come on. Hatred for the proposals in it is the most bipartisan thing I've seen in a decade at least.
"I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul"
I can't help if you are clueless how things are interconnected
Yes, project 2025, loaded with unpopular ideas, opposed primarily by democrats, is actually a democrat wetdream. Because democrats have proven repeatedly their agenda is always rolling back human rights /s
It's moronic. You discredit yourself so hard, it's actually hard to top your own words.
Sure jan
The militant communist is getting their catchphrase from the Brady Bunch. Which btw wasn't a cool reference 15 years ago either. lol
Not to mention that you want to imply that democrats long for the dissolution of human rights but you know saying it outright is laughably indefensible even by your standards, so you keep quiet on that and toss out your little snarky deflection.
Your party voted in favor of anti-trans legislation which was bipartisan in sponsors and cosponsors. Written by a Democrat and a Republican. But instead of calling it an anti trans bill it was presented as saving kids, KOSA
Notice how you hide behind the fact that it likely was bad legislation just by the name of it and refuse to explain what you are talking about in any way. How is this "anti-trans"? You might be right (doubt it outside of some particular edge cases, but prove me wrong). But you're begging me to dismiss you by just being condescending about it.
No.
KOSA which came from the Heritage Foundation recently passed the Senate 93 - 3
Go familiarize yourself with the total aims of Project 2025 and then maybe you'll see why you look like a complete shill trying to equate these 2 things.
The Heritage Foundation roots of KOSA
Advising getting the bill passed is imperative
And that's how the two things are equal.
Care to guess who the shill is?
What part of KOSA dissolves the Department of Education?
What part of KOSA enacts government monitoring women's pregnancies?
Do you understand the concept of false equivalency?
Do you even understand what the word "equal" is?
Stop wasting everyone's time.
I suppose you don't understand what the term piecemealed is. When liberals get on board with it, they won't advertise it as eliminating the department of education like they did not label kosa an anti-trans legislation.
Lol ok