In the end, The Hill lied and Harris was right.
In the end, The Hill lied and Harris was right.
In the end, The Hill lied and Harris was right.
Hey guys, I gotta lock this. There's too much devolving into personal attacks and a shit ton of troll baiting. Weekends and major events are ripe for that, we had both this weekend. Please don't fall for it.
Hillary Clinton too.
Yes it's truly macho to lose elections. Big muscle energy. This person is stoked to lose the next one. As long as they're "correct"... jfc.
I wasn't old enough to be politically involved when Al Gore ran, but I heard he had good policies. How many people can tell you what policies Kamala ran on?
Harris ran on a continuation of existing beneficial politics with a trend of effectiveness and some tuning after she took over the post.
In short, her position was
** gestures at 4 years of positive tending numbers **
. Oh: and not fucking up the treason trial for Trump.
But the sparkle junkies need everything to pop-pop-pop, so incremental improvement wasnt as good as destruction of America.
I voted for Gore, but a bunch of my moron friends voted for Nader in that election. And Nader an ego was so big he could never admit fault for fucking up the next 2 decades of our country.
Now it looks like we fucked for the rest of this century.
I don't think Kamala could even tell you what policies Kamala ran on.
So you think increasing military spending in exchange for having no healthcare, and supporting a genocide is correct?
Gotta love the freaks over here complaining about a prosecutor with a doctorate in law while a felon rapist traitor descends fascism upon our nation and sends the military to assault Americans.
Pull your head out of your ass.
The President deploying Marines inside the U.S. without invoking the Insurrection Act, declaring an emergency, or getting local/state approval β especially just to respond to peaceful protests β is unlawful on multiple levels:
This isnβt just controversial β itβs flat-out illegal.
EDIT: Formatting EDIT: Better Citations: (DoDI 3025.21, Enclosure 3, Section 3)
https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/302521p.pdf
Only illegal if someone enforces the law, and I have a sneaking suspicion the chances of that are low
Uh so Trump is doing something illegal. So like, Tuesday?
Yeah, but this time it's Very illegal, and Very not cool!
This seems like it was probably written by AI. Has anyone actually fact checked this?
Smells like AI, but that doesnβt mean itβs just slop. You can look up each of the cited lawsβtheyβre not long or particularly difficult reads. They are all arguably accurate citations.
However, within this framework, prosecution depends on willingnessβsomeone has to actively push for it, and the government has to be stable enough to recognize these violations as valid. For the most part, these are pardonable offenses.
TL;DR: Until thereβs a regime change, none of this will carry much weight.
Watch the news try to play it like it's the Marines not the army so Kamala lied.
I remember after her DNC speech, NPR put out an article listing all the misleading things in her speech and #1 was that she said Trump will jail journalists, and the article linked to a tweet of Trump saying "dishonest" journalists should be jailed but she's still being misleading because it wasn't actually a part of his official campaign platform.
No similar article existed for his RNC speech. Having preferred NPR for years, that moment made me realize just how hard the media failed the country.
I was a supporter of my local NPR station for decades. It's crazy how far right the coverage has gone. Slowly over the years, then really hard in recent months. It's like they're desperately trying to show that they aren't left leaning, by going way the other way. I've heard long interviews with wackos from things like The Heritage Foundation all the time, with little to no pushback on the BS. I watched a magat congressman interviewed on PBS the other night with zero pushback to his bullshit magat talking points. The list goes on. I stopped watching/listening to them, but I've been kind of at a loss as to where to check up on news. AP or Reuters is about it, I guess.
I mean is anyone surprised? The media's capitulation and normalization of a felon rapist traitor and his enablers is why we are where we are. Because drama makes them more money and this nation lacks the rules necessary to prevent the media from lying to Americans.
I mean is anyone surprised?
I am genuinely surprised that we made it four years under his first term without getting this far in, but we're speed running to military dictatorship inside six months.
If you actually read the article it is absolutely swimming in reactionary revanchism. There's everything from the author defending Trump's association with the Charlottesville rioters to whining about MSNBC sound-bites to referring to immigration during the Biden Presidency as a "Border Invasion".
This isn't even the boilerplate Politico "Lying when their lips are moving" false-equivalency. This is Derek Hunter, a talk radio frothing fascist and senior columnist for Townhall.com, doing exactly what his corporate handlers pay him to do.
All we need is more rules and theyll stop breaking the rules!
We need to reach out harder to the republicans, and we need more AIPAC money. Whoever gets the most election funding tends to win! (except for last time of course)
So lets reach out to AIPAC and ask how we can close on more campaign funding, and ask the Cheney family to send someone stronger than Liz next time, to stand next to Harris. Is Dick Cheney busy? Maybe he can shoot a dem in the face and have the dem apologize for it. I bet Dick Cheney would say yes to this.
/s
And then Harris completely disappeared as soon as the election was over, failing to challenge his extremely questionable victory in any meaningful way
Billionaires: " yes, she's an obedient little soldier π"
If she had challenged it, she probably wouldn't have won the challenge, AND she would have fueled a whole smattering of "SEE, BOTH SIDES ARE THE SAME" bs
Well if people were going to say stuff, it's awesome that she didn't do anything! Close call. \s
This is the same flawed logic as the folks saying that violent resistance will give the other side a "justification", they're gonna make one up anyway so there's absolutely no point in abstaining from any given course of action for the sake of not giving them one. Even if it hadn't worked it would have demonstrated some commitment to actually stopping Trump, but corporate dems don't actually give a shit what happens as long as they're still getting paid.
Fuck that, the situation wasn't the same and EVERYONE knows it. The solution isn't to avoid the whole thing so the accusation isn't made, the solution is to do the right thing, and when the accusation is made, you slap them down HARD!
She was a weak candidate and had very little political capital, it was a wild shot, but she was just a better choice than Biden. The dem party has almost ZERO strong presidential leadership that the general, liberal or progressive population can connect with, and I'm pretty sure it's by design.
AOC might have a chance of rising and gaining prominence but she's still regarded broadly as "too young" to do more than take a senate seat, which would be great either way. Zhoran Mamdani is going to be a titan on the left if he survives the concerted efforts of zionist liberal America to melt his efforts, but if he succeeds he's going to be busy in New York for years to come. David Hogg isn't going to lead the nation, but he IS making worthless old dems literally cry, so there is some marginal hope for a rally by next midterms.
But we also may not have midterms at this point. We're edging closer to martial law and general, fascist, authoritarian dictatorship, and the best we're getting from Dem leadership is "strongly worded letters" from Chuck "Less Than Worthless" Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries likes to reiterate that "Trump has a mandate" and is basically Schumer's little shadow. Cory Booker gained national attention by doing a publicity stunt to literally promote a book. Bernie Sanders is still a voice of power and influence but he's definitely past the window of electability, sadly.
We need better representation and that doesn't spawn from nowhere, we need people on the ground, getting involved in local community, city and county elections so that real people with real passion get national attention. It's not that they don't exist, it's that the left and liberals broadly are sitting on their hands waiting for something to be presented to them.
We have to get out of the "someone will do something" mindset and get out and DO stuff, even if it's just joining the protests right now.
But we also may not have midterms at this point.
I suspect we will continue to have elections, but they will strategically select specific races throughout the country to tamper with in favor of the GOP, and they'll increase the number of rigged races with each election until our entire electoral process has been captured and we end up with something akin to Russia or Venezuela. We'll hold elections, but they'll be a complete sham. We'll (officially) be a one-party state with one other party of controlled opposition to give people the illusion of choice.
AOC might have a chance
We should really stop this.
I like AOC.
I also realize we just elected a rapist felon traitor insurrectionist and declined the last 2 females who ran for president, despite being WAY more qualified than a felon rapist traitor insurrectionist.
This is not the time and not the country to elect a female president, especially one so "green". If we try to push AOC, we're going to lose, again.
This is not how I want things to be. It's simply an observation of this nation and how extremely unlikely it is to elect a woman president. It'll be Bernie all over again, but probably even more of a shutout.
Lol.
Still blaming Harris as a coup unfolds.
So productive.
A challenge would have gone nowhere and given the other side ammunition. Focus on something worth your time.
Still simping for dems while they sit back and watch a fascist coup unfold, you're as spineless as they are and a thousand times stupider. You have no idea whether a legal challenge would have worked or not, at the very least it would have demonstrated any commitment whatsoever to stopping Trump, but Harris doesn't actually give a shit and never did, she just wanted money and power. You should focus on developing some dignity.
As bad as his victory was, it wasn't even vaguely questionable.
Of the people that turned out, more of them voted for Trump, plain and simple, even by the popular vote without having to complain about the electoral college.
The only objective fact that gives an asterisk is he didn't manage to get over 50% of the popular vote, but he still had the most of any candidate.
I've seen the mentions of "inconsistencies" and "Musk manipulated the votes" but a read of them seems about as credible as 2020 election denials.
You're not supposed to question the victory of a presidential election when done in free and democratic elections. Doing anything like that would be horribly anti-democratic.
It would be horrible if Harris had challenged Trump's victory. That would just make her another Causescu/Trump/Mussolini.
Hillary was right. Harris was right. Misogyny ignored them.
Americans didn't vote for Hillary or Harris because apparently they wanted a whiny removed to be president instead.
Lets not pretend the presidential election is all about gender and nothing else. Thats just not true.
That's not what they said.
I posted a post-deep-dive take on what gave Trump the presidency here, but I will say that misogyny did did no small amount of heavy lifting.
What we need to figure out before the GOP finds its next cult leader is how to neutralize the massive far-right propaganda machine that is churning out false information and disinforming the public.
We've decided before that ethically we can't trust human beings to make sound decisions in some conditions. Gambling, for example. Sometimes humans get addicted to just giving the house their money when it's coached in a probability game. But then we've just invented loopholes (and lootboxes) to circumvent regulation. So I don't know how we're going to deprogram massive viewerships of media that promotes hate, including misogyny.
If we fail then the ice zombie army climate crisis (and running out of water for agriculture) is going to drive us to extinction.
All? No, not all. But it is very evident that most Americans seem to hate women. The right hates on women, the left hates on women, the men and the women hate on women. If you doubt me, look how news articles disparage male senators compared to female ones.
Edit: All you four people who downvote without responding only give me more validation. The people hate the truth.
I could understand Hilary not getting elected, but Harris? She's as blank slate as any presidential candidate could get ( and maybe that was the problem). But the demographics which shifted the most politically, was the Hispanic and black male (whom tend to be less educated) voters towards the right. That could either be populism or misogyny, and considering they were leaning left when elected Biden the previous term, I'm leaning towards the latter reason.
I have NO idea why the democrats chose Harris as the nominee. The country wouldn't vote for a white woman last time. You REALLY think they're going to vote for a woman of colour? REALLY? And then a bunch of them didn't. As predicted.
There were a lot of issues with it being anyone else. Since she was already the VP and already "on the ticket", switching to anyone other than her would have brought with it a whole lot of complications and probably would have tied up all the money the Biden campaign had raised. The whole process of deciding on anyone other than her posed huge risks, especially given the time constraints. Harris was effectively the default option so they took the path that appeared to be easiest and guaranteed that the campaign kept its funding.
Maybe the gender or color didn't really matter to people who had a chance of voting Democrat anyway
Harris would have won if the Dem leadership let her run the campaign she wanted to. Instead they enforced civility politics and forced her to be the same as Biden.
Biden made hay about selecting a Black Woman as vise President. That is declaring her heir apparent.
I have NO idea why the democrats chose Harris as the nominee.
Well, that's the thing: they didn't. She didn't win the primary, Biden did; and Biden won because there was no opposition. My ballot had two choices: "Joe Biden" and "Uncommitted". I voted Uncommitted.
I can almost the trolls saying 'well Ackshually he sent the marines, not the army! Pwned lozur!'
Isn't the National Guard the Army?
Kind of, sort of, itβs complicated.
Theyβre independent organizations under their given state, theyβre coordinated with the army and air force through the national guard bureau.
They sort of become part of the army and Air Force when called up federally.
So technically theyβre part of the army right now in LA as they were called up federally.
All thatβs not strictly accurate but, like, roughly thatβs how it works.
No.
Um ackchyually it's the Marines and National Guard.
It was an opinion piece by a guest columnist.
Who is a piece of shit, but regardless.
https://books.google.com/books/about/Outrage_Inc.html
he is derekahunter on siteformerlyknownasbirdsite
This reminds me of another woman presidential candidate who was also right about Trump. I'm starting to see a pattern.
seems lot of latio voters just could not pull the dial for a female president, even if it meant voting against their interests
Latinos have been taught historically to bet against themselves
Saying this as a Latino myself, the misogyny is extremely deep rooted and colorism also has a yoke on the community. I really hope this opens their eyes but donβt hold your breath
Ahem. Marines are under the Navy thank you very much.
Still counts
Still defending him eh
I understand that the hill published this, but it was an opinion article. I get that some people value that, but they are almost never opinions of people that should have an opinion on the matter. Either way, I don't consider opinion articles to be something that you can nail an organization to the cross over. Just sharing a perspective is all.
There have to be consequences for platforming fascists. This whole βcivility and decorumβ crap has got to stop, we are in a fascist coup and cannot afford to tolerate any enemy activity.
Our media has been completely complicit in the fascist coup because our news has been entirely captured by corporations hell-bent on profit maximization.
It's called the court of public opinion. It doesn't work if we don't participate. And no one participates.
This whole βcivility and decorumβ crap has got to stop
...cool... You should tell that to someone that called for you to act with civility and decorum because I sure as shit did not.
enemy activity
π
Calm down combat carl. I fully believe the actual fascist coup to begin any day now, but falling face first into a rake is not exactly a fucking panzer attack. You're trying to defend a clearly false and misleading post by misdirecting with semantics and sensationalism. I'm amazed you didn't try jangling your keys.
You should. Arguably, you should nail the to the cross for opinion pieces more, because opinion pieces exist to launder articles that the paper can't reasonably justify publishing... but still really wants to publish.
They can be used for that but they are absolutely not solely for the purpose of misinfo laundering. That's a proposterous and indefensible claim. Fucking ridiculous.
Look, you can dislike it all you want. I do. I dislike them. And I refuse to read opinion pieces, from anyone. That's what you do when you're intelligent. You check what you're reading before you read it. Do you not check your beverages to ensure they aren't floor cleaner? When your beverage tastes unpalatable do you not remember to check then? At what point does drinking a gallon of bleach become your own fault?
I hate ads. I stopped watching TV entirely because of how much I despise ads. I wasn't good at manually filtering them out so the responsible things to do was to stop watching TV until I had a solution. So over the years, I found solutions. After a while I was able to use a smart phone completely free of ads. I filtered my data and was able to use a lot of sites again. Now I get all my media from Usenet. Every now and then I walk past a TV at work and it's playing ads and I find it hilarious. I literally forget about ads. And hearing the simple fucks cry about YouTube and chrome is yet another joke for me.
I can't imagine being so opposed to something only to invest absolutely nothing into remediation and then blaming everyone else for my failure to act. Because that is what you remind me of when I read your response. You don't get to have your bleach and drink it too. At what point does reading an opinion article become your fault?
Should organizations platform anything and everything? Should there be no standards?
Hey now, they blacklisted Katie Halper for talking about Palestine.
Never say The Hill doesn't have standards.
That's entirely up to them. I sure wish they wouldn't, but capitalism is what it is. And if the mass of metaphorical Beakers hangs their hat on each and every controversial word regardless of bias, then they're going to do that. If platforming chucklefucks keeps the lights on... So there it is.
There should be standards. Agreed. I have literally no say in that and my opinion means literally nothing on this. However, that doesn't mean calling meaningless shit like this out doesn't hurt the rest of us. I'm as sympathetic as the next person. It sucks. But if we are going to cry wolf and alligator tears every single time an already trash organization does a thing you - without a shadow of a doubt - expect them to do, then you are doing their work for them. Stop hitting yourself.
Take it on the chin, ignore them, and move on. I work in one of the most remote places on the planet with about 1000 conservatives, and these aren't the GOP "gays are cool now" conservatives, these are the "gays are pedophiles and we should exterminate them all" conservatives. These are InfoWarriors and flat earthers. Deep state theory is assumedly foundational and antiestablishmentarianism is the MO. I pointed out, a single time, that even Alex Jones said Trump was "mobbed up with the russians" and I have been known as "the liberal" since then. These proverbial tweakers are drawn to plausible deniability like a catalytic converter. Sure, they are the lowest common denominator when it comes to human prototypes, but they are also the low tide and they know it. If they can sanitize bigotry then the cool GOPers will be able to use them to justify it. So we (the opposition to authoritarianism) need to sterilize easily defensible shit like this.
Look at the replies I've received... All I did was point out the plot hole in the assertion implied by OP exposed by the reality that one could say that "the hill" did not say it themselves and furthermore that the hill has a giant warning at the top of the article that literally states they DO NOT hang their hat on opinion pieces (and btw, fuck the hill but they do). All I'm pointing out is to not say the hill explicitly called Harris a liar, because based on the facts, they didn't. Several replies still allude to the culpability of the hill... Which is best case scenario semantic when totally generalized, but more likely consolatory and akin to someone splitting hairs over "travelling" in street basketball.
"The right" could say that "the left" would polish brass on the titanic. And we could know that they'd said it too. But here we are, God forbid we pass a single piece of brass without giving it a mirror shine and then gasp Pikachu faces when the right says "see?".
How did we lose the election? Shit like this. We need to be better than this. This is teaching a pig to sing.
Sensationalism is their game. Leave to play it amongst themselves.
An agreeable position if those opinion pieces were written in good faith by a respectable journalist who knows what they're talking about. Honest opinions are never wrong.
But in today's news it's just a way to publish straight-up misinformation and propaganda, they can just abuse their position to just say whatever and people internalise it because, well, it's the news.
Journalists and news outlets used to depend upon a reputation of integrity and factuality built over the years. Now anyone can open up their "news" website, or be a politically motivated party with lots of resources, claim completely made-up stuff, and when those articles reveal themselves to be complete bullshit, nothing happens.
Also, the world seems to really have lost the conception of what is a fact vs what is an opinion, a deduction, a belief, and so on. Guess the nature of Internet communication doesn't help with that.
I understand that the hill published this, but it was an opinion article.
Authored by a far-right talk radio host who fully endorses mass deportation and execution of liberal dissidents, sure.
This is where I challenge you to find a single opinion article published by the hill from a reputable person about a worthy opinion. And when you say "that doesn't exist" I'm going to respond "no shit sherlock, that's what an opinion piece is, a disreputable person seeking your unearned attention." Good thing we gave it to them...
Also Marines are Navy, so.....technicality?
π€£ Trump really is playing 5D chess. You can't nail him down. He's like a bar of soap, that is also a pedophile.
It's worth nothing that "The Hill" has always been liberal garbage.
If only the dems had had 4 years to do something...
Any attempt by the Democrats to forestall this would have allowed Trump to paint them as anti-American traitors. So the Democrats did nothing and Trump painted them as anti-American traitors.
And he's painting them as anti-American traitors to this day as he makes Nazi poses around the WH.
Hey now! He was convicted of all 34 indictments he was charged with!
And sure, those charges were delayed for years. And they were a fraction of the 91 indictments he could have been tried for. And they had to be brought in a municipal court, by a local DA, because nobody above Alvin Brag was willing to bring a case to trial.
And then the court never bothered to issue a sentence, because it would have been rude to punish a newly elected President.
But they did something!
Reformists try not to capitulate to fascists challenge REDUX(...again)
Kamala DID lie. They didn't send the Army. They sent the Marines.
Stupid smart Kamala.
They can still argue that their definition of "you" is exclusive to a certain group of people
How long before that changes?
Never? They'll shift which group it refers to, but it'll always refer to a minority group of people. Whether that includes "you" depends on luck, I suppose.
The Hill always lies. It's an undeclared right wing propaganda site.
Instead of focusing on what is actually happening with National Guard and Marines being deployed, we see the pattern of pointless arguing in circles about why the candidate lost in the comments below. Analysis Paralysis is the exact intention for articles like this. This helps the current criminal administration continue their behavior.
The fact that people wish that she had won is the real problem.
Missed the whole point of what I said. The election is over, move on. Take this energy and prepare for the very real chance of civil war. Clearly, there is an administration in place that is pushing hard for this outcome.
You can save so many words by just saying "the hill lied".
I'm not sure the intention of this sort of note.
Yes, Harris may've made those predictions. People heard em. They still preferred Trump, compared to Harris. It's not like people, outside of the potentially fringe / outlier cases highlighted in some left-leaning media sources, are all that surprised. People didn't vote for Trump because he was promising to treat immigrants with respect and dignity.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if many of the red-voters are looking at LA, and thinking things like "Look at how bad that immigration invasion got, they're literally destroying the city and disrupting government. Even the governor of the State is part of the problem at this point, making noise about defending the public disorder. Tut tut. Send in more marines".
"this is what we voted for go team ICE" is the jist of what ive been seeing.
But in the end, it doesn't even matter.
I had to fall to lose it all
Kamala also supports sending cops against protesters, especially if they oppose Zionism:
Ahem, for those in the back and those with their heads in the sand: SHE STILL WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER THAN TRUMP!
"better than trump" evidently doesnt get people to the voting booths. Who knew? (everyone)
BETTER THAN TRUMP!
Talk about understatement...
Sheβs just sitting back now. Sipping her tea.
I said he would eventually place armed soldiers on every street corner
I will stand by that prediction
"Lied" means intentionally deceived. I don't know anything about this outlet, but what reason do we have to believe they lied? Perhaps they were themselves deceived.
Edit: people be downvoting me just because I'm ignorant and asking in good faith. We have to fix this culture on lemmy where all questions are assumed to be "just-asking-questions" style trolling.
Bad Faith Is not jounalism
And lied because no facts.
it is in the United States and has been for at least a decade.
It may not be jounalism, but how do we know it's Bad Faith
They were deceived? When the oulet said she lied, they were claiming to know the future. They lied.
Tim Walz, her running mate, sent the national guard in to attack BLM protesters. This is a problem with both parties.
I can't with you people.
Ah the classic alienate the other side of the population to further the divide. It's almost like these political escapades are by design to divide the nation.
You can't win with people who know the facts?
Yes, you are correct
She looks pretty hot in that photo
Yeah but then she lied about "working for a ceasefire" and being any different on genocide. What a hero.
The last administration was openly stating their disapproval of Israel's actions, attempting to initiate peace talks, and floating a pause of arms shipments.
What's the current administration doing?
"the last administration was beginning to start the process of thinking about pretending to initiate the process that allows the inception of starting to begin to put some pressure on Israel"
Weird that didn't work!
and we now know those were complete lies, and they never actually pressured Israel to stop once.
The last administration pretended to care when they didn't, lied about it and did nothing.
The current administration forced a ceasefire at the beginning then went back to letting genocide go through.
At the very least, the people who did nothing and were active in the genocide at the time weren't rewarded. Maybe next time they'll think on that and take a stance so they dont lose the next election.
America is an imperialist empire and fascists are the useful idiots of empire and the do nothing Democrats are just obstructionists that get in the way of the will of the people. But America, because it's so distracted with its netflix and chill mentality, we are always starting from scratch as we live in a vacuum. History, if you know it well from many perspectives, is literally repeating itself. And what is scary is this is the same plan that was tried before. Only this time they're succeeding. So you libturds can try to make me the bad guy but I'll never vote for a fucking Democrat. All is going according to plan. Yankee gets what Yankee deserves, as the imperial boomerang smacks you dumb asses right in the fucking face. Collective suffering is ritious and deserved. NO WAR BUT THE CLASS WAR