World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Tl;dr: they voted
American and European Leftist heads exploding right now
BuT mUh ElEcToRaLiSm!
If we could get blue voters to vote with the same fervor as the insane right (who vote at if their very existence is at stake) there would never be a red president or Congress again.
If we could do that Bernie would have won the primary easily.
The insane right's electoral strategy is to threaten primaries, not the general.
Threatening the primaries makes you a credible electoral threat who's positions should be considered and if possible appealed to.
Threatening the general makes you a moron who obviously cares more about feeling validated than you do about achieving any policy goals since you're literally declaring your intent to hand the contest to the guy who's even less likely to give you anything you want.
There was the uncommitted movement for the democratic primaries, but democrats screamed and shat their pants in anger over people daring to challenge party unity. Reminder that these uncommitted votes were just to send the message that biden should stop supporting genocide which should really be a no-brainer and even then democrats threw a fit. The political parties have their primary processes clamped down and completely controlled. If trump threatened the moneyed interests at all, he would've been shut down during the party primaries like Bernie was.
Is that why the left took power just 4 years ago? Because the right voted with such fervor? Or do you realize it wil be impossible that the left will win anything come November. Face the truth.
"jUsT vOtE" wasn't the solution. It required the opposition parties to work on getting those votes. If the democrats in the US wanted to learn a lesson, it'd be that they shouldn't just lean on "sure we suck ass but trump is worse!!"
This excerpt is key:
Note the first point hitting on the economy. Democrats have gone with "actually everything is great and you not being able to afford things is just your feelings".
Modi won, so you're basically saying "Democrats should try harder but they'll still fail."
That's what happens with complacency. There's still a lot of work that needs to be done to dismantle the fascist machine, but it requires sustained full commitment and effort from the opposition. Think about how bad things were with george w bush. Democrats were able to seize that opportunity to get in and do some good things, but they were mostly fine with the status quo and this is what gave us trump.
I think maybe rethinking tactics is in order because what people are doing isn't working and doing it harder won't make it work. That's what I was trying to suggest.
We're in full agreement here and that was my point when I argued against the "just vote" talking point. Democrats need to change their tactics and apply pressure using what works. Currently their only tactic is pointing out "we're not trump" and they're putting their full force behind that tactic and it's not working (or at least not well enough to enact meaningful change). One key problem is how we get democrats to change their tactics and clearly "just vote" isn't cutting it because they're not fazed by threats to withhold votes, so it's not like they actually care if you vote for them beyond getting them into office. It does nothing to change democratic party policy.
This article was about what strategies and campaign messaging the opposition used to sway voters, and your takeaway from the article was 'they voted'?
I'm not convinced you read it.