this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2024
-10 points (38.1% liked)

politics

18852 readers
4836 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
-10
Trump World Fueled an Anti-Shapiro Whisper Campaign (www.thebulwark.com)
submitted 1 month ago by Rapidcreek@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

So the Trump campaign and its allies moved to quietly kneecap Shapiro. It did so by forging a de facto alliance with the enemy of its enemy, the progressive left, which opposed Shapiro—the only Jewish candidate on Harris’s shortlist—largely because of his pro-Israel stances. The result was a swelling of progressive opposition (some of it organic, some artificially fed) that, among other things, saw Shapiro’s online critics dub him “Genocide Josh.”

Article makes it sound like people wouldn't have had a problem with it...

Which makes zero sense considering how Bidens handling of Israel's genocide was one of the top three issues voters had with him...

[–] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 7 points 1 month ago

I missed the use of the term goncide josh which much like the joe is likely to immediately disregard someones conversation around the subject. Not a whole lot of time for rhetoric to take off though.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This:

swelling of progressive opposition (some of it organic

does not mean

Article makes it sound like people wouldn’t have had a problem with it…

You're just uncomfortable with Trumpworld siding with you, which is fair. It's unsurprising they are more concerned with moderate appeal than progressive appeal, though. They know they can demonize any progressive to rural voters, it's a core part of their strategy. This would have been less effective against a guy that can point to school vouchers.

That said, all this means is we have a responsibility to make up for any potential loss with energy and outreach.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It’s gonna be hard to demonize Walz.

For one thing he grew up a farmer and became a school teacher; he’s a vet. He’s literally “one of them”. Except he doesn’t drink the maga rightaid, and is very good at progressive messaging.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

No, it sadly won't. He's pro lgbtq+. That's the work of the devil you know, the shadowy deep state that is turning all your kids gay. He was in charge during the BLM protests, so clearly he's antifa and wants to defund the police to create more lawlessness. Sure he's ex-military, but have you seen the military these days? Gays and women everywhere, it's all DEI now. I could go on and on, they have a prepared line for almost every position we hold.

He does have one edge, he's a gun owner. He hasn't taken any NRA-supported positions in awhile though.

edit: Remember they're in a frenzy of purging their party for the past few years. They're very leery of anyone that might seem like one of them but is actually sane.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And that’s when he swings back.

You saw some of that last night (“we have a golden rule…. Mind your own damn business”… “Hella Weird”)

They can try, but the harder they push the weirder they become.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Oh definitely. Rural voters are rural voters though. When you look at the electoral map, that's all the red parts in the middle of everything. They trust republicans because the gop is straightforward and nasty, and that makes more sense to them than anything more scientific, objective or pro-social.

It's a region where when a HS quarterback rapes some girl, it'd usually get covered up, even by local law enforcement. When people are really backwards, it's because that's what they want.

I'm sure he might get a few, but he's not going to suddenly un-maga the magas. That's very wishful thinking.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm sure he might get a few, but he's not going to suddenly un-maga the magas. That's very wishful thinking.

He doesn’t need to, all he really needs to do is get the not-maga out to vote. That includes dems across the spectrum. That he can do.

And the more they try to demonize him… “I fed kids. I’m a monster. You’re trying to look up their skirts.”

It's a region where when a HS quarterback rapes some girl, it'd usually get covered up, even by local law enforcement. When people are really backwards, it's because that's what they want.

You’ll do well not to paint entire regions you apparently know nothing about with that brush. Particularly since Minnesota is in that region. Also, that land doesn’t vote, people vote.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

MN hasn't gone red in a presidential in a whole lot of years, so it's actually not.

And yes, if you go back to my original comment, that was more of less what I said, where we have a responsibility to provide energy and outreach. I just don't think we should over-exaggerate how successful progressive messaging should be, as if moderates can simply be brushed aside and their disagreements with us ignored. We did lose a little bit by picking two more progressive people, and we do have to work to make up for it.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

MN hasn’t gone red in a presidential in a whole lot of years, so it’s actually not.

that's an idiotic and dismissive take. Sorry. but you really don't know anything about us, or our politics.

Biden won MN by 230k votes. in 2020. To put that in perspective, there were a total of 3.2 million votes total. it's the kind of thinking that lost Michigan in 2016, which was won by Obama in 2012 by 450k votes.

In 2020, Biden barely squeaked out a win, with the closest three states (GA, AZ, WI) having less than 20k votes. Democrats cannot afford to think of any state that has been reliably blue as not-vulnerable, because the margins are extremely, extremely thin. If you look at more than just what color our state is on the map, historically, you'll see what I'm talking about.

2016, Hilary won MN by 44.5k. Obama by 226k in 2012, and 298k in 2008. Kerry won only 98k. Gore won only by 59k. These kinds of margins are extremely thin, and very easy to tip. (which is why, in point of fact, Trump came back despite having previously had a terrible experience and vowing to not.)

We did lose a little bit by picking two more progressive people, and we do have to work to make up for it.

And that's the point I'm trying to make. Walz is the kind of progressive whose capable of pulling the overton window more to the progressive side. It's how he's done what he's done as MN's gov. In part because he himself has become more progressive. that line about "compromising without compromised values" or however he put it wasn't just idle banter or empty promises. he knows when and how to work through disagreements- and when not to.

He knows when to offer a hand shake and when to throw some haymakers, and he's not going to let them throw their downright abusive and weird politics at us and insist we turn the other cheek because of some dubious moral superiority. When you start hitting back with "No, you're a creep, (for looking at kid's genitals)"... it's very hard for the centrists to be like "yeah but both sides". in some respects, bothsidesism was enabled by that very silence.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Note, I was not trying to say that all of MN always votes blue. I also find it a little odd how personally you're taking this. So, what I'm trying to point out, is that if you're accustomed to "MN nice", you do not have an accurate understanding of the depth of the hatred prevalent in much of the rest of the country. It's not some gentle misguidedness, it's a deep-seated meanness and corruption, a hatred of others and the self. A deep shame.

Not in everyone, not at all. But very prevalent, very noticeable.

Personally I'm from a state not famous for nice people and having lots of lakes and a funny accent like MN is known throughout our nation for, but a state very famous for its racism and poor education ranking. So I've see it a lot, it's unfortunate and sad.

Now, I love Walz, Minnesotans and progressive values, but try not to be too surprised by the depth of the hatred out there, and just how dark and immune to the overton window the actual fascist-loving folks of the world can be. This is not some cure-all. The cure to it will be crushing it in an election, weathering the possible terrorism incidents that result, and proving that they're all losers.

When it comes to the moderates, people like Never Trumpers, I'll be surprised if they respond well to progressive ideas, they don't actually like equality, they just hate Trump more.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

If true, they miscalculated.

But, you can tell them something, but that doesn't mean they'll let it to be read.