908
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] tetrachromacy@lemmy.world 245 points 1 week ago

The first time the moderators countered his obvious dog-whistle lies I was absolutely blown away. You could have knocked me over with a feather. Then I started laughing and didn't stop.

The correction was really well done and completely natural by both moderators, I almost didn't register what happened. Love to see it.

[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 94 points 1 week ago

Too bad they let him continue to lie about the thing they just fact checked, let him talk beyond his allotted time, reapond when it wasn't his turn, and shut down Harris the one time she tried to respond out of turn.

The moderators crossed an extremely low bar on fact checking last night, but did everything else the same way they always have.

[-] Rhaedas@fedia.io 53 points 1 week ago

All his talking didn't help him at all. I don't think the Harris side cared about him self-destroying his image and giving lots for the talk shows later to make fun of.

[-] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 week ago

It gives him a platform. End of story. Every single minute he talks it allows for normalization.

[-] Bassman1805@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

This works for some things, but it's like the parable of the boiled toad: you need to push on the edges of truth, not come out guns blazing with "post-birth abortions", "Immigrants eating family pets", and "Democrats wanted Roe v Wade overturned also"

[-] frezik@midwest.social 11 points 1 week ago

It's too late for that. We deal with him or he gets back in the White House.

[-] stoly@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

But to who? His cult? They are lost, stop trying to save them. B

[-] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 42 points 1 week ago

It's complicated, since the Harris campaign wanted him to have more opportunities to ramble, interrupt and get mad. They were very much counting on him being himself and comparing that to someone who can speak in coherent sentences without getting mad.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 9 points 1 week ago

A well executed Batman Gambit in real life.

[-] jhymesba@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

My thoughts as well. Trump did himself no favours with undecideds and independents with his inane rambling rants. For the most part, Harris just seemed content to use her time to press him and let him make a fool out of himself, with only a couple of instances popping up when she seemed to want to interject but couldn't.

[-] stoly@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

In this case his extra time actually hurt him.

[-] DogPeePoo@lemm.ee 33 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

That really showed what a shitbag outfit CNN has become under it’s new conservative ownership group. They are a wolf in sheep’s clothing now.

“I would like to see CNN evolve back to the kind of journalism that it started with, and actually have journalists, which would be unique and refreshing,” he said. Then he suggested a model: “Fox News, in my opinion, has followed an interesting trajectory of trying to have ‘news’ news, I mean some actual journalism, embedded in a program schedule of all opinions.”

Malone’s comments didn’t resonate much beyond a couple of places: At Fox News, which responded with glee, and inside CNN, where they sounded alarm bells.

—New board member and billionaire John Malone, a legend in the cable TV business and one who has deep and longstanding ties with David Zaslav

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

CNN was much more honorable—the debate we had with Biden was a much more honorably run debate.”

The CNN moderators in June notably did not fact-check or question statements made by Trump or Biden during that event, as per agreed rules.

Emphasis added

[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I would like to see any organization actually have journalists or actually do journalism. But my definition of journalism is different from this sociopath's, like I take telling the truth as an assumption.

[-] Kalysta@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago

Al Jazeera is pretty good with international news. Be skeptical of their middle east news though.

Also Democracy Now. Amy Goodman is still out there trying to break stories.

[-] DogPeePoo@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

There are only a handful of journalists left. Two that come to mind are Pam and Russ Martens of WSOP (Wall Street On Parade) who have been speaking truth to power for decades but remain obfuscated like other journalists with integrity.

Obviously these are financial journalists and we need many like them and their courage in the political and world news spheres.

They are out there, but they are the very few.

[-] renrenPDX@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Yeah the baby executioner bit was gold.

[-] tetrachromacy@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

THEY'RE EATING THE DOGS

this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
908 points (100.0% liked)

politics

18883 readers
3299 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