Not a single Trumper can explain why this was unfair because their homie likes to grab pussy and fucks underage girls with Epstein.
And actually said/did all these things listed.
"The MeDyA Is UnFaIr!!1!"
For just stating how your favorite little guy is?
Seems remarkably honest, much more honest than our presidential candidates.
I like how when you put the two candidates into 8th grade level language, the differences become so stark. There really isn't room for additional interpretation.
Also, I'm not surprised its Kapolei parents getting outraged at this, things get fairly red once you get out of Honolulu and especially as you get onto the West Side. You'll see a Trump flag being towed along side a Kanaka Maoli flag, a back the blue flag, AND a Hawaiian kingdom flag. I'm glad to see the DOE not budging on this.
I've been in Honolulu this past week and saw loud Trump supporter caravans going through the city twice, loud group of Trump supporters in front of the state capitol, and another one I don't remember where. Not sure what they're trying to achieve with all this.
Almost guarantee they are Westside.
Got a chuckle seeing this clown running for office. Not surprised though, a lot of people here are insane.
He got my vote.
These are literally all factual. If they don't want to look bad on paper maybe they shouldn't be fascists.
The truth doesn't reflect well on Trump. That's the fucking point! Instead they bitch that it was unfair. How can they be so fucking stupid to miss the entire point!
Yeah, the truth about Trump is pretty ugly when you don’t bury it beneath talking points, or obscure it with incoherent rants. “Biodegradable cattle byproduct” sounds okay, but it’s still bullshit.
pretty ugly when you don’t bury it beneath talking points, or obscure it with incoherent rants
Or outright blatant, easily proven lies.
Should they have included each candidate's stance on grabbing women by their privates?
So some parents whine because truth hurts, or what? Or is there a single item that is not easily verifyable?
They are phrasing it in a way that makes plausible deniability harder!
"Wants to make it easier to guns"
I think you a word there
I wish it was easier to these guns
Flexes nonexistent biceps
Aw, are the republicans upset that the children aren’t getting their propaganda? That’s so sad for them.
I love how even a biased take, trying to paint Harris much further left than she actually is, still went hard on Harris’ right-wing anti-immigration policies as if they were a good thing. LoL.
When I was in the 8th grade I tried asking what the difference was. A friend of mine at the time, who was kinda smart albeit the son of a rich dentist, summed it up by saying "Democrats want to give money to the homeless while republicans want to create jobs for the homeless". It made sense at the time and held some truth for a decade or 2.
Whereas now it's "democrats try to get homeless people back on their feet, republicans make being homeless illegal"
I read the headline and thought the controversy was probably stupid. Then I read the comparisons.
They should have pulled out planks from the party platforms. At least write what the party says it is going to do in its own words. It's OK to simplify, but this list is heavily editorialized. I don't know how much of that was from the NYT article (editorial?) and how much was the teacher's take.
I think it would be fine to have these characterizations of each party's policies in Speech & Debate coming from the opponents.
It's a comparison between Harris and Trump, not between the parties.
In theory the candidate supports and has a heavy influence over the party platform.
So that's either true in practice, in which case there's no problem putting the candidates' views there, since they represent the party too; or it's false in practice, in which case the candidates' views should be there, because that's who you're voting for.
My point is they are putting up views they ascribe to the candidate. It would be better to quote a written or spoken statement.
I guess people can't figure this out without having it reversed so they can understand it. Imagine a school district in Idaho handing out a lesson to students where they characterized the candidates' positions thusly:
Abortion Trump: Opposed to baby-killing Harris: Allows baby-killing in most cases.
So you're saying that some of the answers are flat out lies like in your example?
At least write what the party says it is going to do
No, they should present what each party actually tries to do. No more lies.
Are current politics something usually discussed in US middle schools? They're like what, 14? Or is there a separate civics class?
I'm pretty sure if a questionairre that fluffs Trump instead of Harris is passed out to children, people would be yelling fascism.
The problem is with spreading propaganda in school. There's just too much history and philosophy to cover to get a sense for modern policy, unless you have a special class for it maybe in high school.
I need a copy of this!
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
Posts must be:
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!