this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2024
391 points (87.7% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2423 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 26 points 4 months ago (3 children)

It's like you didn't even read the article or what they said and are trying to pretend they said something else. Amazing that you would pull the term "gaslighting" out, it's almost as if you know what you are doing.

To reiterate he article, they were turned off by Trump's lies and repeating the same things and avoiding the questions. None says they were inspired by Biden.

[–] hark@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Did you read the article? Here's a quote:

The clip shows a group of about a dozen people and one of them being interviewed by a journalist.

So you think this can be applied broadly to undecided voter sentiment in general?

[–] mildlyusedbrain@lemmy.world -2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Lol did you? It literally cites a single voter and a poll showing Trump trending better among Latinos than previous electoral performances for that demographic. Nothing in this article actually warranted the headline and meta polls show Trump still ahead. Delusion will only hand us another 4 years of Trump

[–] VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

You fighting to sow discord against the only viable alternative is working to get Trump, pointing out that regular people found reason to prefer his responses over Trump and highlighting what they are is useful in helping people highlight the many advantages of Biden.

Yes he's not as energetic as a lunatic, probably because he's a sensible human that's been working hard on his lifelong goal of improving the society he lives in and pushing through sensible and practical reforms that actually help real people and put the nation on track to deal with the many challenges it faces going forward.

[–] mildlyusedbrain@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

So nice job of not addressing the fact that you didn't read the article and nothing I said indicated that I'm trying to sow discord. I will vote for Biden and argue that others should as well

But pretending that the debate helped that cause is worthless. We are losing and pretending we are not doesn't help. Stop fighting with people pointing out reality and be more vocal on why to vote for Biden.

[–] Saurok@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

Criticizing Biden right now is not "working to get Trump". Biden could easily step down and get behind an alternative candidate. These things aren't black and white when we're still like 4-5 months out from the election.

[–] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today -4 points 4 months ago

FR FR

One of those "Vote for me because I'm not my opponent" moments.