politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Convince people. The quick polls are already in.
Walz is fine though. I don't remember any mistake honestly. But the numbers are in already. We can say solidly that JD Vance did better.
22 people is hardly a survey for a national election, and is a total nonanswer. I'm asking you what you think Vance did better.
Image, body language. Looking at the camera with the "Marine Stare" to show off with body language his disdain for a particular topic or response from Walz (while Walz's body language was not nearly as effective at showing JD Vance's weird shit).
If you're not aware of what "Republicans see as weird", well... guess what?? JD Vance is, and he's able to rally people with just a glance. It was clearly effective. Though perhaps in a "deeper" political look / visual communication cue rather than actual talking.
JD Vance is the complete package. Walz is well spoken but not quite as emoted and not as good of a reaction to JD Vance.
Don't get me wrong, JD Vance is fucking nuts. But if you're not seeing JD Vance's good performance here, you're at risk at underestimating the scope of the problem here.
EDIT: Like... base things. The things people care about. Like, "Who looked more like a soldier" (especially on the meta-topic of JD Vance service record vs Tim Walz's service record), JD Vance looked more like a soldier. Base things that appeal to the ID and not logic. JD Vance is spot on on these issues.
I don't think it matters because Donald Trump is the actual topic of discussion. But JD Vance's performance is better than you'd think within a Republican mindset.
Its fine because Walz didn't need to win this debate. Walz just needed to punt and he's accomplished that. JD Vance isn't going to turn all of Trump's ills away with one good debate performance either (especially since Walz wasn't crushed or defeated).
Walz needed to introduce his personality to the country. And Walz did that. Good. Take the W for what it is, but don't overplay your hand here. This isn't like the Harris v Trump debate where Harris crushed Trump. This is actually slight win to JD Vance IMO but Walz is good enough to not damage Harris's campaign kinda debate.
JD looked and talked like an alien making his first contact with humans. He lacks any charisma, and you can tell he doesn't actually believe anything he says. And because of that, the moderators asked many times about his stance on almost everything being 180 degrees from when he started the Trump audition.
Also I don't think Republican = MAGA cult anymore. I also feel 99% of these "undecided" voters at this point are going to vote Trump, and are just reaching for something that they can say is the reason other than racism.
100% agree on this point.
But that's also not JD Vance's goal here. JD Vance's goal is to sanewash Trump. And he accomplished that.
I kinda-sorta see where you're coming from here.
Alas: this is the marine stare. A lot of marines I know do this. I think people in the know are in the know and see JD Vance's mannerism here as charismatic.
Please, reconcile your fawning fascist fellating with the FACT that he's the last popular VP candidate in American history. I'm sure it will be an entertaining, if somewhat nauseating read.
JD Vance is like +19 points in favorability today post-debate.
Recognize the threat and sit the fuck down. I'm on your side. But we all need to recognize what is or isn't working in politics. JD Vance's performance worked. That's the face of our political opponents, and it's a solid working strategy.
Don't be blinded by short term Trump issues. JD Vance is the longer term threat now, even if Trump loses we have many decades of JD Vance ahead of us, especially with his performance last night.
Vance went from -22 to -3. Wow. He's so popular now. Such a long term threat.
I wouldn't consider staring off while trying to reword your same lie as being charismatic. There is a reason his favorability has been under water the whole time, it isn't because he was a Marine. I have met Marines, and I have seen former Marines in office that can have a normal conversation, and actually appear to care. JD lacks the ability to converse, and has zero ability to relate with anyone, even MAGA folks.
Because the point of an election is to determine who has the best body language. You heard it here first folks
You all don’t seem to understand how stupid people vote. Or what’s important to them or most importantly HOW FUCKING MANY OF THEM YHERE ARE.
Trump looks like he's about to fall forward at all times, and his blank, geriatric, demented stare is honestly a spectical at this point, paired with his constant word salad.
I guess that means Kamala wins, folks. Wrap it up, everyone. It's over. Let's go home and move on.
You jest but half a country are below average intelligence. It’s not outlandish to think that many individuals in that half aren’t really following what is being said or understand it. What they can follow is the visuals. How they look, how they stand, how they move; how they “read”. And a non-trivial number of above average people still judge books by their covers.
I think the point the person above was trying to make is that Vance won the area the majority of people can evaluate and the importance of visuals.
Harris's body language was far superior to Trump's. And is part of why she crushed him so completely.
EDIT: Body language is incredibly important to QAnon btw, because QAnon believes that JD Vance is not free to speak his mind. So these nods and looks JD Vance are doing are non-verbal acknowledgements that also plays to the whole "Q" and "Deep State" shit. Yadda-yadda.
I'm not sure if you're recognizing the threat this body language actually is, or the role its playing in this debate. Tim Walz certainly looks completely ignorant to it all (or at least, doesn't want to deal with it). This is JD Vance literally leaning into Q-shit and rallying it.
Wow, and I thought your first post was full of maga copium, but damn, this one takes the cake.
Who the actual fuck gives a single wet shit what QTurds have to say?
At least anybody who is seriously trying to figure out how to get Kamala and Walz across the finish line.
Q-shits and other groups like that are how we got Trump in the first place. We must defeat that ideology not because of a trump, but because QAnon will continue to influence our politics over the rest of our lives, long after the 78-year old orange man is dead.
Sitting around in a circle pretending Walz had a better night than he actually did is counterproductive. Walz did fine but we must be honest with ourselves here. JD Vance did very well.
At a bare minimum, we need to be honest about which parts of this debate we need to meme and spread around. This moment in this topic is a self-own and plays to Q-anon. So NOT meme this, it's counterproductive.
Our opponents think the media is in cahoots with Harris / Walz, that Walz is scripted and Harris has an earpiece telling her the answers. To see the moderators of the debate challenge JD Vance like this is proof of the conspiracy. It's not the shining moment you think it is politically speaking.
January 6th moment later in the debate? Meme that. Spread that one. You need to be strategic about the message if you want any hope of winning. This election is closer than it should be so we need to give it everything we got to reach across the finish line.
That's so damn horny 😄
Are you a couch?
This was the exact thought running thru my head as i forced myself through that disgusting fan fiction.
I know you're getting downvoted, but I appreciate this analysis. I have autism and don't pick up on body language
JD Vance did full 100% politician stance the entire time so I don't think there's anything to take from it.
Well, you don't wanna listen to dragontamer then. The scenes they're describing happened only in their head.
Also, what is the source of that image?
From the fonts I’d guess NYT
Edit: other comments are saying Washington Post
Ah yes, "the numbers". Are those the same numbers that say Trump has the bigliest rallies? Are they the BEST NUMBERS OF ALL TIME?
Yeah, you might be an idiot if it belive any of that. That's your right, though. It's a free country, for now.
This is a fucking Washington Post screenshot.
Holy shit man. Pull your head out of your own ass. Walz did fine, its not a big deal. But JD Vance outperformed. If you don't see it then you're fucking blind and you're ignoring even left-leaning papers like the WashPo.
That's right everyone, the Bezos Post is left leaning!
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-post/
Yall live in your own fucking reality. I'll tell you what.
Can someone please explain to me why everyone hates this? I'm so lost lol
Cuz it's not objective.
Because the vast majority of "mainstream" news outlets are pro-corporate and pro-capitalism, making them center-right at best, yet they label them as left wing. The entire idea behind the site is Republican propaganda that was created to coerce the media into repeating their lies unquestioningly, lest they be labeled as "biased".
MAGA uses it so suggest that every fact you throw at them is biased because an outlet may lean left, which the majority of the noteworthy ones do. My buddy is a maga guy and he even declares AP news and Reuters as liberal mainstream media.
Another popular tactic is to see who owns the company where the news is coming from. If there’s a single Democrat on the board of directors or anything like that, then the news is “tainted”
Can’t win. It’s also pointless giving them facts I’ve learned over the past 8 years.
That MBFC garbage even rated AP as left leaning last time I saw it. It's so incredibly biased.
And who the fuck crowned MBFC the kings of based unbiased-ness?
The "both sides" types seem to think it is entirely credible.... 🤣
It's fucking bullshit. It ranks news orgs owned by billionaires as "left leaning"
Yes. That's always the question the hard right and their apologists and the Enligtened Centrists (TM) can never answer in any serious way and that question is - how can the news outlet of a huge MNC and/or controlled by an oligarch be, in any serious way, on the left?
These unserious people keep telling me that "well, everyone just knows" or quoting polls that poll the newsreaders or the stenographers for the elite and who they are registered for, not realizing we are talking about the help, not the owners. What the help wants or who they vote for doesn't mean a fart in a high wind. It's the owners that call the tune, FFS.
Oh I see, dispite it being owned by a BILIONAIRE who is opposed to any fundimental change in the status quo, this one website says they are left leaning so no need to consider anything they are left... FFS use your damn brain
JD Vance out preformed! Cause I say so!
WashPo, CBS and CNN reports JD Vance won the debate in quick polls of swing state voters post debate.
Cope harder. There is simple truth on this issue and I'll continue to speak the truth here.
Are you really referencing a poll of 22 people lmao
Are you really denying the poll which has now been replicated on CNN and CBS instant polls?
JD Vance won the debate in every reputable flash poll I've read this morning. For fucks sake you dumbass, open your eyes and recognize the political challenge before us.
You'd rather muse on irrelevant technicalities than see the actual polls from the electorate. Small polls are in fact statistically sound btw if handled correctly, and the methodology of focusing on undecided voters is the key here. The election is close and we need every vote we can get to stop Trump, and you are blinding yourself to the truth of the situation.
You’re getting emotional over something that doesn’t matter. Only 1% of people changed their views after this debate
Newsweek is reporting the opposite, with Walz getting a boost and not Vance.
https://lemmy.world/post/20422964
You didn't even read the article.
What you, and your system of copera is doing, is muddying the waters and ignoring JD Vance performance.
Trump dies in a few years, he's a 78-year-old sickly man. JD Vance is the guy we will likely have to deal with the rest of our lives politically speaking. He's young and clearly taking charge of the ideology. This is a long term problem (even if Trump is the bigger problem).