• ResoluteCatnap@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    148
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Let me get this straight, CBS is refusing to fact check the VP nominee who, on TV, admitted that if he has to make up lies to get America’s attention then he’d do just that?

    Eat shit CBS

  • ChicoSuave@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    149
    ·
    1 day ago

    If there is no fact checking, Kamala needs to be ready to ask why Trump nominated someone who isn’t allowed in any Ashley Furniture store in the lower 48 states and Alberta.

    • Empricorn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      You… do know Harris (it’s weird you used her first name) and Trump won’t be at the Vice-Presidential debate, right?

        • 4lan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          It’s a subconscious reduction of the person based on the idea that men are better leaders. I promise you’ll start to catch on to it now that you know about it, it’s weird as fuck.

          • Jarix@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            26 minutes ago

            Only if you let it be. Its not weird to call someone by their first name. Especially since the term weird has become weponized.

            Calling Kamala Harris, Kamala instead of Harris might be unusually in the situation…but its not “i like to fuck couches” or “ill invent overt lies if thats what i think i need to do” or “grab em by the pussy” etc kind of weird.

        • Empricorn@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Yeah, we all know it’s her first name, no one calls her that unless they have a personal relationship with her. I’m not even saying it has to be “Madame Vice-President” or anything so formal, but no one refers to the former president as “Donald” either…

          • Jarix@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            20 minutes ago

            R/theDonald

            /s

            Its unusual maybe, but with the current weaponization of the word weird its a point worth making. Its not weird to call someone by their first name.

            Awkward in as elections go, but I think its worth pointing out how completely normal it is to use her first name when refering to her.

            Its much like calling your parent by their first name. Its different, but not wierd in the new sense of the word weird

        • Jtotheb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Start looking at how many people say “Kamala” versus how many people say “Joe”, “Tim”, “Donald”, or “JD”.

          • Jarix@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            18 minutes ago

            Yeah no thanks. Its hard enough to get away from american politcs at a time like this as it is. Ive no interest or capacity to go out of my way to subject myself to more of it than i have to.

    • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I agree with the sentiment, but that tees up Trump to reply with something that normalizes getting banned from places. You know, the sorts of consequences for the actions of “fine people” everywhere. It doesn’t even have to make complete sense nor be morally defensible; simple soothing words and support from perceived “leadership” is enough to make that play.

      If your opponent isn’t rational, and their base much less so, appealing to general reason is probably not going to work. Better to go on the attack and out specific weird behavior as, well, weird and not a part of the overall group (voters) dynamic. The key is to signal that there’s something wrong with this kind of behavior with your time on the mic, rather than hope that your opponent will just screw up their rebuttal.

  • Empricorn@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Don’t act like Walz wiping the floor with Vance is a forgone conclusion, it’s not. That’s what people thought about Biden’s debate. Whether we admit it or not, there’s intelligent Republican debaters who can’t be baited out there, Trump just isn’t one of them.

    I genuinely wonder if the best option wouldn’t be to refuse the VP debate until live fact-checking is in place for both candidates. That, or correcting simple untruths didn’t count toward their time. I love Tom Walz, but if he has to literally spend his entire time refuting very obvious lies continuously spewed by Vance, his time would be better spent campaigning in swing states. How much does a Vice-Presidential debate really matter, anyway?

    • PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      There’s intelligent Republican debaters who can’t be baited out there

      This is true, but I’ve seen Vance speak, he has zero charisma. I feel like you need some amount of charisma to be a bullshit artist and have people not see straight through you. I mean people with any semblance of intelligence will see through you no matter what, but votes aren’t weighted on intelligence.

      • 4lan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I’ve been saying for years that votes should be weighted on IQ. 1 vote for 100IQ points, 1.2 votes for 120IQ. If people literally rip up their children’s homework because they are learning about pronouns (the grammatical concept) then they should be considered mentally unfit to vote

    • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      15 hours ago

      correcting simple untruths didn’t count toward their time

      This would be THE BEST rule ever for all debates of any kind.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I disagree, that’ll be abused by candidates to get more screen time.

        We should keep the fact checking ABC did and perhaps deduct time for candidates that are consistently caught out on lies. The fact checkers should be approved by all candidates as well, so they can’t just point to the hosts as favoring one or another.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      13 hours ago

      The president absolutely can. Would it be legal? Probably not. Would that matter after federal agents kick everyone out of your studio and lock it? Probably not.

    • dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      13 hours ago

      A random person - no.

      A person who controls millions of narrow minded gun wielding nationalists - maybe.

  • danc4498@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    1 day ago

    Part of the problem is that nearly every sentence trump spoke was a lie, so fact checking was not 100%. They just fact checked random things, like, nobody is eating our pets. ProfessorWeKnowDis.gif

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      13 hours ago

      They fact checked the most obvious stuff on purpose. It’s irrefutable. You cannot seriously claim they were biased when their two fact checks were the most basic shit. And yet that highlights just how bad Trump is.

  • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Walz needs to make outlandish, unbelievable, rumors. Couch fucking should sound normal.

    Vance is technology he’s own great-,grandfather/ brother. You know, he’s Grafa bro! His pet ladybug is very proud of their accomplish.

    • 4lan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      It seems that Walz has been using the Trump cult’s tactics of being super cheeky and poking at the competition.

      I hope to see him ridicule that eyeliner-wearing, couch-fucker. When the righties complain we can tell them “why so triggered? he was just joking around! Lol”

    • Diurnambule@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      15 hours ago

      That would be so fun if he would use the maga debate technic and go full lie after lie making Vance lose his time refuting everything

          • HonouraryDragon@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            13 hours ago

            This one is truly deranged, and it doesn’t think that it’s an asshole, although it does admit that it possesses one, for the sake of transparency.

            Anyway, it doesn’t think that you ought to bother others on proper pronoun usage. Doing so might draw the fire of those who wish to build a better world.

          • Dragon "Rider"@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            16 hours ago

            Neither. Xi referred to dragself in the first person. Xi has first person neopronouns, xi/drag. Xi’s pronouns are person-independent, so they apply the same way in first, second, and third person.

            Most people have first person, second person, and third person object, subject, and possessive pronouns. That’s 9 pronouns! Xi only has 2 pronouns, so xi’s pronouns are much simpler and easier to remember.

            • 4lan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 hours ago

              Calling us “people” and “person” is kind of fucked up, why are you assuming our species? Get with the times, that is so 2023

  • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    1 day ago

    It’s not that Trump is killing anything; no more than millenials killed anything. It’s the media that’s the problem. If we’re going to blame anybody for failed media, then let’s blame the appropriate people. Instead of giving them a scape goat, we hold their feet to the fire.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 day ago

    Some people are under the mistaken impression that corporate news is not run specifically by republiQans to promote conservatism.

    🌎🧑‍🚀🔫👨‍🚀

    • asteriskeverything@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Do you mean that these entities are run by people who believe qanon? Or you weren’t being literal? Just the former I’d be really curious to see what lead you to opinion

      Hilarious and sad if true

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Do you mean that these entities are run by people who believe qanon?

        It’s kind of a ‘trick question’ because they don’t have to believe Qanuts to support them. I like to think they don’t but statistically - i.e. Elon - some must. It becomes irrelevant when they simply repeat Qanon idiocies without brutally mocking them.

        A defining quality of Qanon “theories” is that they literally aren’t theories in any sense but in the largest most general term. Like “robots are stealing my luggage” is a “theory”.

    • OpenStars@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Is this one though, or are they merely… “useful”?

      My own point is that if those two are functionally indistinguishable, then that should tell us something about how dangerous the situation has become.

      Very nice emojis btw!

  • Pavidus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 day ago

    I kinda wanna see the entire debate evolve into ludicrous, outlandish claims back and forth. Just sheer comedy. I know this isn’t the right way to fix anything, but it’s what we deserve at this point for letting the situation get this far unchecked.

  • shutz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 day ago

    Is the debate being simulcast on all the major networks? I seem to remember seeing the Trump/Harris debate on ABC, CBS and NBC (just with different talking heads before and after).

    If so, ABC should broadcast the debate with fact-checking overlays (Pop-up video style?) and advertise the shit out of the fact that they’ll be doing this.

  • SattaRIP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Americans still haven’t figured out that when the US talks about democracy and freedom, it’s a fucking lie. The rest of the world knows this. Catch up already. Democracy was never alive in the US.