I mean, let's be honest here. There is a lot of good journalism in MSM; just about everything reported on from leaks and "anonymous" sources leading up to the Mueller report was later confirmed in the report or by first-hand witnesses(the matter-of-fact stuff, not necessarily the conclusions). Buutttt... CNN still has their "outrage" segments and echo chambers..
Neither accepts that it’s not just the other side distorting reality; both are oblivious to their own distortion.
I'm really not sure where the whole communist thing came from, anyway. Go to the far left of the Democratic Party and you are still pretty far to the right of communists.
I think this is mainly because we set the wrong incentives, for example outrage drives clicks which drives ad money, though we can also throw evolution some shade for lacking foresight when it made outrage such a strong emotion and gave us a tendency towards reaffirming our own views.
In any case, I don't know how to solve it, and it's certainly not a new problem (I guess it's been a thing since democracy is a thing), but it seems the web amplified it a lot, to the point where I think it's to blame for our current political division.
That's where you completely lost me. Yet another person who doesn't know what communism is and just uses it as a blanket, non-sense label for leftists.
> you guys don’t realize you’re part of the echo
> we’re all trying to navigate this strange post truth world
I see what you did there, do you?
Makes sense to me in the context of an assault on speech. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Breitbart is leaking.
But honestly, care to elaborate? I'm genuinely curious.
Even if you do, the right pretty obviously doesn't agree, and you don't have to look far for evidence. If they wouldn't feel like they're represented unfairly in the MSM, they wouldn't keep complaining about fake news and the MSM in general.
We’ve got to be very careful here not to paint all of MAGA with that brush because that ends in a dark, dark place.
So many servile people ready to give up liberties here because they want to punish the other, refusing to understand the implications of how such systems will be turned on them some point in the future.
Even when ‘leftists’ protest at congress, they go through metal detectors and demonstrate peacefully—no window smashing, no theft, no overrunning security lines. Trumpists on Wednesday literally hung nooses from trees and killed a cop.
Also not like 5 congressmen were shot of anything: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_United_States_Capitol_sho...
I think that says more about how boring & peaceful the late twentieth century was. The number of people old enough to remember more interesting times is declining quickly.
I mean, damn, there’s a reason Buchanan is said to have caused the war—and it’s not that he just happened to have been president before Lincoln.
Similarly, the refusal to accept Trump's loss is rooted in deep gulfs on identity and to a lesser extent on issues. I don't think you can separate the end-of-the-world paranoia from attitudes on BLM, for example.
I believe, they believe the election was rigged. Justified or not, it doesn't stop them from doing stuff.
2) Even if they did investigate it clearly wouldn't work. These conspiracies are self sealing - lack of proof is itself proof. If you're capable of rigging an entire election, then of course you will be able to do it without leaving any evidence.
How do you "investigate" allegations like that? If you've really fallen for this scam then you have been thoroughly brainwashed by the far right internet.
Take for example, this: https://mapthefraud.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/DATASCIENC/pag....
If the thousands of votes here were fraudulent, the quantity is sufficiently high to assume that some organization is trying to interfere with the election. If there is an organization capable of creating thousands of fraudulent votes in this instance, then what instances are we unaware of that the same organization is also involved with.
I'm not asking for a 2-year investigation based on allegations of a pee pee video recorded in a Russian hotel, I'm just asking for:
"Republicans opposing Wednesday's electoral count have one proposal to deal with the controversy — that Congress delay action for 10 days so an "emergency" electoral commission can audit the results and investigate voter fraud claims in the contested states."
https://www.npr.org/sections/congress-electoral-college-tall...
> Take for example, this:
More crank garbage. The voting histories of every voter are public domain, if you think there are more votes than voters why are you trying to scrape some random web portal through questionable methods instead of checking the voting records directly?
If this allegation were really credible can you point me to a lawsuit filed by an by a plaintiff with standing (e.g. Trump or another Michigan candidate who allegedly had the election stolen from them, NOT some 3rd party QAnon crank) that presents this allegation to a court? If no such lawsuit exists why do you think that is the case? Maybe because no competent lawyer wants to destroy their reputation by arguing obviously fake conspiracy theories in front of a judge?
The president has spent weeks trying to delegitimize the results of a democratic election, culminating yesterday by inciting a mob to de-rail the ratifying of the results, but it’s the banning of said president from a social media site that has changed American democracy forever. Right.
How many of us here has had to face years of despair because of job loss, and loss of social standing due to globalization and corporate greed? Do we have any genuine hope (and more importantly, need) of understanding this 74 million?
Actually, one of the magical things Trump did was prey on a lot of individuals individual desires while getting them to ignore all the stuff he promised to others that they don't agree with.
But anyway, just because you voted for somebody doesn't mean you agree with them on everything. That's as true for the left as it is the right.
4+ years of no-quarter given raging against Trump has set the tone for the future of America. I don't think anyone is going to like that future.
Grab a mirror. This has been building for a lot longer than 4 years.
You believe you have no hope of understanding nearly half of all voters? You think 74 million people all think the same?
Heck, GOP got jack-all done in the first two years because they apparently don't agree all that much.
They literally had 4 years of their president sitting in the oval office, during 2 of which they controlled the legislature as well. If they felt ignored by the people in power, then it was THEIR people that THEY elected that were ignoring them. And, apparently they were not dissatisfied with them because they by and large voted for them AGAIN in 2020.
>then they must genuinely feel that the normal method of registering protest, i.e., voting, has ceased to function for them
No, let's just call them what they are: sore losers.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email [email protected] and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.
It's interesting that you say that Biden voters feel disrespected because Trump voters protested something in the way they did. When BLM protesters vandalized (mostly poor or middle-class people's) shops, do you think it was reasonable for non-BLM people (most Trump supporters) to be outraged? If not, therein lies the problem.
BTW, there were violent riots when Trump was elected president, including in Oakland, Portland etc.:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Oakland_riots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Portland,_Oregon_riots
Mail dumping, interception and modification of ballots, just plain errors in ballots or failure to mail them (these last two are not in the 'game the ballot' category, but they do happen with mail-in balloting) all occur in almost every election. Even if they do not materially change election results, they affect the perception of the legitimacy of results. The perception is as important as the reality of the process. Any law that helps improve the perception should be welcomed.
Did any of this actually happen?
> ...they do not materially change election results...
So... what’s the problem again?
I would bet Federal bureaucracy would have hampered say a Clinton response, but Trump refused to lead, take even the most basic federal action, and he basically doesn't care beyond testing numbers affecting his election. He specifically withheld supplies and support to D states until 'they have to treat us well' e.g. be a sycophant on tv.
Maybe voters would have confidence in mail-in-voting if Republicans & Trump didn't spend a year attacking it and spreading politically motivated lies.
VBM is secure and many studies have shown there is very very little fraud.
My state Colorado has been sending ballots to almost every voter for years and it works. A Republican SOS helped craft and refine the system.
used by like something 94% of our voters, clearly trusted and used widely on both sides. Notice it doesn't get attacked by legitimate Republicans here
https://www.5280.com/2020/05/no-fraud-isnt-rampant-in-colora...
Republicans have been ruthlessly effective here and there are plenty of laws that are passed under the guise of 'anti-fraud' but really are to suppress the vote usually in favor of southern Republicans. Copy of license, very very restrictive rules on who can request a ballot, reducing drop off locations etc Same playbook for a century, different rules
I strongly suggest you stop and think for a bit about what this means.
You didn't see this sort of reaction in 2000, and that was far far closer.
And to be clear, this election was 306 to 232. That is considered a landslide in my book (meaning my 40+ years of living). And in percentages, you can see just how poorly Trump performed in this election - 51.4% to 46.9%. 2000 was 47.9% to 48.4% (technically a negative 0.5% difference).
So I think your argument is completely disingenuous.
Just a comment on this point, I see two huge differences:
1) Gore conceded. On 13-Dec 2000. Trump only just "conceded", and still called it rigged, stolen etc. It makes a big difference when the leader concedes.
2) Technology has totally change the landscape in the last 20 years. There are now plenty of spaces on the Internet, huge echo chambers, allowing people to share posts and fuel each others hatred, spread misinformation, organise and mobilise.
2020 obviously blew it all out of the water though.
> You didn't see this sort of reaction in 2000
I think you found the reason? When exactly have we seen such a reaction before?
I think it's more accurate to say that a percentage of people believe they will benefit by repeating claims that the election was rigged.
It's difficult to truly believe that an election was rigged, by the other side, when your side was ultimately responsible for its administration.
In a mid December CBS news poll, “82% of Trump voters say they do not consider Mr. Biden[‘s win] legitimate.” The vast majority of trump voters isn’t the same thing as half the country.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-poll-most-feel-electio...
Seems like most voters were still holding out while there was some hope of a viable legal route to contest the election. But a majority of Trump voters, at the time of the poll anyway, made a clean break from contesting the election after the electoral college vote.
And to be really fair, half of the country believed neither of those things. There are plenty of people who voted for Trump who believe that he lost fair and square, and ditto Hillary voters in the previous election.
You keep blaming tech companies for the poor actions of the adults using it and it doesn't make sense.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll/half-of...
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/