972

After nearly a decade of being forced to take Trump seriously, Democrats increasingly call BS on the whole charade

Sure, Donald Trump is a threat to democracy — a would-be dictator on day one who has called for terminating the U.S. Constitution so he can hold onto power even after losing a free and fair election. But while draped in the rhetoric of populism, Trump and his MAGA movement are not actually popular; the man himself has never won more votes than the person he ran against, a majority of Americans twice rejecting him and his off-putting cult of personality. That he was ever president is more or less because a few thousand swing voters in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania thought it would be fun.

President Joe Biden won in 2020 largely by promising to a return to normalcy and baseline competency. In 2024, Democrats are making a similar argument but more forcibly: They’re pointing, laughing and dismissing Trump and his circus as a total freak show to which we can’t return.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 71 points 2 years ago

I think it's because for so long they've relied on Democrats/people on the left (I say that because it's not just in the US, it's become the right-wing tactic all over the place) being serious and arguing in good faith, IE: they'll just say the wildest shit that's blatantly untrue, and people on the left tend to bust out the facts and links to long explanations of why that's false, and they just counter it with more nonsense until their opponents get tired and quit, then they proclaim victory. But if you just go "you're weird, fuck you" and then refuse to follow up on it they kind of don't know what to do with it.

Also, the amount it's pissing them off means it's working, everyone keep doing it!

[-] bitwaba@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

arguing in good faith [edit: faith was originally missing. That's what I get for Lemmy on the toilet-ing]

I specifically remember Trevor Noah having an opening monologue to the Daily Show some time just prior to or after Trump having taken office about this exact topic. Essentially he was saying it allowed Trump to control the narrative. Every time he lied, the left leaning media would be off digging up facts and statistics to come back and says "ah ha ya! Look at this!" But by the time they get back to respond, he's gone off and changed the topic and made another blatantly false condemnation of some group of people. And so the cycle repeats itself.

Noah's proposed solution was the same as a child having a tantrum: ignore them. When things go wrong, make it clear why it's a result of his policies or rhetoric. Stop playing politics like you're playing them with a competent adult. You're not.

[-] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago

Yeah it's a bit like dealing with the school bully I think. They want to make people flustered and upset because it makes them feel big and gets them attention. But if you give them even a little bit of their own medicine they can't handle it at all.

[-] cm0002@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Hmm, I wonder if commenting that in that strange Lemmy place c/conservative would have the same effect lmao

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 2 points 2 years ago

Ugh, what a weird and creepy place that is

[-] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago

But if you just go "you're weird, fuck you" and then refuse to follow up on it they kind of don't know what to do with it.

Well, if it were that easy, the right would've been beaten a long time ago. If Kamala ever gets a chance to debate Trump (spoiler: he will never debate her) she isn't going to just respond to everything he says with some variation of "you're weird; fuck you".

this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2024
972 points (98.3% liked)

politics

31574 readers
3270 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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 3 years ago
MODERATORS