this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
194 points (96.2% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2175 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
 

WASHINGTON, Sept 27 (Reuters) - Former U.S. President Donald Trump, who is the Republican presidential candidate, said on Friday he will seek the prosecution of Google if he wins the Nov. 5 election, claiming that the company only displays "bad stories" about him.

Trump, in his post on Truth Social, gave no evidence for his assertion about Google.

"It has been determined that Google has illegally used a system of only revealing and displaying bad stories about Donald J. Trump, some made up for this purpose while, at the same time, only revealing good stories about" Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris, Trump said.

top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 68 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Trump using blatant mafia scare tactics to get his way. And about half the American voting population is like. Hey that's cool, I'm absolutely fine with that, as long as he also makes the poor, the colored, the immigrants and LGBT people suffer, and he lowers taxes for the ultra rich.

[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 47 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Look. This is how Cluster B personality disorders work. And how utterly exhausting they are. Notably, borderline personality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder. We all know Trump is the latter even if he isn’t officially diagnosed.

.

Anyone who has ever been in a relationship with Cluster B, be it familial, friendship, or romantic knows this is true about trump. And has probably been screaming on the inside, due to additional exposure, for 8 yrs.

.

What’s killer about this guy and his Cluster B is the press. The mains like NYT, NBC, etc, not fringe stuff like new republic and others that we often post to lemmy and Reddit, don’t just say it outright. Don’t just say there’s something mentally off with all he says and does. We should have had a blasted wall, a boundary set against this level of delusion, but instead we’ve had nearly a decade of “let’s explore this”, leading us down the lane of what is, yes, the perceptions of untreated mental illness. That’s what a Cluster B personality disorder is: untreated mental illness. Not the lock you up kind (barring a BPD trip down SA/SI, which is a hallmark of that disorder, but that’s off topic for a Trump discussion). The press isn’t reporting misinformation, but they have enabled his mental illness and pulled us all into an unwelcome relationship with it by never placing healthy boundaries on it. It’s like they wanted a society of Cluster B co-dependents. They have helped create this exhausting reality via their own codependency.

.

And it’s fucking exhausting.

.

So what we have is this exhausting, societal level gaslight that feeds into a Cluster B personality disorder’s reality, instead of reality. This statement about Google? “Normal” for Cluster B. Utterly expected and within the operating procedures of Cluster B.

.

Typically, a person finding themselves in a relationship with one of these nightmare personality disorders goes no contact to get healthy again. They have to. It’s the only way. For a decade we haven’t been allowed to go no contact.

.

I’ll conclude by saying the obvious. If you’d finally like to go no contact on this Cluster B relationship, vote for Kamala Harris.

[–] Xanis@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

Here you go, everyone:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/cluster-b

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_disorder

I'd post a summary, though with these it is often best to go a little more in-depth than some tldr on the subject. Long story short, Trump represents Narcissism and Histrionic, maybe BPD. I'll be honest, I've kept my distance from watching him. Someone else with more screen time, or more knowledge, feel free to chime in with corrections.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

Yes yes yes and yes.

100 percent.

Good write-up too 👌🏻

[–] ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I've known and agreed about Trump's obvious clinical narcissism, but I needed to hear this last piece: the ineptitude and culpability of the media in not just facilitating it, but actively contributing to what in any other circumstance would be systematic abuse. It's so messed up that they are exposing us to, and amplifying, his mental illness without any self-reflection or caution.

For reference, I also had a relationship with someone with BPD. I had to go no-contact after she took a bottle of pills, and then tried to time a call to me so she could die on the phone while I was powerless to stop it. (The ambulance got there in time.) It wasn't until months later that I realized just how exhausted I had been, and how much it was harming me. Feels familiar.

[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 40 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If I was google I would estimate the cost of said prosecution an start funding things to prevent Trump.

[–] AlexanderTheDead@lemmy.world 37 points 2 months ago (3 children)

If I was google I'd simply sue for defamation. Seems pretty open shut, considering Trump is claiming a law to have been broken and that is blatantly and easily verifiably untrue.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

If I were google, I'd just remove any positive mention of him from people's search results.

let him scream into a void. it's not like they're not legally allowed to fuck over a person.

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Probably don't even wanna get into it. Streisand effect, and probably just want to avoid all the discovery that would entail.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 months ago

They’ve got the bank account to do so successfully. But I don’t think they’d wanna piss off his lunatic supporters and risk domestic terrorism.

[–] Zexks@lemmy.world 27 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Google should sue him for defamation immediately.

[–] Soup@lemmy.cafe 2 points 1 month ago

Didn’t see this before I posted essentially the exact same thing, totally agree though. They should ruin him.

[–] bizzle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

So that the cronies he packed the court with can take his side anyway?

[–] 800XL@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

"It has been determined that Google has illegally used a system of only revealing and displaying bad stories about Donald J. Trump, some made up for this purpose while, at the same time, only revealing good stories about" Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris, Trump said.

Don't worry, I speak Trump.

Translation: Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! I don't wike what thewer saying about meeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!! I want Google FIRED nnnnnooooooooowwwwwwww!

*other wet fart noises*

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Are you gonna sue Fox News for being biased as well?

[–] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

"Bias favoring me, not favoring thee"

[–] NABDad@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

That seems like libel to me.

[–] meeeeetch@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

I'd rather see them broken up for monopolism (a possible outcome thanks to the current FTC chairwoman appointed during the current administration) than sued about hurting the president's feelings

[–] aquinteros@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

only displaying bad stories ? have you tried not doing bad and illegal shit perhaps ? or is he as imbecile that thinks that a group of minions are organizing the results of a search and it's not an algorithm

[–] 4_degrees@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Is this why I got a Google news hit criticizing Harris for "repetitive speeches?" Lol, what a joke. "We don't like how she stays on message, waaahhh," lol.

[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago

Suing companies that Hurt your Feelings it was BIG STRONG MEN do! Also FUCK YOUR FEELINGS LIBTARDS!

[–] Soup@lemmy.cafe 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

This sounds like defamation to me. Google is pretty fucking litigious if I remember correctly, and Donnie is FAR too stupid to have any chance of winning against them.

Pointless to hope, but gonna anyway…. It’d be nice if Google absolutely decimated him into irrelevance for this shit.

And I hate Google almost as much as that orange-tinted fecal sample.

[–] smokin_shinobi@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Smart move threatening the ad-monopoly.