this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2024
353 points (97.8% liked)

politics

19136 readers
3876 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
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 50 points 5 days ago (1 children)

smells like desperation. if he doesnt win, hes got quite a few court appearances to answer to.

[–] takeda@lemmy.world 58 points 5 days ago (3 children)

I still don't get how we ignored our own constitution and allowed insurectionist to have a second chance.

WTF America?

[–] DogPeePoo@lemm.ee 25 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Merrick Garland’s fecklessness will go in the history books—that is if they are not all burned by the MAGA Nazis

[–] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 10 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Milquetoast.

His name is Milquetoast.

[–] Myxomatosis@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago

Neville Garland.

[–] StrongHorseWeakNeigh@lemmy.world 11 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Because presidents are kings now thanks to the supreme court.

[–] espentan@lemmy.world 5 points 5 days ago

If our king displayed behavior anywhere close to how Trump behaves, it would've been the end of monarchy in Norway, and indeed any other modern monarchy.

[–] OpenStars@piefed.social 2 points 5 days ago

Bc pwn libs.

And it'll happen again if given a quarter of a chance. Get voting!

[–] Hubi@feddit.org 32 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

I've got loads of respect for anyone willing to sift through 9 years of Trump speeches without turning insane.

[–] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 19 points 5 days ago (1 children)

They probably forced some poor, innocent algorithm to do it

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 14 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Maybe this is how Skynet happened

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago

And it would be justified

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 1 points 5 days ago

Added to the pile of everything else we're shoveling it. I prefer Ultron's take on things seconds after its birth.

[–] nimble@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 5 days ago

Id feel sorry for anyone who did this manually when it is a relatively simple sentiment analysis project the can be done programmatically. The hardest part would be sourcing the transcripts or audio files (which then could be transcribed programmatically)

[–] Brunbrun6766@lemmy.world 15 points 5 days ago (2 children)

No shit, we've all BEEN here the whole time, we've watched this unfold

[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

don’t underestimate the frog in hot water effect. it can make it hard for some people to notice the dramatic increase if they aren’t paying close attention. it helps fascists gain power

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 1 points 4 days ago

But people in 100 years will need to reference articles that show this for the history books. Its important work to publish these things.

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

He's backed against a corner and lashing out. Scared little man.

[–] errer@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

The share of words associated with violence rose from almost 0.6% in 2016 to 1.6% in 2024 in Trump’s speeches. As a comparison, the proportion of violent words in 40 randomly chosen weekly radio addresses by Barack Obama was 0.79%

Obama more violent than 2016 Trump confirmed. /s

The Conversation - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for The Conversation:

Wiki: reliable - The Conversation publishes articles from academics who are subject-matter experts. It is generally reliable for subjects in the authors' areas of expertise. Opinions published in The Conversation should be handled with WP:RSOPINION.


MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - Australia


Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://theconversation.com/we-analyzed-9-years-of-trump-political-speeches-and-his-violent-rhetoric-has-increased-dramatically-238962
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support