Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
There are ten simple words I wish they would say, and keep saying:
"If you vote for Trump, you're voting for a rapist."
Because it is that simple. And there is absolutely no question he is a rapist.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/07/donald-trump-rape-language-e-jean-carroll
There is a bunch of criminal and traitorous shit that trump has done. I think Biden should be focused on that, but crazy talk is what we've landed on.
And being a rapist is one of the things he has done. One you cannot even come close to rationally argue against like you can the treason stuff because he's already been found to be a rapist by a judge.
Also, I honestly think telling people that if they vote for Trump, they're voting for a rapist will resonate better than telling them if they vote for Trump, they're voting for treason.
They've almost certainly considered doing that but I suspect it's a legal thing. Saying "Trump is a rapist" can be seen as claiming that "Trump was convicted of rape" which is not true so it gives them space to sue over a knowingly false defamatory statement (whether he'd win or not, it would be expensive and might halt the ads while it was being litigated)
Saying "Trump was found liable in a civil sexual assault case" doesn't have as snappy a ring to it and leaves Republicans saying bullshit like "well if he was really a rapist he'd be in jail/it's just corrupt civil court judges trying to make him look bad."
But saying "look at this silly footage showing that Trump is a numpty. What a silly crazy clown man" is depressingly more effective at making swing voters not want to vote for him. "Trump is evil" works for people who know he's evil but "Trump is a fool" works better for people who are willing to believe that the "evil" stuff might be overblown lies from his opponents' smear campaigns.
The judge said Trump committed rape. I don't see where there is defamation there.
There absolutely isn't a good case and he'd probably lose because he's a rapist, but there's potentially enough wiggle room there that such a lawsuit might not get thrown out immediately which is potentially expensive and could get ads taken down while it proceeds.
I could be wrong, maybe they do run ads based on the rape but they might not think it's worth the risk for the reward if ridicule is more effective in their research.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.590045/gov.uscourts.nysd.590045.212.0.pdf
From the pen of the judge who handed down the verdict:
“The finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape,’ ” Kaplan wrote.
He added: “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”
Kaplan said New York’s legal definition of “rape” is “far narrower” than the word is understood in “common modern parlance.”
The former requires forcible, unconsented-to penetration with one’s penis. But he said that the conduct the jury effectively found Trump liable for — forced digital penetration — meets a more common definition of rape. He cited definitions offered by the American Psychological Association and the Justice Department, which in 2012 expanded its definition of rape to include penetration “with any body part or object.”
Kaplan also flatly rejected the Trump team’s suggestion that the conduct Trump was found liable for might have been as limited as groping of the breasts.
The reason? Trump was not accused of that, so the only alleged offense that would have qualified as “sexual abuse” was forced digital penetration. Beyond that, Trump was accused of putting his mouth on Carroll’s mouth and pulling down her tights, which Kaplan noted were not treated as alleged sexual abuse at trial.
Yep, 100%. It's probably safe to call it like it is and he doesn't have a great track record with lawsuits at the moment. That said, they might still just not want to take the risk if their research is showing that painting him as a fool who you wouldn't want in the job is more effective with people who might change their minds.
This is literally what Clinton did to amplify Trump during the 2016 primaries.
They tried to paint mainstream Republicans as "crazy," so voters would be turned off.
That worked out just gangbusters. /s
It's also largely what they did in 2020. There's a difference between making people say "hah, wow, he's pretty out there with the gaffes", and saying "do you remember when he was president? He's worse now".
As a strategy, if you're the sort whose going to be impressed with Bidens policy wins, you're already going to be voting. So driving turn out in people who think trump is potentially an existential threat is gonna be your biggest win, like in '20.
Because when you are dumb as rocks trump sounds like a genius. He speaks his ideas in 4 second attention-span sound bites that his base can grasp. He is the fucking CoComelon of politics to a country of mushy-brained undiagnosed ADHD sufferers and rich businessmen instigating and enabling it.
I’m calling bovine scat. He can’t “win” legitimately; he has to have help from Russia, Cambridge Analytica, Facebook and Wikileaks. Don’t blame Democrats for his corruption. The grifters did that.
How about instead getting people excited for what has been accomplished? Focusing on crazy shit that Trump says just energized his base.
His base is already energized, focusing on the crazy shit is a way to point out to moderates just how scrambled Trump's brain has become. Biden is not going to convince Trump's base of anything, so there's no point wasting time and resources to try.
The issue is that Trump is doing the same: trying to paint Biden as shit and he is decent at it. It results in moderates being apathetic to who wins so they do not turn out to vote. So it comes down to who has a more energized base. That happened in 2016. Clinton rightfully pointed out how fucking nuts Trump was and Trump did his best to make Clinton seem corrupt as fuck. Voter apathy was through the roof but Trump had the more energized base in states that mattered
Biden is doing fine when it comes to the economy but few people seem to be seeing that. I often hear complaints about inflation and a bad job market. But the fact is that inflation went down drastically while keeping a very low unemployment rate. He is also chipping away at student debt little by little. But I often hear people complaining that few people are getting relief because each time only a few thousand people are helped. All of those are positives but I would not say they are marketed very well.
Because Jimmy Carter passed a shit ton of legislation but at the end of the day God Cowboy Actor won.
Jimmy Carter is why I can make beer and wine at home.
Jimmy Carter is why I have a home. Habitat for Humanity folks. Look it up, go to the first meeting, see how it works.
Was that because of Jimmy or because Billy made him do it?
1980: “God Cowboy Actor” guy won
2000: “Misunderestimated nuculer” guy won
2016: “Person woman man camera TV” guy won
The hostages in Iran were released twenty minutes after Reagan's inauguration speech. A couple years later his administration sold weapons to them.
Who exactly is that going to turn?
The only people interested in the Biden administration's accomplishments are already Dem voters that would never, ever, vote for Trump. All you're really going for is winning over a few of the less stubborn progressive voters that aren't committed to "burn it down" as the only way forward.
The Biden campaign needs to motivate the apathetic voter, and even the Republicans that are fed up with MAGA, though the later is mostly a lost cause if they're still on the fence.
So yeah, pointing out how bat shit insane Trump is, and how dangerous a 2nd term of Trump would be, is probably a sound tactic to mobilizing the apathetic voter to just try to keep Trump out of office.
Stop talking about Trump. ~~Seriously how the fuck is it that nobody in politics and media have considered this~~. Just stop. Stop putting him on everyone's tv 24 fucking 7. It doesn't work. You aren't going to move the needle a single centimeter. Get the lazy asses to the polls in November. Then you have a slam dunk campaign.
Seriously how the fuck is it that nobody in politics and media have considered this.
They've considered it. The media moguls make massive amounts of money with Trump around. Bad news sells.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/leslie-moonves-donald-trump-may-871464/
It May Not Be Good for America, but It’s Damn Good for CBS
Just in case you're unaware, there's a class war going on, and the people who own the media aren't the same class as us. "It's a big club and we ain't in it."
Damn, I forgot about money. You're right. But I stand by the rest of my comment.
Agreed. The free attention we give Trump is absolutely part of the problem.
Even not counting the rich vs poor, theres a war between the informed and the stupid and gullible. 2016 proved the second group is bigger than initially thought.