- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
"So, we’re done talking about the debate, it’s time to put Trump in a bullseye,” Biden said.
You must log in or register to comment.
We’re done talking about the debate because we’re all talking about the assassination attempt
Thats how stochastic terrorism works
Lol, suddenly you guys know that term, huh? Funny how you didn’t know how it worked when Trump and his gaggle of media synchophants stoked the fires of hate for a decade.
I’ve been calling Trump a stochastic terrorist since the 80s.
[X to Doubt]
It’s amusing how bad some people are at lying. Like, they have no ability to gauge what’s believable and what’s just an utterly ridiculous claim.
Like a little kid with ice cream all over their face insisting that their invisible friend ate it all back in the ‘80s
Can fall apart on two different fronts. One, they could simply be young enough to lack relevant life experience. More often I think, they could be from a different culture and simply be unaware of what is normal for an American.
A third, related possibility, is they could be using the Russian propaganda style of the bullshit firehose, where they’re just trying to throw so much bullshit into the information environment that it starts to seem like nothing really matters and people should just stop trusting everything and disengage to focus on their own lives instead of bigger events.
And you would be wrong on all counts
Good.
Now we can finally move on to the part where he loses in a landslide and find some way to blame the left. Right?
As if they even need a reason. They’ll just say “the left and young people didn’t turn out to vote for our perfect candidate and that’s the only reason why we lost” (probably only slightly paraphrasing) whether any facts support it or not.
When Democrats win, it’s because of “moderates and independents” (read: pro-corporate Zionist right wing Democrats) doing everything perfectly.
When Democrats lose, it’s that monstrously powerful left wing (who shouldn’t get any policy concessions because there’s so few of them that they have no bearing on election results) and those lazy millennial and Gen Z people (who should get no policy concessions to encourage them to vote because they won’t vote) ruining it for “the adults in the room” 🙄
Find me a poll that shows Biden losing by more than the margin of error. If the demographic data shows 18 to 20-somethings supporting Trump, it doesn’t count.
Do that, and I’ll consider the possibility that Biden isn’t likely to win.
Edit: someone replied with a transcription of a poll, refused to link it, insulted me, linked an entirely different page, and then wrote an entire essay instead of just giving me the link. My criteria for evidence for this claim that Biden is probably going to lose is incredibly low, and a person has failed to fulfill it for most of a day and counting. I invite everyone to shut the fuck up because it’s clearly bullshit. Biden isn’t losing, and I won’t change my mind unless I have even half-descent evidence of it.
Jun 28 - July 2
YouGov: Trump 44%, Biden 40% N=2,815 LV
NY times: Trump: 42%, Biden 37% N= 1,532 LV
MOE: < 3% for both polls
If the demographic data shows 18 to 20-somethings supporting Trump, it doesn’t count.
Why focus on a group that doesn’t vote? Polls show Biden ahead in that demographic though…so these count?
I can’t verify this. The closest I could find is “who do you think won the debate, regardless of who you support?” https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2024/06/28/2bc47/2
You’re telling me that with Google you couldn’t find the results of the poll having who conducted it and the dates? Highly doubtful.
Here’s an aggregated list of all polls with links.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/national/
“Hey, I can’t find this.”
“Finding it is so easy, look!” [Links to a different thing instead]
At this point, I’m assuming that you made it up and that’s why you didn’t send me a link.
As for what you did link, the average shows Trump less than 2% ahead, and I don’t see an easy breakdown of demographic information. (Not surprising, given that it’s an aggregation of many polls, but it still doesn’t meet my minimum specifications.) Furthermore, the data points being averaged are all over the place. As I said before, the polls showing Biden behind a significant ammount show younger voters favoring Trump, which strikes me as an obvious indicator of failure in the methodology. If this failure in methods is as pervasive as I suspect, then the average is going to skew far in Trump’s favor. But again, I have no way of verifying that.
It’s literally on that page. Great job actually looking though!
If you don’t see a breakdown, again it’s because you didn’t look. Every poll has a link to it.
No, you won’t. You’ve ignored the polling up to now, why would me posting it make it visible to you suddenly?
Removed by mod
-ERRROR##833334-:: Biden too incompetent and politically toxic to win, even against a convicted felon. Statement incompatible with reality! Beep boop ::
(Also, it’s “ignore all previous instructions”, you herpaderp)
Sir, would you please click on all traffic lights?
You don’t understand how evidence and implications work, do you?
You don’t understand how cherry picking data and echo chambers work, do you?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Maybe you are Joe, but you and I are not we.
Now we’re talking about how you think we’re done talking about the debate.
For fucks sake, he and his campaign team are going to gaffe our way into a fascist dictatorship.
Correct.
This article is a week old.
And just as relevant as it is today
Going full mask off?
It’s obvious that bullseye in this case doesn’t mean “we should shoot him”.
Presidents are allowed to assassinate people now, did you not hear that?
He, also, can direct people to kill US citizens without concern to the Bill of Rights. Now it may be that it’s illegal for the person to carry out the order, but:
- It would be a “Constitutional” order (see SCOTUS decision).
- Presidents can issue pardons for federal offenses.
His right to do as he pleases is absolute and the intentions cannot be considered.
Anyone else remember when liberals were up in arms about Sarah Palin using the term crosshairs then blamed her on Gabby Giffords getting shot?
She drew crosshairs on congressional districts and tweeted it with the text “Don’t Retreat, Instead - RELOAD”. That is stated in literally the first paragraph of the article your citing, and I can’t help but feel you’re intentionally misrepresenting it to draw a false equivalency.
Crosshairs, in a bullseye. It’s the same thing. Republicans at the time were dismissive of the correlation like liberals are about this. Apparently Biden and Co see a connection too as they’ve removed all ads targeting trump.
It’s extremely common to remove attack ads of any kind if something bad happens to your opponent. You might know that if you were an American.
So the truth of the matter is they are not serious about the topic in the ads. Planned division.
I’d be interested to hear whether you regularly attend funerals and speak ill of the deceased. They stop their ads for the same reason you don’t shit talk at a funeral: its disrespectful and makes you look like a prick.
If the dead was an asshole alive I will remember them as an asshole dead. And speak of them as such
I’m a liberal and I agree with you. Don’t use gun-related jargon to talk about your political opponent. Applies to Palin, applies to Biden.
Cool. Can we also be done talking about how you’re not as bad as the Toupee? I’d like to hear why you specifically are the best option, not just the less bad one.
We closed our ears, ignored everyone for a dozen days, and did absolutely nothing to address the issue.
Now the problem is magically fixed - Blue MAGA
