It makes a kind of sense to me because a lot of news about Trump since the first time he started running is vacuous click-chasing. From what I've read, Hillary Clinton's campaign in 2016 even employed a "pied piper" strategy with Trump, intentionally elevating far-right elements of the Republican party with the belief that they would be unpalatable to the general public and so easier to beat: https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/

And since then, a lot of news about him is "he said whaaaaaa?" Rather than being substantive criticism of his policy; his policy is trash, but the mainstream publications can't properly criticize his policy without also criticizing the kind of policy they normally support, so there's a lot of superficial criticism. It can get tiring to hear about the next word salad thing he said, which may or may not be a complete lie in the first place.

[–] sussyshaka@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

About 6 in 10 Germans say they try to avoid Hitler news: Late 1945 Survey

[–] pyromaiden@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 4 hours ago

Meanwhile the average Bluesky post goes something like this:

Jane Doe, PhD: "Went for a run with my dogs today. There was a strong breeze that felt really nice. The dogs loved it, too." 🙂

HillaryWasRight2016: "IT'S A SHAME THAT THE WIND BRINGS WITH IT THE STENCH OF POOP STRAIGHT FROM THE CHEETO-IN-CHIEF'S DIAPER!!! THAT DOG OF RUSSIA IS RUINING AMERICA!!! #RESIST #RESISTANCE #VOTEBLUENOMATTERWHO" 😠 😠 😠

Tell me you can encounter something like this semi-regularly and not want to divorce yourself from everything Trump-related.