183
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] TechyDad@lemmy.world 94 points 1 year ago

The biggest thing that I can see that needs to be done would be shutting down "news" organizations like FOX News, OAN, and Newsmax. Also, breaking up online movements like Q where blatant misinformation is spread as if it's proven truth.

Now, HOW you do that without massive first amendment violations, I don't know. You would also need to be careful how it's structured because that could easily be used to shut down anyone left of center should a Republicans take the presidency/control Congress.

[-] JimmyBigSausage@lemm.ee 38 points 1 year ago

Gotta look at that right wing radio cabal also

[-] Jaysyn@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Since that is over actual airwaves, reinstating the Fairness Doctrine would fix that very fast.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] snekerpimp@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago

Education and critical thinking skills. Which is why they want to defund public schools so all children can be indoctrinated in “Christian” private schools.

you do it with massive funding to public education for generations.

which is why massive first amendment violations are more likely

Shutting down Facebook would be huge. It's a cesspool of propaganda.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

There's no need to shut them down:

"The fairness doctrine of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, was a policy that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that fairly reflected differing viewpoints. In 1987, the FCC abolished the fairness doctrine"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine

[-] TechyDad@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

The problem, even if we reinstated this, is that this applied to broadcast only. This wouldn't apply to cable channels. Neither would it apply to Internet groups. Both of those would still be free to spout full blown lies and conspiracy theories dressed up as "news."

[-] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

It would definitely need updating to include cable, things have changed a lot since 1987. As for the internet, I don't see how that could be enforced other than to classify sites as publishers and make them liable for the content they host.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

The entire legal basis for it was the notion that the FCC was entitled to regulate the radio spectrum because it's a scarce resource. The FCC has no authority to regulate cable or the Internet.

[-] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

The FCC has no authority to regulate cable or the Internet.

"The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an independent agency of the United States government that regulates communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable across the United States. The FCC maintains jurisdiction over the areas of broadband access, fair competition, radio frequency use, media responsibility, public safety, and homeland security."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Communications_Commission

It's true that the FCC doesn't regulate internet content, that's why classifying sites as publishers would be useful. We would have the same legal tools that apply to newspapers.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 86 points 1 year ago

Stop mentioning Hillary. She’s old news. She’s as relevant to 2023 politics as hunter biden.

[-] khepri@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No kidding, I don't know why she feels the need to insert herself in this year's politics with this super divisive "cult deprogramming" language/narrative. Not that a lot of folks don't need to step down from the rhetoric of violence and demagoguery that's a big part of MAGA, they absolutely, do... but seriously, Hillary, you are such an unnecessary bull in the china shop on this right now. Like her or hate her, I think it's a pretty objective statement that bringing the temperature down and bringing people together just isn't something her presence and choice of language in this debate is going to accomplish.

[-] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

She shares the blame for Trump being elected. She campaigned shittily and she was a shitty candidate. The DNC conspiracy to prop her up as the chosen nominee is also to blame.

Those elements combined with Obama hate from Trumptards and the Russian propaganda all over social media produced the result we got.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Well, did she insert herself here or did someone do it for her for clickbait

[-] SlikPikker@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

She's arrogant. Simple as.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Probably because she's not planning on running so she can say what she really thinks without giving a fuck about whether it offends some people's delicate sensibilities?

[-] Astroturfed@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Came in here to say basically this. The fact that they used Hilary as the image for this articles headline killed any credibility instantly. She is not relevant and hasn't been since she lost. There is zero positives to bringing her up. Unless you want an example of exactly how not to run a presidential campaign.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] oxjox@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

I saw the link was from Salon.com... as relevant to politics as TMZ is to climate change.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 37 points 1 year ago

I have a hard time taking this article seriously. I don’t understand why it feels the need to tout HC so fiercely. I guess she was right about "deplorables" but everyone else was correct in pegging her as an out of touch elite. The DNC's inability to back candidates that can help working class people continually emboldens right-wing extremists. It’s not hard to see how the Dems' center-right stances open the door for far-right reactions. Yes, they are deplorables but HC is not one of the good guys.

[-] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago

Republicans are programmed due to their echo chambers. People who don't even follow the news have been shown to be more informed than Republicans who watch and listen to conservative media.

load more comments (49 replies)
[-] orclev@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

I don't understand why the DNC (as in the actual organization, not Democrat voters) is so god damn obsessed with Hillary. It feels like they would crown her queen if they could. Makes me wonder if she has some dirt on key people in their organization or something.

[-] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

I think it has something to do with Democrats still feeling "hurt" over the absurdity of the Clinton impeachment and other sham issues Republicans have with her, that they have some need to redeem her image. Letting her go feels like accepting a loss.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 33 points 1 year ago

Back in the day, their grandparents happily filled public swimming pools with cement rather than accept allowing 'others' to have a good time.

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 1 year ago

Defunding and privatization of public schools also started for similar reasons

Prison terms would be really helpful.

You know, equitable application of the law.

[-] Spacebar@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Let the Trump cult be. They are a minority of a minority.

Focus on fielding quality candidates that are not Hillary-Clinton-esk and Maga will fade away. Focus on getting out the vote. Focus on issues that resonate with the center right to center left.

It's not that hard of a concept, but it it doesn't sell ad clicks. It doesn't drive engagement either. So we get to wring our hands and are subject to Salon articles for the next 13 months instead.

[-] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

I'm not saying that you're wrong. But I am saying that history doesn't agree with your approach.

If you're in an enclosed space with a crazy person who's flailing around with a knife, " leave them alone and let's focus on ourselves" isn't going to mitigate the damage.

[-] migo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 year ago

You cannot be tolerant to intolerance if you want a tolerant society.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] dangblingus@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Obviously they need to Pokémon Go to therapy.

[-] Yewb@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Trying to get to the root of the ideology is almost impossible.

Asking why they have those opinions is futile they have no opinions past the surface layer.

In fact bringing up contradictory facts is an attack, its crazy.

Everyone deserves a chance at redemption for us to heal as a country we have to leave the door open for them to cone back in... its going to be very difficult if they are choosing willful ignorance.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2023
183 points (88.9% liked)

politics

19159 readers
4523 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