357
submitted 5 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

The Ohio lawmaker was asked about Donald Trump's debunked claims about the 2020 election.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) seemed to have an uncomfortable moment on “60 Minutes” during Sunday night’s segment on social media disinformation. 

Jordan argued against social media companies taking down inaccurate posts, saying the American people should figure out what’s true and what’s not. 

“What about this idea that the 2020 election was stolen?” asked correspondent Lesley Stahl. “You think that these companies should allow people to say that and that individuals can make up their own mind.” 

“I’ve not said that,” said Jordan, who is on the record pushing conspiracy theoriesabout the 2020 election. “What I’ve said is there were concerns about the 2020 election, I think Americans agree with that.”

“No they don’t,” said Stahl.

top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 181 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

“I’ve not said that,” said Jordan, who is on the record pushing conspiracy theories about the 2020 election. “What I’ve said is there were concerns about the 2020 election; I think Americans agree with that.”

“No, they don’t,” said Stahl.

This is how you need to talk to republicans.

Be firm, short, and too the point.

Like a toddler throwing a tantrum. Try to explain anything with facts or logic and it goes right over their heads. They respond well to authority and are mostly cowards. So just like Jordan, they'll quickly shut down.

If you try to use facts and logic, they argue against what you said with no logical consistency. If you just tell them they're wrong, they have to try and come up with facts and logic to prove theyre right rather than just fight what you said.

Which is a lot harder.

[-] rayyy@lemmy.world 56 points 5 months ago

If you just tell them they’re wrong, they have to try and come up with facts and logic to prove theyre right rather than just fight what you said.

This only works in situations where they cannot run back to the cult for overwhelming reinforcement .
In rural red areas most MAGAs have their heads so far up each other's asses that a breath of honest truth would kill them.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 29 points 5 months ago

No, it still works.

The county I grew up in voted 95% trump the last two elections... I know how they think, I had to grow up with them.

[-] aodhsishaj@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago

And you're seeing these communities trend away from Trump? Otherwise no matter how you interact with them individually, they're still a net drag on the rest of America.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

They love progressive policies tho, that's how Obama won multiple red states in 08 out of nowhere.

They dont love neoliberals who act like Republicans without the hate.

That's what the DNC doesnt get. These voters like the hate, not Republican policy.

So Dems adopting Republican policy accomplishes nothing but depressing their own voters turnout and helping Republicans normalize their shitty policies.

[-] r4venw@kbin.social 4 points 5 months ago

What do you think needs to happen for them to stop being attracted to the hate?
I've seen a similar thing: rural people talking about all sorts of progressive ideas like UBI, student debt relief, and other policies for helping others (sometimes without even knowing that they're talking about progressive ideas) yet always go back to "immigrants this" or "elites that".

[-] crusa187@lemmy.ml 9 points 5 months ago

Dems can offer a better alternative by simply leading by example. Stop leaning ever rightward and chasing the republicans to the bottom of the barrel. Progressive policies will work to win over hate-addled republicans because these policies will immediately and materially improve those people’s lives. If it affects them personally, republican voters will finally “get it.” When the republicans then argue that these policies need to be taken away, the voter sentiment will turn sour quickly.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

We'll never be able to out hate republican politicians, trying only alienates Dem voters.

But it's not impossible to reach them, when Manchin acts too much like a fool, Bernie and I think AOC too go down to WV and explain what Manchin is blocking, then Manchin's voters get him to switch.

Like, reaching them ain't an impossible task no one's figured out, the rub is without the hate, you have to be serious about helping them. Republican politicians lie about the help, but honest about the hate.

Dems need to be honest about the help and they'll win all types of red states. It's just neoliberals addicted to do or money aren't gonna be able to be honest about helping.

We all watched Obama do it in 08, but the DNC just isn't willing to help Americans if it hurts their donor money.

So we run candidates voters don't want and vote for them anyway, which just makes the DNC act up even more next cycle.

The current system isn't working, it's going to break soon. We can take it down in a controlled manner or wait for it to blow up and catch us off guard.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world -5 points 5 months ago

Dems adopting Republican policy

Well, now that we've finally figured out what Obama is doing wrong, we should tell him!

Oh wait, he's not the President and we're not doing that anymore.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 14 points 5 months ago

They will never admit that they are wrong.

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago

being wrong is weak, and being liberal is weak, so being able to admit being wrong is to admit to being a weak liberal. /conservative logic.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

Apparently, 'reality based thinking' was a put down in the George W. Bush White House.

I can't remember the exact quote, but the idea was that strong leaders just go in an do things, while intellectuals dither and come up with reasons why it's bad.

[-] cogman@lemmy.world 147 points 5 months ago

Shows how big a lie the election is stolen narrative is.

Jordan, if he were in Congress where he knows he can't be sued for defamation, would have ranted for 20 minutes about Dominion voting machines. But put him in a place where he knows he'd get a defamation lawsuit and all the sudden that congressional fire goes ice cold.

He's a supreme weasel and he covered up rape for years.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 67 points 5 months ago

I remember Rush Limbaugh. He'd never talk about African Americans on his show, but those "inner city rappers" and "affirmative action losers" always got a good drubbing.

They always speak their minds, after vetting it with the legal team.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago

Lee Atwater called it "the Southern Strategy"

but it's just racism.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago

More people need to know about Lee and all his hard work.

https://youtu.be/X_8E3ENrKrQ

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 52 points 5 months ago

This is what happens when a guilty man thinks he just got caught. Heart rate goes through the room, stammers. She did a good job steering that interview back on the road.

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 37 points 5 months ago

I don't see this interview as too much of a "gotcha"... it still lets the whole thing get framed in a very weird and deliberately-conservative-friendly way.

The core issue is, big tech companies have identified deliberate misinformation as a major problem on their platforms, and they're trying to fight it. Conservatives don't like that, because a lot of the deliberate misinformation is being spread by them and by professionals that they're employing. So they're trying to reframe the reality to justify their desire to make it illegal or at least difficult for tech companies to fight misinformation.

  • There's a myth that government is telling social media companies to censor certain viewpoints, which simply isn't happening, and any communication at all (e.g. if the FBI learns that some misinformation campaign is on behalf of a state adversary and communicates some details about it to a social media company) gets seized on and misrepresented to make it look like that.
  • There's a myth that this "censorship" is happening based on viewpoint, or whether something is true (like if I go on Facebook and say the sky is orange someone will take it down), rather than based on it being specifically dangerous misinformation or not.
  • There's very little discussion of the fact that a lot of what's being "censored" is professional misinformation, and only tangentially (through someone reposting or repeating something that a professional outfit originated) does someone's actual organic post go into the crosshairs.
[-] TurtleJoe@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Which big tech companies are trying to fight misinformation?

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Pretty much every one except X/Twitter. If you don't make some effort in that direction then your platform quickly becomes an absolute cesspool (see Twitter).

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 34 points 5 months ago

Trump rewarded Jordan with the Presidential Medal Of Freedom before leaving office.

Fuck, I either didn't know that or blocked it out entirely. What an embarrassing shitstain.

Gym Jordan has an uncomfortable interview and it's about the idiotic "Big Lie" not the fact that he oversaw sexual abuse and is still a Representative.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

Remember the reason Representative Jim Jordan loves encouraging dishonesty is the fact he's protected under Speech and Debate Clause.

this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2024
357 points (97.6% liked)

politics

18821 readers
4921 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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