this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2023
275 points (96.6% liked)

politics

19159 readers
5938 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
 

"They need us. We don't need them”

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 60 points 1 year ago (2 children)

These folks, by design, are annoying all of the time, but lately, things seem to be getting worse. After being captured on tape spouting an anti-semitic conspiracy theory, Kennedy doubled down with an incoherent gripe about not getting Secret Service protection, which mainly appeared to be an excuse to dog whistle "14" and "88," which are understood as coded signals of support to neo-Nazis.

Im just... Yikes.

[–] Alto@kbin.social 40 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The fact he's polling anywhere above 0% is fucking terrifying

[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Most of his "Democratic" supporters are probably Republicans.

[–] Cerbero@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's really the Republicans that are bank rolling him as a spoiler candidate.

[–] Zaktor@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Unless this is a prelude to going third party, he's not spoiling anything in the Democratic primary. He's probably more of a play to deliver anti-Biden/anti-Democratic-Party messaging.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think that's just his last name doing the heavy lifting. Once you hear what he actually stands for (like being both antisemetic and supporting Israel no matter what they do), there's probably not a huge constituency.

That's probably why the media is amplifying him and not Marianne Williamson.

[–] rog@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago

Isnt he a prolific anti-vaxer as well? But then held a fund raiser that required attendees to be vaxxed?

[–] Jeff@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Now I must go look these dog whistles up so I can know the enemies of America.

[–] Kabloink@lemm.ee 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Perhaps, Musk can create some bots that auto respond in a shocker manner to the trolls so they keep paying for the blue checks. Sort of like what those dating sites did with the fake members.

[–] instamat@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

First off, it’s funny that you think Musk can create software that works, and secondly, what bots on what dating sites??

[–] Mylemmy@lemmy.ml 42 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He destroyed Twitter and made a shitty alt right page

[–] new_acct_who_dis@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] style99@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

That's giving him way too much credit.

[–] o_oli@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Interesting take. I wonder how it will pan out.

All this, Ryan said, explains why the trolls "are getting more extreme and desperate." The pool of people available to get attention from is shrinking, so the only way to keep the engagement rates as high is to say wilder and nastier things

If that happens then it will just implode quite rapidly. Regular users will just leave and that fuels the fire and Twitter just becomes yet another niche right wing echo chamber in no time.

I do question the claim that 'the trolls are getting more extreme' though. That seems like anecdotal evidence and I wonder if it's actually happening. The author listed many examples of extreme views on Twitter but I could have done the same thing and made the same claim 5 years ago. There has always been loonies on there and some of them get worse and some don't.

[–] ElBarto@lzrprt.sbs 14 points 1 year ago

Naww poor widdle baby's can't scam people as easy now. Does the baby need their binky?

[–] ganksy@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Maybe it's just my personal bias aligning with the journalist but it makes me optimistic hearing what feels like an objective take on what's wrong with our society.

[–] sdrawk@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I think Musk screwed the golden goose on this one. I think he thought his large following would keep the site afloat. Sadly he's just alienated his fans in one way or another over the past handful of years and Twitter users did not like his extreme right-wing pandering.

He really should just focus on his electric cars and rocket businesses. Sell Twitter's corpse. Sell the other small companies he owns. Sigh...