There is no “both sides” to Donald Trump’s threat to democracy
There is no “both sides” to Donald Trump’s threat to democracy
Just because Republicans choose unreality doesn’t mean the media should ignore the facts of January 6.
Just because Republicans choose unreality doesn’t mean the media should ignore the facts of January 6.
On January 6, 2021, I watched CNN as thousands of Donald Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol. As someone well-versed in watching tragedy on television, I was struck by just how indisputable the facts were at the time: violent, red-hat-clad MAGA rioters, followed by Republicans in Congress, tried to stop democracy in its tracks. Trump had told his followers that the protest in Washington, DC, “will be wild,” and in the assault that followed his speech, some rioters smeared feces on the walls of the Capitol. Hundreds of them have since been convicted on charges ranging from assault on federal officers to seditious conspiracy. These are stubborn facts, the kind that do not care about your feelings. These facts include the inalienable truth that Trump is the first president in American history to reject the peaceful transfer of power.
It never occurred to me that these facts could somehow be perverted by partisanship. But three years later, we are seeing just that, as Republicans cling to the lie that the 2020 election was “stolen” by Joe Biden and are poised to make Trump their 2024 nominee. And perhaps even more dangerous than the GOP ditching reality is the news media’s inability to cover Trumpism as the threat to democracy that it very much is.
...
But the problem is, when all you have is conventional political framing, everything looks like politics as usual. One candidate makes a claim; the other disputes it. Two sides are divided, etc. This framing only works if both parties operate within the frameworks of a shared reality. But Trumpism doesn’t allow for the reality the rest of us inhabit. Trump’s supporters believe their leader’s reality and not, say, the reality the rest of us see with our eyes. As Trump once told a crowd: “Don’t believe the crap you see from these people, the fake news. What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.”
Journalists may be well-intentioned in trying to be “objective,” or they’re simply afraid of being labeled partisan. Either way, coverage of January 6 that gives equal weight to both sides—one based in reality, one not—is helping pave the road for authoritarianism.
You're viewing part of a thread.
Right now, the message I get from a lot of these conversations here is that the President is allowed to have a little genocide as a treat because otherwise there could be more genocide. It's completely insane.
No you don't
Anyone insisting that the only way to move forward is to vote for someone who is promoting genocide is effectively saying that, yes.
What the fuck is wrong with you people. You're going to reelect trump and finish this country off because you're too god-damned stupid to understand reality
We're you fucking asleep from 2015 until now? Seriously what is wrong in your brain?
WE DON'T WANT GENOCIDE.
If that is what is wrong with us, than what the fuck is wrong with you?
If Trump is an existential threat (Not disagreeing that he is, bear with me.) then why isn't the Democratic party acting like he is?
The only time they do is when they want to shame people into voting for majority unpopular things, LIKE FUCKING GENOCIDE.
What the fuck is wrong with your brain?
You imagine things will be better under trump, or just don't care as long as you get to cosplay the moral person here?
I'd rather the people responsible take responsibility.
Biden has made himself unelectable due to his actions.
If only we had a democrat process to choose who the Democratic party would field for president.
Oh, wait, we do. Oh wait, the Democratic party has banned 5 states from having anyone else as a candidate for the democratic nomination and told New Hampshire that their delegates won't count because they are having other candidates?
Do you enjoy cosplaying as a 'pragmatist' when being a good puppet for people that would rather lose to Trump, than give up control of the Democratic party?
They don't think he's an existential threat for the US(Though, I think they are wrong on this as they are on pretty much everything else.), so why are carrying their water for them?
If trump wins you will be responsible. Full stop.
Interesting you dodged my question since you know it exposes how wrong you are
Nope, Biden and the Democratic party will.
It won't matter what I do. You are justifying your backing of genocide as being 'pragmatic' to stop Trump, but it won't even work.
There is now a large enough Muslim population in the midwest swing states to be a requisite component of a winning democratic coalition.
Do you hear that?
Muslim people are required in the mid-west swing states to win the presidency for the Democratic party.
Support within that community dropped from in the 60's to single digit support for Biden because they correctly see him as backing a genocide of a group they identify as their people. I won't begrudge them their lack of willingness to vote for someone genociding a group they identify with. Do you?
The people responsible for getting Trump re-elected are the people who did something that they KNEW BEFOREHAND would tank their eligibility, and yet refuse to hold a primary to try and pick someone electable.
You're not pragmatic, you're just a fan-boi.
To answer your bad faith question: No I don't think things will be better under Trump. I think it start the slow slide to civil war.
I'm pissed at the people who are undemocratically stopping the democratic process of the primary to select someone WHO CAN'T WIN.
Didn't read, no more time today to waste on lying fucks.
Bad faith religious dumb fuck.
I like how you have time to pick on a trans person you personally blame, and accuse them of receiving chinese money, but are unwilling to respond to the literal break down of why this genocide makes it impossible for Biden to win, except to call me a liar and run away.
There is no genocide. Speaking of it as if it was a proven fact is a mean rhetoric trick.
With the current situation in Israel we might see ethnic cleansing in a few years but we're not there yet.
Do you know what will prevent a future genocide? Finding a better way for Israel to protect itself against Hamas and other Palestinian terrorists. That will also be the only way to get Israel to exit the west bank.
We’re saying the only way to avoid a trump wanna be dictatorship, and even longer term fucking of the US, which is allowing Biden to lose.
We need a general strike and to eat the rich if that doesn’t work, but we also need a president that won’t call out the troops (real ones or bullshit fanbois) when we protest.
We’re saying the only way to avoid a trump wanna be dictatorship, and even longer term fucking of the US, which is allowing Biden to lose.
Biden could stop supporting genocide if he doesn't want to lose votes of people for whom genocide is a dealbreaker.
I'm voting for biden, but I expect you will ignore this sentence.
I’m still hoping Biden has the balls to tell Netanyahu to fuck off.
However, I assume the calculation between voters who’ll drop him after conflating support for Israel with support for the Jewish people are greater than, or at least the same as, voters who are dropping him now for allowing this Palestinian genocide.
It’s a lose-lose choice the Dems, which is exactly why it seems likely that Russia convinced Iran to back Hamas’ attack in the first place (Israel’s Apartheid is still the reason terrorists felt they had no other option). It might be a crazy conspiracy, but that’s where we ended up, however it started.
I’m with you though that it sucks that our only rational choice is to vote for not-a-wannabe-dictator, when thousands of people’s lives are currently at stake.
However, I assume the calculation between voters who’ll drop him after conflating support for Israel with support for the Jewish people are greater than, or at least the same as, voters who are dropping him now for allowing this Palestinian genocide.
I do not make charitable assumptions about people who support genocide.
What’s charitable about pointing out how they’re likely ignoring lives based on polling?
Your sounding like more and more of a shill as you go on.
If someone supports genocide, you may want to try to imagine some plausible excuse to make that ok.
But genocide is inexcusable, and there is no reason to bend over backwards to give its supporters the benefit of the doubt.
You're apologizing for genocide supporters and lobbing accusations at people who oppose genocide.
I have never advocated for withholding votes, nor have I ever advocated for voting for anyone but Biden since he won the nomination in 2020. My consistent position has been that Biden should not be supporting genocide.
There is no good or compelling reason to support genocide.