• cmoney@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    100
    ·
    2 months ago

    Does anyone else remember when the president’s age was a big topic? Suddenly Trump is the oldest candidate and just like that the media doesn’t talk about it anymore.

    • Rapidcreek@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      52
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Whatever the reason might be, the fact is that Trump is getting much gentler treatment in 2024 than Hillary Clinton did in 2016. That’s especially concerning given that Trump’s alleged crimes are many orders of magnitude worse than Clinton’s alleged crimes.

      • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Definitely seems like the media, bought up by very conservative old men, has a favourite in the election. Not sure if they’re pushing the narrative that Trump is surging to depress Democratic Party vote or motivate us to not get complacent.

        • Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Seriously? Is it even possible to not know? Or you just like making people list them?

          Here is just the sexual ones.

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

          Here are his current active trials in court

          https://www.politico.com/interactives/2023/trump-criminal-investigations-cases-tracker-list/

          There’s of course more, but isn’t that already enough?

          Unless you wanted Hillary Clinton’s for comparison. She used her personal e-mail address a lot instead of the one she is supposed to use as a high ranking government employee. Her e-mails may, and did, contain classified information. Only the official government e-mail server is intended to be used for sending classified infirmation due to risk of breach by outside individuals. No such breach seems to have occurred, but still a crime to have put them in a position where they weren’t officially as secure as they could have been.

          The result of going through 60’000 plus e-mails was that no intentional wrong was done and they recommended no charges.

          https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

          Now that we are on the topic of improper handling of classified materials… guess what else Trump has done… and like, actually. Like in a way that resulted in actually being charged.

          He Illegally stored a bunch of classified material where he was living, and while having that information, invited foreign government officials to also stay there. We can’t know if anything intentionally malicious happened. But we can certainly assume that classified information was not “as secure as it should have been”. And when asked to bring that classified material he was illegally storing back, he refused.

        • LillyPip@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          The difference is stark and utterly bonkers. Look at every single headline coming out of CNN, CBS, NYT, NBC, ABC, FOX – literally all of them… the fact they’re all reporting on Harris and trump as though it’s a normal candidate dichotomy and not the insane disparity between a politician and a raving lunatic who should be sectioned by his loved ones for his own protection, is simply madness.

          This should not be a contest. Nobody should be taking seriously a man who is a demonstrable racist, fascist, unhinged lunatic who rants about toilets and windmills, who has been found liable for rape, who can barely string sentences together, who has felony convictions, and who has demonstrably committed treason twice – and he’s treated the same by the media as a career prosecutor with none of that and who has actually sane (if centrist) policies….

          Do you see how crazy that is?

            • LillyPip@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              19
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              It’s not a trap, Jesus.

              FPTP voting means 3rd parties can only be spoilers for the party they’re most aligned with. That’s a mathematical fact, whether we like it or not.

              I hate that as much as you do, but edgy protest voting only gives the fascists more control.

              If you really care about that, stop propping up fascists, and instead put that effort into an actual grassroots effort to make the US electoral system more fair:

              Support FairVote Action.

              • Spiralvortexisalie@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                13
                ·
                2 months ago

                So you telling me one of the two most unpopular candidates is gonna win on their merits? Cause sounds like nepotism with extra steps.

                • LillyPip@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  12
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  1: Who are you saying is one of the most unpopular candidates? You seem pretty misinformed.

                  2: Do you know what nepotism means? Which candidate inherited their position because of family ties?

                  Your comment makes no logical sense.

  • JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Because otherwise they’d be accused of ‘election interference’. X in the other hand, gets a free pass to do just that. Selective outrage at its finest.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    37
    ·
    2 months ago

    Pop quiz: without using google, what was the date of the second assassination attempt on Donald Trump.

    No peeking!

    • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      You think you have a big gotcha here, but it was covered extensively when it happened. The google (or Bing in this case)(you don’t want us to do returns over 10 pages of results, including articles from:

      • NBC News (top result)
      • US News
      • AP News
      • Wikipedia
      • CNN
      • NY Times
      • LA Times (literally, coast to coast here)
      • NPR
      • Reuters
      • Fox News (of course…)
      • Politico

      Some of these sources wrote more than one article, with at least three by CNN and two by NPR.

      You might think none of us know that Trump came close to assassination on 2024-09-15, but did you know that Trump didn’t tell his secret service detail he was going to the golf course, so they didn’t do a perimeter sweep before he got out there? They only found the shooter because Trump was finishing up one hole and they rushed to the next and spotted the would-be assassin.

      • intensely_human@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        34
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah I think it’s a big gotcha. The fact you didn’t know without using a search engine proves my point.

        • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 months ago

          You don’t even have the courage to state your point bruh, you’re far from actually having one lol

        • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          This poster thinks I didn’t know. But how can it know that. I just pointed out that there were literally hundreds of articles, then correctly cited the date. It’s not making the point it thinks it’s making. The media covered both idiots that took the pot shots at the Trumpster Fire. To the tune of hundreds of articles.