this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2024
337 points (97.7% liked)

politics

18828 readers
4624 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
 

Without evidence, the Republican vice presidential candidate tried to cast doubt on his opponent's obvious momentum: "If you talk to insiders in the Kamala Harris campaign, they're very worried about where they are"

You’ve heard Donald Trump cry “fakenews” too many times to count, and now his running mate is claiming — without evidence — that the media is using “fake polls” to show Vice President Kamala Harris is in the lead in the presidential race.

In an interview on Fox News Sunday, Sen. J.D. Vance alleged that “The media uses fake polls to drive down Republican turnout and to create dissension and conflict with Republican voters.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] dogsnest@lemmy.world 75 points 3 weeks ago (9 children)
[–] NoForwardslashS@sopuli.xyz 9 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

DJ Trump comin' in your ears

[–] ours@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

And JD Vance in your couch.

[–] brrt@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

First thing I thought when seeing this. Looks like a poster for a gig and the setlist. Someone needs to put an ai to it and make the most garbage of songs out of those titles 😆

[–] NoForwardslashS@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I bet Replace Bureaucracy is a banger

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 41 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Keep on denying everything. Love to see it.

[–] worldwidewave@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Sadly this led to January 6th as the MAGAts “couldn’t believe” that Trump lost. I’d like people to start accepting reality ASAP, ideally, before our next insurrection election.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 weeks ago

It's beautifully counter productive because if they convince their base it'll be a cake walk GOP turnout will dip.

Keep denying it JD!

[–] Happywop@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

all hail the Indianan edge lord! lol what a rube

[–] splount@lemmy.world 37 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

This is a part of the plan to delegitimize and undermine any election result that doesn't go their way. "The election results are fake. We've been telling you for months that the polls are crooked so the election must have been crooked."

[–] makyo@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

“It’s not over on Election Day. It’s over on Inauguration Day,” (Trump campaign manager) LaCivita told Politico’s Jonathan Martin during a Thursday interview at the RNC.

[–] sndmn@lemmy.ca 34 points 3 weeks ago

This guy is sofa king annoying.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 25 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Don't trust polls.

There's always an element of society who pretend they don't know who they're voting for yet. They're voting for bad things, they know they're bad, and they are embarrassed to tell pollsters.

Vote.

[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 6 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Not to mention the incredibly questionable ways of gathering data.

Like calling people in the day, on their PHONES, asking how they might consider voting. Like MF, I'm working in the day and I'm not picking up a random phone call to tell you about my political alignment.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Like calling people in the day

I had a pollster call me at 10pm.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah, I don't know if it's still even possible to do an accurate poll these days, what with how hard it is to get accurate representation of the following groups: people who ignore all unrecognised calls, people who hang up as soon as they can tell it's a mass call rather than something for them specifically, and people who don't want others to have accurate information. It's even difficult to accurately measure the size of each of those groups, let alone figure out what they think.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Don’t trust polls.

High quality pollings (Gallup, Ipsos, various university polling groups) are consistently reliable within the margin of error. There's no point in being afraid or dismissive of them.

There’s always an element of society who pretend they don’t know who they’re voting for yet. They’re voting for bad things

There are plenty of people who are disinterested or uninformed. They aren't naturally malicious simply because they don't religiously follow political news. Lots of them don't even know if they're going to vote until early voting starts, and even then only vote as part of their family or social group rather than because they have an emotional attachment to one of the parties.

The regional nature of voting tends to mean that if you're too shy to express your views, you aren't in the majority anyway. Its the guy who answers the phone in a MAGA hat and shouts "Hell yeah I'm voting fer Trump!" that you have to worry about, not the one who is too shy to whisper support for RFK Jr down the line.

[–] korazail@lemmy.myserv.one 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

don't trust polls.

This isn't telling you to not be confident or to be scared, this is telling you to not assume victory is assured. Vote regardless of polling. Polling can be accurate or not. If the polling is accurate, and a majority would vote for A, but A is so far ahead of B that A-voters sit out the race, B can still win if enough voters choose to stay home.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

this is telling you to not assume victory is assured

Who looks at a 50/48 polling split and thinks victory is assured? That's still within the margin of error and it doesn't even include battleground swings.

But if it was 60/40? Yeah, I'd feel pretty assured. You'd be a fool not to.

If the polling is accurate, and a majority would vote for A, but A is so far ahead of B that A-voters sit out the race

People keep talking about this like it ever actually happens? Name one candidate that lost an election because the polling was too favorable.

[–] lemmylommy@lemmy.world 23 points 3 weeks ago

Dear MAGAs Please believe your vice Führer. You will win. No need to go vote.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 22 points 3 weeks ago

Then I guess we better get more blue voters out to vote. Thanks JD.

[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago (7 children)

So what I'm not understanding, is what happens when they aren't elected and they remain unable to do basic math.

They seem to really putting all their eggs into the basket of "numbers are fake, do our bidding" but somehow fail to realize without the numbers they won't have support?

Like they really think they have enough weird dudes with too many guns to out gun and out fight the military that is currently under Biden's control?

Also, have they accounted for the fact that the number of armed crazies gets even smaller when the crazies realize they don't get paid for fighting?

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] lone_faerie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

They're already laying the groundwork for claiming the election was stolen

[–] Daxtron2@startrek.website 8 points 3 weeks ago

They've been doing that for years

[–] Naja_Kaouthia@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

He always looks so confused in his photos.

[–] rhythmisaprancer@moist.catsweat.com 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The Harris Walz campaign needs to call them ~~lists~~ liars in public. Constantly. I don't see how there isn't intent and capacity here.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

needs to call them lists in public.

What?

[–] subignition@fedia.io 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I believe they meant to write "liars" and autocorrect stepped in

Omg that was pretty bad. Liar what they said, call them lists

[–] MerchantsOfMisery@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I like how the Republican playbook is "grow a beard if you want to look manly" and it just makes them look shlubby more than anything. Vance and Cruz are prime examples.

[–] Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee 5 points 3 weeks ago

This guy would look baby faced if he shaved. I have the same problem where if I shave I look 10 years younger than I am.

I'm not claming this guy (or myself) are the pinnacle of attractiveness by any stretch of the imagination. Just saying what I know from a similar genetic background and age.

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] DJDarren@thelemmy.club 3 points 3 weeks ago

You done messed up JD Vance

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 7 points 3 weeks ago

Such performative masculinity, you can never be the underdog or have nuance.

Harris is up by a point or two nationally, and that's not necessarily enough to win. Battleground states are all too close to call. The RCP electoral map is still giving Trump the win granted they tend to be R-biased in their poll aggregation but that is the path to claiming Trump is in the lead.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

He's going full Baghdad Bob. You never go full Baghdad Bob.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago
[–] randon31415@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

Trump: See, the polls were wrong! Particularly in the places where my supporters controled the counting process AND refuse to release the final count! Oh, you got those electoral votes thrown out? Too bad the consitution gives the presidency to Republicans if no one reaches 270 electoral votes (one state, one vote)

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It's only fake news when it goes against their agenda. Otherwise, it's bigly accurate.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›