this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2024
190 points (99.0% liked)

politics

18651 readers
4049 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
top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 98 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Multimillion-dollar ad-buys highlight a so-called “car ban”

A recent fuel manufacturers ad shows a woman driving through a suburban neighborhood. A narrator warns that “President Biden is banning most new gas cars” and that he has put the “freedom to choose what to drive in the rearview mirror.” As the woman drives, she notices that Biden is gleefully sitting in her back seat.

This kind of shit is why we need to have better regulation and oversight of advertisements.

  • ✅️ False information presented as fact.
  • ✅️ Fear mongering.
  • ✅️ Dishonest use of a political candidates likeness.

Even if the most rational voters fact-check what this ad is saying, it will still succeed at convincing emotionally-driven individuals to vote against Biden.

[–] Omega_Man@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

I've been using Facebook marketplace recently, which has caused me to come into contact with my Facebook feed. The amount of disinformation on Facebook is absurd. It's probably a four to one ratio of disinformation to reality.

Do you know how many Hollywood stars are supposedly starting a "anti-woke" production studio?

  • Tim Allen
  • Richard Karn
  • Mel Gibson
  • Mark Wahlberg
  • Robert Downey Jr.

To name a few.

There are also tons of accounts that are clearly just farming engagement by posting AI generated pictures of veterans holding sign saying "t's my birthday."

[–] hark@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago

If they're going to attack you for being a radical, you might as well be a radical, then you can actually get things done. We need radical policy to fight climate change and a gas car ban would actually go a long way toward that. Instead we'll have democrats insist they're not radical and try to prove it by promoting republican-lite policies. Republicans will attack him regardless. This song and dance has been on repeat for decades now, it's tiring.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 1 month ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The ads urge viewers in the key presidential and Senate swing states of Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona, Georgia, Montana, Ohio and Texas to oppose Biden-era rules that improve fuel economy.

But political advertisement experts say the ad campaign echoes the broader conservative plan to mobilize people who are like-minded in their mistrust of electric vehicles, whether they’re base voters or those who’ve never voted.

But this election cycle, groups that are against expanded electric vehicle production and Biden's clean energy initiatives have targeted Democratic candidates in states with electoral significance–often with false claims about those climate policies.

In Wisconsin, an ad by the GOP funder Restoration PAC falsely claimed that Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisc., cut Medicare funding to redirect money to subsidize electric vehicles.

API spokesperson Bethany Williams said that their campaign is addressing a “de facto ban,” and despite running the ad in Pennsylvania and Michigan, they said they are not taking a stance on parties or the presidential election since they are a bipartisan organization.

“During an election year where inflation is top of mind, API is working to inform the debate and educate voters, candidates and policymakers on both sides of the aisle of the importance of sound energy policies,” Williams said in a statement.


The original article contains 1,925 words, the summary contains 210 words. Saved 89%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Gee, I hope he doesn't wear a tan suit,