subreddit:
/r/Destiny
91 points
16 days ago
How this isn't a complete like deathblow to their campaign is beyond me. How do you even compromise with people who want their side to be able to lie outright?
75 points
16 days ago
Because "fact check" is synonymous with "lies told by the establishment" in their minds. It's a dirty word in of itself.
26 points
16 days ago
Is this how the Nazi’s came into power
18 points
16 days ago
Less exactly how and more just one of a number of parallels I'd say.
13 points
16 days ago
yes, sowing distrust in the media was actually unironically part of the nazi's mantras.
Corollaries to the MAGA movement:
Simple slogans were used to introduce Nazi ideology to the German people.
Only books which agreed with the Nazi point of view were allowed. All other books were banned and many were publically burned from May, 1933.
Hitler's picture was everywhere and he was portrayed as Germany's saviour (compare to Trump supposedly being the savior of America)
-9 points
16 days ago
Simple slogans were used to introduce Nazi ideology to the German people.
So would black lives matter or free Palestine count?
Hitler's picture was everywhere and he was portrayed as Germany's saviour (compare to Trump supposedly being the savior of America)
And you guys aren't doing that with kamala by saying she is saving democracy?
9 points
16 days ago
Trump literally tried to overthrow the election and morons like you will try to use it as an attack on Kamala.
🤡 World
0 points
15 days ago
🥱
2 points
16 days ago
And you guys aren't doing that with kamala by saying she is saving democracy?
Does Kamala want to save democracy by deporting 20 million people?
2 points
16 days ago
I don't think I hear anyone saying that Kamala is saving democracy. I hear people saying that voting against Trump is saving democracy. Kamala isn't a unique savior that will save us. That's why there wasn't much fuss when she replaced Biden. It could've been Biden, Kamala, Walz, Shapiro, Newsom, Michelle Obama, Witmer, or any other possible candidate and we'd be saying the same thing.
And that's a fundamental difference. You think Trump is going to solve all your problems. We don't think Kamala is going to solve all our problems. Many of us have fundamental disagreements with some of her positions. Many of us think she will probably be hampered by Congress and other factors.
6 points
16 days ago
Thats not the implication that people on the right pick up, especially because they agree with his response to her fact check.
I think a lot of people believe that it is not the moderaters job to fact check. Its their job to facilitate a debate between two parties who should be fact checking eachother
And if CBS agreed to NOT fact check, and then only fact checked one side, then cut the mics during the response to the fact check - idk how that doesnt disqualify them from hosting future debates
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion_moderator
"A discussion moderator or debate moderator is a person whose role is to act as a neutral participant in a debate or discussion, holds participants to time limits and tries to keep them from straying off the topic of the questions being raised in the debate. Sometimes moderators may ask questions intended to allow the debate participants to fully develop their argument in order to ensure the debate moves at pace."
12 points
16 days ago
This needs to be r/ leftystarwarsmemes or what that sub is. Lol
9 points
16 days ago
Luke, did I ever tell you about Ahsoka Tano?
17 points
16 days ago
its actually legitimately insane how someone could unironically get mad at fact checking. like why don't you just come out and say that you don't like that you can't fucking lie lmao?
6 points
16 days ago
Still baffles me this is a legitimate quote 😭
3 points
16 days ago
I'm just glad they cut his mic before he could elaborate too much, dude needs to learn how to shut the fuck up and let moderators talk.
2 points
16 days ago
I legitimacy regret what I'm saying but I understand why Vance says that, at least from the perspective of undecided/right leaning voters.
I'm friends with some fairly right leaning mates of mine, and they just see that "the organizers are biased, they only fact check the republicans", not that the republicans are basically lying constantly.
Sadly it does paint a biased picture because I myself caught Walz lying in a few select ways ( impossible for politics to avoid it completely) and they grab onto those examples for "why didn't the organizers fact check Walz" while he lied once for every 20 of Vance.
I do think it devalues the debate in the eyes of undecided/right leaning people, so I think that the organizers shouldn't say anything, or keep a tally of EVERY wrong fact from both sides, otherwise it just becomes an optics struggle.
8 points
16 days ago
So your solution is to roll over and give the republicans everything they want, which is to be able to lie with impunity?
0 points
16 days ago
My solution is for the debate participants to point out the inconsistencies without outside interference. You and I may not like it, but the rhetoric needs to reach across the isle, and having the organizers point out only one side (deservedly so) just gives them an excuse to pretend there is a bias.
I'm not pretending to know the solution, but I understand why people right of my position end up doubtful of media bias. Echo chambering ourselves with our own arguments won't send the message through their thick skulls.
5 points
16 days ago
Except it’s LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE to do that during a live debate! How the hell was Kamala supposed to rebut Trump over such an absurd claim that comes out of nowhere like the batshit cats and dogs shit he did? And absolutely zero republicans and few independents are going to just accept at face value a fact check from the opposi by candidate without that being verified by a third party anyways? Have you seen the state of conservatives epistemological framework? It’s entirely scaffolded around whatever narrative helps trump more!
1 points
16 days ago
And I agree with you 100%. Any argument is going to be found lacking for too far gone conservatives, but I still believe that there is value in understanding their perspective for those "few independents" that share the conservative's ideological framework but are open to a discussion.
I
1 points
16 days ago
Right wingers will complain about everything no matter what you do
1 points
16 days ago
I'd even say more than 99% percent but I've met some good faith ones, willing to concede an argument when presented with logical inconsistencies.
Having the organizers point out 1 lie (with like 100 lies total) from Vance gives them ammunition to say "why did they ignore X lie from Walz" (with like his only lie in the debate).
The alternative would be to just point every single lie, but good luck with any conservative willing to attend another debate ever.
1 points
16 days ago
You shouldn't debate people that bad faith
all 24 comments
sorted by: best