The Republican presidential candidate ridiculously claimed that Biden is “trying to hold” Bibi back, as the Israeli prime minister continued to ruthlessly bomb Lebanon and Gaza.

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/45237868

“He’s doing a good job,” Trump saidabout the Israeli leader. “Biden is trying to hold him back, just so you understand, Biden is more superior to the VP. He’s trying to hold him back, and he probably should be doing the opposite, actually. I’m glad that Netanyahu decided to do what he had to do, but it’s moving along pretty good.”

  • kikutwo@lemmy.worldEnglish
    651·
    1 month ago

    The real not the onion is that half the country is still voting for this criminal scumbag grifter.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        181·
        1 month ago

        258m adults in the US in 2020 about 255m in 2016

        74 223 975 votes in 2020, 62 984 828 in 2016

        That’s both more than 18% and there’s no reason to believe that all people under 18 would vote against Trump.

        And that’s only based on the people that bothered voting, there’s supporters that didn’t vote that should get added to that as well.

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                1·
                1 month ago

                Which was a reply to a comment about support for him therefore your argument didn’t make sense in the context as shown by the fact that more than 18% of people who could vote did vote for him and you can’t show that there’s no support for him amongst those under voting age and they can’t be included when talking about votes statistics because they can’t vote.

                Also the bit about victim blaming makes zero sense.

                So yeah, reading comprehension, work on that.

        • tacosanonymous@lemm.eeEnglish
          17·
          1 month ago

          The person you’re replying to is pointing out the distinction between voters and actual population.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
          126·
          1 month ago

          Because the media has a profit incentive to portray it as such. The closer it is, the more people watch their coverage and the more money they can charge advertisers.

          Which is bad enough in itself, but them portraying it as close and the lies of fascists as valid arguments worthy of consideration MAKES it closer than it would otherwise be, in a classic case of the tail wagging the dog.

          Bottom line is that, even with the sensationalist media helping them be more competitive, they would lose every major election in 40-45 states if not for massive voter suppression.

          They do NOT have the support of half of the population, or even half of that. They’re viable in spite of 80% of the population not supporting them because the system is broken in their favor.

          • atzanteol@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            95·
            1 month ago

            Utter bullshit. The polling companies are often separate from the media companies. Some are even academic institutions. And they are incentivised to be accurate. Imagine being the one polling organisation that can call elections!

            What y’all are misunderstanding, however, is the difference between poll numbers and probability of winning. Harris definitely polls better but due to the electoral college the probability that she wins in lower than poll numbers suggests.

            • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
              77·
              1 month ago

              Utter bullshit

              Thanks for the summation of your reply. Headlines are usually bolded and in bigger type than the body text, though…

              The polling companies are often separate from the media companies. Some are even academic institutions

              And there sre hundreds if not thousands from which to choose. The media choose the ones that best fit the narrative they’ve already written.

              And they are incentivised to be accurate

              Nope. They are incentivized to deliver the results that their customers want, regardless of accuracy.

              Imagine being the one polling organisation that can call elections!

              Even if doing so consistently was possible (which it isn’t), that wouldn’t be the most profitable thing to do. See above on incentive.

              What y’all are misunderstanding, however, is the difference between poll numbers and probability of winning

              Nope, I understand full well the difference between the popular vote, which is what’s polled, and the electoral vote which is a big part of the aforementioned system being broken in favor of the American Fascist Party AKA the GOP.

                • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
                  16·
                  1 month ago

                  What a garbage response

                  This you?

                  “There is a profit motive, checkmate” is all you’ve said.

                  You either have the reading comprehension of a toddler or the capacity to argue in good faith of Ben Shapiro. Either way, I’m done indulging you. Have the day you deserve.

        • rbesfe@lemmy.caEnglish
          62·
          1 month ago

          This line of thinking is exactly what got Trump elected in 2016. All it shows is ignorance of your own political system

          • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.worldEnglish
            52·
            1 month ago

            What it shows is how little our ruling parties care about wage earners, really.

            Harris spent two months repeating memes instead of coming up with plans to bring wage earners into the fold, and if she loses, that’s why. You can meme about joy all day and that doesn’t put food on people’s tables.