whats to watch. a bunch of un-empathetic sycophants pretending to have a platform or relevance to an audience already "not votin for a lib"
this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2023
466 points (94.8% liked)
News
23284 readers
3919 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It was even worse than you're imagining.
I dunno, I'm imagining them doing the Nazi salute to punctuate the end of their hate speech.
Watching a bunch of assholes "debate" (read: regurgitate canned talking points on cue) who are only going to lose the primary to a bigger asshole, who is even in the room, is kinda pointless. Especially when said bigger asshole already lost one general election and may well be on track to lose an other one., So, we could either watch losers who are losing to a loser; or, spend our time more productively. Like say, insulting said losers on the internet. Not a hard choice.
We need to be mindful that he can win the general election too. Lots of angry white racists out there and even more evangelicals.
No need to get white into it, racist is sufficient. Trump has plenty of black and Hispanic supporters. I don't know if they are all racists, but they are definitively assholes.
Yeah… he lost the general election, but only by a hair, and a LOT of work went into grabbing last minute votes.
The most dangerous thing you can do is be complacent.
We need to vote and we need to get others to vote.
Ya, while I was being flippant about it, I do agree that Trump has a very real chance of winning the General Election. I well remember the noise over polling in 2016 and Nate Silver's epic rant (he was right) about how the data should be looked at.
I'm curious to see how things shake out in the General Election this time around. And I wonder if Biden's Campaign will lean into Trump's criminal actions. In 2016, Trump's campaign pushed the "lock her up!" narrative over Clinton's email server. Now that we have clear evidence of Trump mishandling, hiding and attempting to hang onto clearly marked classified information (some of which is clearly SCI or NNPI), will we get choruses of "lock him up!"? At the same time, Trumpets seem to revel in Trump's crimes and prosecution as almost a badge of honor and/or an underdog fighting "the man". The irony of Trump pretty much being the definition of "the man" seems lost on his supporters. But hey, no one ever said politics has to make sense.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Does this mean they eventually got "tired of winning"? Or are they now trying to win at losing too?
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
This is incredibly obvious but it’s stated this way because a more honest headline would be uninteresting. The last time there was a serious Republican primary was 2015.
So they’re saying debate ratings are lower than the last time there wasn’t an obvious front runner. Yeah, no shit cnbc. Good job.
I mean, they have nothing interesting to say, no policies to discuss, and are a black hole of charisma.
That last part is all that really matters in this case. None of them can make their insanity interesting to watch without the reality TV star around.
[...] lowest viewership since 2015
Hasn't there only been one other debate since then...? That's rather misleading.
lowest ratings since the first one a little bit ago.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Why would you want to watch? They're all a bunch of losers and one worse than the next. They're the current failures that rose to the top.
None have compelling arguments or solutions and are only there to shitsling each other. Even monkeys at the zoo are smarter.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Who wants to watch a bunch of mentally ill psychopaths talk over each other? I sure don’t.
Wasn't Jersey shore insanely popular?
Not the tryouts for it.
To the most of the world, they are "mentally ill psychopaths", but to their rabid supporters, they can do no wrong. They will still watch them, cheer them on, and support them and vote for them...
That’s the thing, though. They don’t actually have rabid supporters. Trump does, and they want his supporters to support them.
That’s why no one is interested in watching their debates. The people who actually care about debates aren’t interested in their nonsense, and the ones whose vote they are courting are just waiting for Trump to give them the Go signal.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's Republicans debating against each other? Like aren't they all the same?
"I'm a piece of shit."
"No I'm a piece of shit!"
"Heh... that's cute. I'm the biggest piece of shit."
rapturous applause
Narrator: The audience was the biggest piece of shit, after all...
It is a championship of "Who is the most shitty politition behind Trump".
load more comments
(1 replies)
Nobody wants to watch a bunch of losers kiss the ass of an elephant who isn't even in the room (honorable mention to C. Christie who clearly does not kiss Trump's ass)
Chris Christie. Maybe the least smelly turd in the group. He still smells like shit and now the question is whether he's only trying to separate himself from the others while still planning to deliver the exact same steaming mess any of them would. Is he hedging his bet that trump is falling to the charges?
At this point, they all are counting on the chance that he won't be able to run for one reason or another.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Couldn't watch it without a cable subscription or signing up for a streaming service. That's probably at least part of it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
"Are you not entertained?"
But didn't they watch in the hopes that Vivek would spit out some rhymes? Vivek rhymes with cake, you know.
Who?
They are all running for VP candidate but are too dumb to realize it.
They're well aware of it, it's why they're not really badmouthing Trump.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
view more: next ›