2024 US Election thread

[lizkat]

Also returning to the topic of billionaires who happen to own media....

There are suggestions that Bezos' decision for WaPo not to endorse Harris involved an actual quid pro quo with Trump... related to prospective government contracts and desire to get on better terms with Trump in case he wins.

Ex-WaPo Editor: This Is a Straight Bezos-Trump ‘Quid Pro Quo’

The Washington Post’s outgoing editor-at-large and longtime columnist has made explosive claims that its owner Jeff Bezos struck a deal with Donald Trump in order to kill the newspaper’s endorsement of Kamala Harris. Robert Kagan, who resigned from his position on Friday after more than two...

news.yahoo.com

Robert Kagan, who resigned from his position on Friday after more than two decades at the publication, told the Daily Beast that Trump’s meeting with executives of Bezos’ Blue Origin space company the same day that the Amazon founder killed a plan to support Harris was proof of the backroom deal.

“Trump waited to make sure that Bezos did what he said he was going to do, and then met with the Blue Origin people,” he said on Saturday. “Which tells us that there was an actual deal made, meaning that Bezos communicated, or through his people, communicated directly with Trump, and they set up this quid pro quo.”

Apparently, although the WaPo's publisher Lewis was who announced the non-endorsement policy and announced it as his own, he had privately supported the editorial board and journalists and was in favor of going ahead with the endorsement.

Jeff Bezos Overrode His Own Publisher to Kill Washington Post’s Kamala Harris Endorsement

Multibillionaire Jeff Bezos alone made the decision to block The Washington Post, the newspaper he owns, from endorsing a presidential candidate. The Daily Beast has learned that even Will Lewis, Bezos’ hand-picked publisher, fought Bezos “tooth and nail” to prevent him from squelching the...

www.yahoo.com

“Will Lewis fought tooth and nail against this,” a source familiar with The Post’s internal discussions told the Beast. “He argued with Bezos.”

Post journalists were wary of Lewis when he was hired as publisher and CEO. He provoked an uproar about ethics, with his alleged role in a hacking scandal at the British newspapers owned by Rupert Murdoch, for whom he previously worked for in the U.K.

But he is said to have privately sided with newsroom journalists who were outraged by Bezos’ eleventh-hour decision—literally 11 days before Election Day—to censor their free speech.

Who knows. It's possible that Lewis's subsequently leaked pre-announcement stance was just meant to try to keep the reporters and editors from acting out or taking a hike once the decision went public. It's not like anyone sane has ever figured Will Lewis is a left-leaning dude or was hired to take the Washington Post leftward. Au contraire... and so I would think that Will Lewis' argument with Bezos was more because Lewis knew it would make management of the blowback from the newsroom and editors pretty challenging for awhile.

 

[ronntaylor]

I've been saying this since the supremes decided to protect 45 from his own shit

I know it's Tongue-in-cheek, but I really hope Biden takes care of the A-hole if Harris-Walz wins and the Mango Menace acts up. Nothing should be taken lightly given what happened on January 6, 2021. That includes giving Garland the boot should he be too timid to do 💩

 

[P___X]

.

There are suggestions that Bezos' decision for WaPo not to endorse Harris involved an actual quid pro quo with Trump... related to prospective government contracts and desire to get on better terms with Trump in case he wins.

Ex-WaPo Editor: This Is a Straight Bezos-Trump ‘Quid Pro Quo’

The Washington Post’s outgoing editor-at-large and longtime columnist has made explosive claims that its owner Jeff Bezos struck a deal with Donald Trump in order to kill the newspaper’s endorsement of Kamala Harris. Robert Kagan, who resigned from his position on Friday after more than two...

news.yahoo.com

Apparently, although the WaPo's publisher Lewis was who announced the non-endorsement policy and announced it as his own, he had privately supported the editorial board and journalists and was in favor of going ahead with the endorsement.

Jeff Bezos Overrode His Own Publisher to Kill Washington Post’s Kamala Harris Endorsement

Multibillionaire Jeff Bezos alone made the decision to block The Washington Post, the newspaper he owns, from endorsing a presidential candidate. The Daily Beast has learned that even Will Lewis, Bezos’ hand-picked publisher, fought Bezos “tooth and nail” to prevent him from squelching the...

www.yahoo.com

Who knows. It's possible that Lewis's subsequently leaked pre-announcement stance was just meant to try to keep the reporters and editors from acting out or taking a hike once the decision went public. It's not like anyone sane has ever figured Will Lewis is a left-leaning dude or was hired to take the Washington Post leftward. Au contraire... and so I would think that Will Lewis' argument with Bezos was more because Lewis knew it would make management of the blowback from the newsroom and editors pretty challenging for awhile.

Besides being a shitshow, whose vote would a WaPo endorsement sway? People who actually read had made up their mind already. "Pretend independents" or even true undecideds aren't gonna be like, "Ohh, I don't know, both candidates look equally shite, but now that WaPo endorsed Harris, I'll just go with her". So the non-endorsement and Bezos messing with the endorsement process has a much more significant impact by angering people to show up at the booths.

 

[lizkat]

.

Besides being a shitshow, whose vote would a WaPo endorsement sway? People who actually read had made up their mind already. "Pretend independents" or even true undecideds aren't gonna be like, "Ohh, I don't know, both candidates look equally shite, but now that WaPo endorsed Harris, I'll just go with her". So the non-endorsement and Bezos messing with the endorsement process has a much more significant impact by angering people to show up at the booths.

Yeah a lot of the people who cancelled their sub over this (some say it's only about 2k subscribers anyway) are probably people who had read the WaPo since back in the times of Watergate, or else people who follow politics (and the challenges of journalism about politics) and whose outrage was primarily that Bezos would override the sensible conclusion of the editorial board to endorse Harris in 2024.

You're right that a newspaper's endorsement doesn't likely affect vote outcomes at least in these polarized times. Often enough such endorsements don't even draw much notice. Witness the muted reaction to the NYT endorsing Harris back on 9/30 as "the only patriotic choice" and reciting the litany of Trump's failings across spectrum of policy and character. Only thing surprised me about that, frankly, was that the NYT publisher didn't override it LOL since their coverage and headlines before and since then can hardly be said to advocate for Harris.

I figure the NYT figured their day to day repertorial coverage is what gets scrutiny from most subscribers, and endorsement gets a ho-hum yeah of course they endorse the Dem and meanwhile the biz office is happy enough that the mix of blistering comments appended to their news articles shows "both sides" pretty offended by the newsroom's efforts so they must be doing something, well.., at least revenue-praiseworthy.

But the WaPo situation was different. The non endorsement stuck out like a sore thumb and made Bezos look both venal and weak.

OK, Trump's an irrational grudgeholder and had skirted or even broken norms and laws re his attempts to harm Bezos' wallet while he was in office. He never quit harping on his belief that Bezos controlled everything the Post wrote. He never quit threatening to sic the USPS rate setters and the IRS on Amazon despite Trump's WH counsel and legislators and agency counsel advising him that such behavior would be illegal.​

​

But it was largely a free press --and then the Pentagon's procurement office reliance on rule of law and citing interference-- that were largely responsible for correcting the bias in the original cloud computing contract awards. In retrospect it feels like Bezos didn't get that his own paper contributed to making that contractual process fair on a re-do,​

Democracy DOES die in darkness, and it's disappointing that Bezos took the route he did by suppressing that endorsement. He instead could have let the endorsement run, then "leak" that he might have preferred that the paper not make a 2024 endorsement but that, as promised when he had bought the paper, he did not want to interfere with independence of the editorial process.

But no. Bezos caved. And did he imagine no one would report the subsequent (same day!) meeting of Trump with execs of Bezos' Blue Origin company?

Quid pro quo or no, the timing of the non-endorsement and especially after the WaPo's clear reporting on Trump's monumental unfitness during his first administration and in the 2024 campaign as well made Lewis' announcement of "back to our roots" of not endorsing stink like the pile of garbage it was.

So in having his new publisher squash a Harris endorsement 11 days before the elections, Bezos drew far more (and far more unfavorable) attention to the non-endorsement than the NYT ever reaped by just publishing a sensible enough end-September endorsement of Harris and moving on with its usual collection of algo-driven clickbait "offend everyone twice today" headlines.

 

[Jay Mysteri0]

If you hadn't heard about 45's ego stroke campaign stop to Madison Square Garden, ...you will.

See, a problem with racism for some, is that no matter the circumstance you can't realize when to turn it off. If you're going to campaign, you have to have that sensibility. If you are going to campaign for someone, you have to have that capability. What may seem f'n hilarious to you & a rabid in the bubble audience / base, may play much differently outside of that base & venue. Case in point...

This dumb M'Fer

Republicans disavow comedian who called Puerto Rico 'island of garbage' at Trump rally - Roll Call

Republicans sought to disavow the anti-Puerto Rico joke that Tony Hinchcliffe made Sunday at a Trump rally in New York.

rollcall.com

Republicans sought to disavow the anti-Puerto Rico joke that comedian Tony Hinchcliffe made on stage Sunday at former President Donald Trump’s rally at Madison Square Garden.

“I don’t know if you know this but there’s literally a floating island of garbage in the middle of the ocean right now,” Hinchcliffe said at the New York City rally. “I think it’s called Puerto Rico.”

That led to widespread criticism from Democrats ad Republicans alike, with even the former president’s own campaign seeking to create distance. Trump campaign senior adviser Danielle Alvarez said in a statement provided to CQ Roll Call, “This joke does not reflect the views of President Trump or the campaign.”

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., who is facing a reelection challenge from Democratic former Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, posted on X, “This joke bombed for a reason. It’s not funny and it’s not true. Puerto Ricans are amazing people and amazing Americans! I’ve been to the island many times. It’s a beautiful place. Everyone should visit! I will always do whatever I can to help any Puerto Rican in Florida or on the island.”

The Florida Senate race is rated Likely Republican by Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales, but it is one of just three Republican-held seats that are remotely competitive this year.

Rep. Anthony D’Esposito, R-N.Y., said in an X post that he is “proud” of his Puerto Rican background and called for the GOP to “stay on message.”

“My mom was born and raised in Puerto Rico. It’s a beautiful island with a rich culture and an integral part of the USA,” said D’Esposito, whose reelection race against Democratic challenger Lauren Gillen in the Long Island-based 4th District is rated a Toss-up. “The only thing that’s ‘garbage’ was a bad comedy set.”

While those residing in Puerto Rico cannot vote in presidential general elections, there are many citizens of Puerto Rican heritage living on the mainland. And island-based citizens do vote to send a nonvoting resident commissioner to serve in the House of Representatives.

When the news from your campaign rally is that repubs are distancing something from it, and not how the rally went... You F'd up. It also serves to remind people as I've said before, what kind of people you CHOOSE to associate with. Somebody picked that guy for a reason! Add that to the recent comments about 45 & murdered soldier Vanessa Guillén, it's painting a pretty horrible picture that most already knew. Importantly though the MSG shitshow spurred on a group of Latin entertainers like Bad Bunny & JLO to come right out and post a video from Harris on 45's treatment of Puerto Rico.

But hey, some are okay with 45 & the group he rides with, but they can't say they are surprised when they find out what 45 & his crew really think of them.

But not to worry, the guy has an explanation...



People can't take a joke? 🤷‍♂️

Also, if you are having trouble finding out about the MSG event, just look up "nazi rally". I'm not shitting you. It's what one guy opened up with early in the rally. It's not what he really meant, but for F sake why go there at all?!! If you are trying to dodge that stink, don't deal it yourself!



Oh, and emo?



Wow.

 

[P___X]

If you hadn't heard about 45's ego stroke campaign stop to Madison Square Garden, ...you will.

See, a problem with racism for some, is that no matter the circumstance you can't realize when to turn it off. If you're going to campaign, you have to have that sensibility. If you are going to campaign for someone, you have to have that capability. What may seem f'n hilarious to you & a rabid in the bubble audience / base, may play much differently outside of that base & venue. Case in point...

This dumb M'Fer

When people tell you who they are, you'd better believe them. It was dumb AF, and the fact that this guy got surprised about the reactions tells you everything about his perceptions about the MAGA movement. Even some MAGAs think that MAGA is a racist movement.

Yeah a lot of the people who cancelled their sub over this (some say it's only about 2k subscribers anyway) are probably people who had read the WaPo since back in the times of Watergate, or else people who follow politics (and the challenges of journalism about politics) and whose outrage was primarily that Bezos would override the sensible conclusion of the editorial board to endorse Harris in 2024.

You're right that a newspaper's endorsement doesn't likely affect vote outcomes at least in these polarized times. Often enough such endorsements don't even draw much notice. Witness the muted reaction to the NYT endorsing Harris back on 9/30 as "the only patriotic choice" and reciting the litany of Trump's failings across spectrum of policy and character. Only thing surprised me about that, frankly, was that the NYT publisher didn't override it LOL since their coverage and headlines before and since then can hardly be said to advocate for Harris.

I figure the NYT figured their day to day repertorial coverage is what gets scrutiny from most subscribers, and endorsement gets a ho-hum yeah of course they endorse the Dem and meanwhile the biz office is happy enough that the mix of blistering comments appended to their news articles shows "both sides" pretty offended by the newsroom's efforts so they must be doing something, well.., at least revenue-praiseworthy.

But the WaPo situation was different. The non endorsement stuck out like a sore thumb and made Bezos look both venal and weak.

OK, Trump's an irrational grudgeholder and had skirted or even broken norms and laws re his attempts to harm Bezos' wallet while he was in office. He never quit harping on his belief that Bezos controlled everything the Post wrote. He never quit threatening to sic the USPS rate setters and the IRS on Amazon despite Trump's WH counsel and legislators and agency counsel advising him that such behavior would be illegal.​

​

But it was largely a free press --and then the Pentagon's procurement office reliance on rule of law and citing interference-- that were largely responsible for correcting the bias in the original cloud computing contract awards. In retrospect it feels like Bezos didn't get that his own paper contributed to making that contractual process fair on a re-do,​

Democracy DOES die in darkness, and it's disappointing that Bezos took the route he did by suppressing that endorsement. He instead could have let the endorsement run, then "leak" that he might have preferred that the paper not make a 2024 endorsement but that, as promised when he had bought the paper, he did not want to interfere with independence of the editorial process.

But no. Bezos caved. And did he imagine no one would report the subsequent (same day!) meeting of Trump with execs of Bezos' Blue Origin company?

Quid pro quo or no, the timing of the non-endorsement and especially after the WaPo's clear reporting on Trump's monumental unfitness during his first administration and in the 2024 campaign as well made Lewis' announcement of "back to our roots" of not endorsing stink like the pile of garbage it was.

So in having his new publisher squash a Harris endorsement 11 days before the elections, Bezos drew far more (and far more unfavorable) attention to the non-endorsement than the NYT ever reaped by just publishing a sensible enough end-September endorsement of Harris and moving on with its usual collection of algo-driven clickbait "offend everyone twice today" headlines.

I don't disagree about the importance. At the same time, if anything, this will mobilize people more than a WaPo endorsement would have. And about journalistic independence... Oligarchy messes such things up. all the time.

Everybody made up their mind at this point, pretendependents just enjoy being courted 24/7. I think overall the male / female turnout is pretty encouraging at the battleground states.In Mich it's 57% to 43%. in WI it's 51% vs 43% (6% unknown) I an even distribution is safe to assume in that group), in PA that's 56% vs 43%, in NC it's 55% vs 44% and in GA it's 56% vs 44%.




There are 7-10M more female registered voters, and they have a 3% higher turnout rate.

 

[lizkat]

When the news from your campaign rally is that repubs are distancing something from it, and not how the rally went... You F'd up. It also serves to remind people as I've said before, what kind of people you CHOOSE to associate with. Somebody picked that guy for a reason! Add that to the recent comments about 45 & murdered soldier Vanessa Guillén, it's painting a pretty horrible picture that most already knew. Importantly though the MSG shitshow spurred on a group of Latin entertainers like Bad Bunny & JLO to come right out and post a video from Harris on 45's treatment of Puerto Rico.

But hey, some are okay with 45 & the group he rides with, but they can't say they are surprised when they find out what 45 & his crew really think of them.

Well it certainly seems like we are watching the inglorious withering of the GOP's fig leaf of "that's just Trump being Trump" play out at Trump's rallies.

If the guy's "just Trump being Trump" smorgasbord of indelicacies at each succesive late rally has not alienated another couple thousand potential R votes, it's only because whoever is left is in the same sort of trance Trump is in.

Just Trump being a racist and misogynist. Just Trump losing his marbles. Just Trump praising autocrats and Nazis. Just Trump elevating hostile nations and threatening another round of disrespecting and weakening US alliances with democratic nations. Just Trump insulting anyone with a sense of decorum or decency. Just Trump not even bothering to try to keep evangelicals in the fold any more, insulting even his dwindling crowd of increasingly bored or annoyed hard core followers.​

​

Just Trump promising to terminate the Constitution as soon as he can take another oath to uphold and defend it.​

​

Just Trump teetering on the edge of a total and very public decompensation while trying to maintain his narcissistic embrace of an omnipotent self-image.​

​

just Trump enraging GOP candidates out on the stump trying to keep from losing both houses of Congress along with the White House. Just Trump promising retribution on his perceived enemies --the American people in all our diversity -- while he continues to set us against each other but also promises to set the military on us to restore order, even as he prospectively delivers retribution to a fading Republican Party that has elevated and sustained him while annoying him for still being small-d democrats when push comes to shove, e.g, declining to buy into his border wall budget, trying to pass immigration reform...​

Meanwhile the pathetic Republican national campaign honchos send out sycophants like Lindsay Graham to the Sunday talk shows, trying to get the focus off their uncontrollable puppet and back to the Republican Party's anti-regulatory anti-tax litany -- the other fig leaf, the one they hope still has enough opacity to conceal their craven desire to retain power at all costs for themselves and their cronies.

I'm kinda hoping this time around, and regardless of the yard signs that may be on their lawns, Republican businessmen are quietly figuring they'd all do better with Harris in the White House and a split Congress again. Gridlock and a bunch of budget bills grudgingly negotiated across the aisle --and without the threat of "Trump being Trump" in the Oval Office again-- could look better than the uncertainties of a Trump 2.0 White House staffed by loyalists and a cabinet full of "acting assistant" secretaries angling from within for wholesale dismantling of regulations favoring clean air and water, worker safety and food inspection.

As for international relationships, seems like only a handful of countries, all run by autocrats, are thrilled at the idea of another round of Trump at the helm of the USA. Even they must wonder what fresh hell that former guy could summon up if the US voters decide to make him a king this time around, no thanks to the Supreme Court lean that he has apparently managed to establish.

 

[shadow puppet]

So between the ballot burning and Musk paying folks one mil for voting Rump, do we even stand a chance anymore?

 

[Pumbaa]

So between the ballot burning and Musk paying folks one mil for voting Rump, do we even stand a chance anymore?

The Madison Square Garden rally could help offset Musk's million dollar bribes at least.

 

[shadow puppet]

 

[Jay Mysteri0]

View attachment 1621

In fairness, that is pretty consistent for the man & his team.

Trump told supporters at his campaign rally that the U.S. has tested 25 million people, far more than any other country. The “bad part,” Trump said, is that widespread testing leads to logging more cases of the virus.

“When you do testing to that extent, you’re going to find more people, you’re going to find more cases,” Trump said. “So I said to my people, ‘Slow the testing down, please.’ They test and they test.”

Trump suggests US slow virus testing to avoid bad statistics

TULSA, Okla. (AP) — President Donald Trump said Saturday he's asked his administration to slow down coronavirus testing because robust testing turns up too many cases of COVID-19.

apnews.com

You have to understand the "philosophy". If you don't look for problems, there won't be no problems!" 🙄

😏

 

[lizkat]

So between the ballot burning and Musk paying folks one mil for voting Rump, do we even stand a chance anymore?

I still think Harris is going to win the White House. I dunno. Is it "the economy, stupid?" If it is, and enough voters think that translates to a vote for Trump as well as a vote for their own pocketbooks then they ARE stupid and Trump could win one for the billionaires again.

I think or maybe only hope the Ds can flip the House. The Senate could be past too difficult to hang onto in 2024 thanks to the so many seats up to defend in this Senate class, but who knows. If the turnout's high enough in the right states, it's possible. Harris could have coattails in states that are not swing states for the presidency but where the extra blue votes might help retain some challenged Senate seats.

Think Maryland, where Larry Hogan is former Republican governor but the electorate does tend to run blue and Angela Alsobrook has a good chance. She leads in the polls by 14 points, Harris leads there by 22... so if Harris voters can be persuaded to go blue down ballot, Maryland will elect the Dem and thus retain the seat now held by retiring Democrat Ben Cardin.​

Meanwhile since the House R majority is so thin, the Dems are focusing very hard on a handful of swing districts the Rs managed to flip in 2022 including some in upstate NY, e.g., Molinaro won for the Rs in the 19th CD and has been trying hard to come off as bipartisan or moderate, but it's a rematch, his opponent Josh Riley only lost by 1.6% last time out and this time not only the state Ds but the DNC are awake and pouring money into the race.

Polls at the House level are often pretty hard to trust, most are paid for by the candidates and the questions are ridiculously loaded. Incumbents do have an advantage, but in upstate NY a redistricting caught some voters by surprise in 2022, and some apparently didn't recognize candidates from either party, so turnout in some blue-purple areas was spotty. Not this time, I suspect. More voters in traditionally blue areas incorporated into the 19th last time are more than awake this time around and should help the 19th swing back to blue. Down in Long Island, I have somewhat less hope. All those damn brokers and bankers...

 

[shadow puppet]

In fairness, that is pretty consistent for the man & his team.

No argument. But it's an insane threat to national security.

 

[shadow puppet]

I still think Harris is going to win the White House.

God I hope so.

 

[SouprMatt]

In fairness, that is pretty consistent for the man & his team.




You have to understand the "philosophy". If you don't look for problems, there won't be no problems!" 🙄

😏

I am always astonished at the mental gymnastics.

Harris did a terrible job at the border! She’s bad!

Things were no different at the border under Trump though. Oh well, so what!

And they NEVER acknowledge that his handling of the pandemic was among the worst, if not the worst, of all countries in the world. They go around saying the economy was better under Trump? Do they just not have any memory of the pandemic at all? Really?

If I compare them to sports fans who always support their team no matter what, they are even crazier. Because at least sports fans will complain, often in specific details, what’s being done wrong when their team loses. When Team 45 loses? He’s perfect, and everybody else must have been cheating….

One other random musing: Election worries are carrying over into work discussions now. People are genuinely scared, and even more so after this weekend’s Nazi rally.

 

[lizkat]

Hmm. NPR reports that WaPo has lost more like 200k subscribers since the weekend, not 2k.

200k is around 8% of the WaPo subscriber base. Still petty cash to Bezos and it's spread out over upcoming months in many cases, so not even yet an actual hit on the ledgers. But that's a lot of people bailing out over a blank space in the opinion pages eleven days before a national election.

https://www.npr.org/2024/10/28/nx-s1-5168416/washington-post-bezos-endorsement-president-cancellations-resignations

More than 200,000 people had canceled their digital subscriptions by midday Monday, according to two people at the paper with knowledge of internal matters. Not all cancellations take effect immediately. Still, the figure represents about 8% of the paper’s paid circulation of 2.5 million subscribers, which includes print as well. The number of cancellations continued to grow Monday afternoon.

So is that 2k of people like me who no longer recognize the WaPo of the 60s in the WaPo of October 2024, plus 198k of trolls wearing buttons on their jackets that say

Panic! Chaos! My Work Here is Done! ​

and who now feel free to pack up their copy-paste commenting kits, cash their paychecks (rubles? rials? yuan? benjamins? ) and go home?

Or is it 200k engaged (and, enraged) readers who think we all just saw a billionaire cave in pre-emptively to threatened retribution by the shadow of a declining Donald Trump?

Who knows. Anyway I didn't think it would be that many people cancelling. No wonder they put up a banner asking if I wanted to reconsider almost immediately after I had killed my sub. No thanks. I will observe from afar for awhile to see if some other shoe drops on the erstwhile independent news desks and editorial slots.

After the elections of 2024 was when the touted "third desk" was supposed to be rung in at the WaPo, an arrangement that would somehow make a place to feature social media and topics that might draw younger readers. Why bother now... the whole paper just landed as a target of traditional AND social media for three days running, and not in a particularly attractive light. This has to be why Will Lewis argued with Bezos against squashing an expected Harris endorsement. By now it would have had its 15 seconds of persual and gone the way of the ones by other papers including the NYT. But no. Its absence turned on a spotlight that now shines ironically on the WaPo's "Democracy Dies in Darkness."

 

[SouprMatt]

I am heartened to see the PBS News Hour calling a spade a spade in their coverage of the Trump rally at MSG in NY. Not only did they call out the racism, but they brought in Ruth Ben-Ghiat of NYU to explain exactly how Trump is playing from the fascist playbook.

 

[TBL]

Ballot boxes are being set on fire in Oregon and Washington:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/28/us/ballot-box-fires-oregon-washington/index.html

It also happened in Arizona, though the man who did it claimed it was not politically motivated and he seemed to have mental issues.

In either case, this does not bode well for the possibility of political violence around this election.

 

[lizkat]

I am heartened to see the PBS News Hour calling a spade a spade in their coverage of the Trump rally at MSG in NY. Not only did they call out the racism, but they brought in Ruth Ben-Ghiat of NYU to explain exactly how Trump is playing from the fascist playbook.

Speaking of historian Ben-Ghiat, the Baltimore Banner has reported that while Elon Musk recently spoke at West Point, Ruth Ben-Ghiat was disinvited from speaking at the Naval Academy because, are you ready, the military wants to remain nonpartisan and she has spoken out against Trump. West Point has no problem with the "free" speech of dedicated Trump partisan Elon Musk? Even officers of his own platform X have problems with Musk!

Why was Elon Musk, dancing Trump supporter, welcome at West Point?

Where was the outrage when Elon Musk, weirdly dancing supporter of former President Donald Trump, spoke at West Point? It’s a stunning contrast to the cancellation of a lecture by historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a Trump critic, at the Naval Academy.

www.thebaltimorebanner.com

 

[shadow puppet]

I think I'm going to be sick.