111–120 of 1001 posts
"Democracy dies in darkness" and silence, apparently.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is that Democratic voters didn't get a chance to have their voice heard. Conducting polling is post-hoc rationalization for Harris being installed by party leaders in unprecedentedly anti-democratic action.
If the presidential candidate wishes to hand the reins over to his vice president, why is he not allowed to do that?
Is anyone really changing their mind based on some newspaper endorsement? I’m pretty sure everyone knows who they’re gonna vote for at this point.
Doing it after the board had already written up a document endorsing a candidate (demonstrating clearly that it was not a policy of anyone but the owner, who decided to be an utter coward at the last minute) sends a clear message that even one of the richest men in the world is scared of possible backlash against him.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the presidential candidate wishes to hand the reins over to his vice president, why is he not allowed to do that?
He is allowed, it's just doesn't follow a democratic process.
So they aren't going to endorse either candidate. If I didn't have context about the situation, I'd say it makes sense. However I think that in this flawed two-party situation, there is unfairness on both sides, resulting in some sort of balance, and it's bad that one of the richest people on earth could upset the balance in this way, especially at the last moment. Article from 2020: https://www.washingtonpost.com/op…
Yeah, I think you’re missing the point a bit here: the fear of endorsing the “wrong” candidate, as it would lead to loss of profit by the owning company, is what led to the axing of the endorsement. Call it what you want: profit and political strongarming silenced a newspaper.
More interesting to me is that this is the third tech billionaire to take a decidedly different stance than he did previously. Musk is quite active, but even Zuckerberg took a much more neutral stance for 2024. Honestly I'm more surprised that Bezos even bothered. Does he really think the endorsement of The Washington Post editorial board is so significant that it's worth intervening? That seems implausible.
Thats because of the calculation: - Endorse Harris and Trump wins, Trump will seek revenge on Bezos and Amazon (he tried this in the first term) - Endorse Trump and Harris wins, Harris will not act outside the bounds of a normal government official This is capitulation to the perceived threats of a Trump presidency and is very bad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which candidate was deemed a fascist by over a dozen members of his own administration ? https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/13-former-tru...
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Now we'll never know who the Washington Post's editorial board would have endorsed. At least Taylor Swift was able to make her recommendation, so I know I'm all set.
[flagged]