Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 1001 posts

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#61

Post by pyuser583 »

wormlord wrote: post #33

[flagged]

Capitalism. They own companies that are established. It’s in their interest to prevent competition.

Almost all established companies eventually support rules that enshrine themselves as monopolies in exchange to much tougher regulation.

Tariffs force governments to pick and choose industries to receive state protection. As do subsidies.

Even creating tons of paperwork for startups helps a lot.

Plenty of democracies function this way. Italy and Belgium come to mind.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#62

Post by jmcclell »

It makes sense in so much as "it's a risk to our business to endorse Harris because of the risk of falling afoul of Trump's vindictive nature should he win."

From a fiduciary standpoint, I agree with that assessment. From the standpoint of a citizen, I find the implication alarming.

I do believe that this is the reasoning behind the decision, but it is certainly speculation on my part.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#63

Post by olliej »

wormlord wrote: post #33

[flagged]

Which party is ending capitalism? I'm curious, because there's one party saying explicitly that they intend to end the democratic process, one party explicitly stating the goal is the end of the rule of law, and one party saying they want to deploy the military against the supporters of the other political party.

You could make the argument that those positions are fundamentally opposed to capitalism as well, but that's not as explicit.

Regardless, only one party is threatening either of your alternatives, your straw man nonsense about ending capitalism not withstanding.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#65

Post by TylerE »

moduspol wrote: post #52

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.

All signs point to this being an extraordinarily tight election. 5 or 10k votes in the right state could swing the whole thing.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#66

Post by nickff »

jprete wrote: post #47
daft_pink wrote: post #34

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.

It's relevant on the margins. WaPo not endorsing Harris would be a very negative signal about Harris for fence-sitters and lukewarm voters - this is the paper that hated Trump so much they changed their motto to the apocalyptic "Democracy Dies in Darkness"!

How many fence-sitters and lukewarm voters are following WaPo? It’s the third-most popular newspaper (in the US), but seems to attract people who are either very politically aware, or partisan.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#69

Post by wormlord »

olliej wrote: post #63
wormlord wrote: post #33

[flagged]

Which party is ending capitalism? I'm curious, because there's one party saying explicitly that they intend to end the democratic process, one party explicitly stating the goal is the end of the rule of law, and one party saying they want to deploy the military against the supporters of the other political party. You could make the argument that those positions are fundamentally opposed to capitalism as well, but tha…

Please read my edited comment for clarity.
Post reply on HN