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

71–80 of 1001 posts

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#71

Post by Molitor5901 »

coldpie wrote: post #16
Molitor5901 wrote: post #11

To play Devils Advocate for a moment: Why do we need, or even want, a newspaper to endorse a President? How does it not undermine a paper's journalistic ethics to be neutral and fair?

I actually agree with you, newspapers really shouldn't be doing this. Our major local paper in the Twin Cities basically torched its reputation by endorsing wildly unqualified candidates for city offices (like, one guy they endorsed for Minneapolis city council didn't even live in Minneapolis). They recently decided to stop doing endorsements at all, which I think is the right decision. But that's not what happened h…

Another point that just occurred to me: Who is the endorsement supposed to influence? I think in America at least, the national media has become so hyper partisan in the eyes of its readers, that an endorsement of a newspaper is really just preaching to the crowd. What difference does that endorsement really make?

At the national level, I don't think it really makes a difference if a newspaper endorses a candidate for President. Those who read and value the opinions of that newspaper are more inclined to vote for the endorsed candidate anyways.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#72

Post by olliej »

wormlord wrote: post #39
vermilingua wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really think Harris and co are able or willing to end capitalism? They have nearly as much to lose as the billionaires.

Of course not. However they are like 5% more willing to pursue anti-trust action and enforce regulations. Even a small threat like that will be resisted by the ultra wealthy.

You understand that anti-trust and regulations exist to support capitalism right? You understand that that is why those things exist right?

Because absent those comments you don't get capitalism, because absent those things you don't have a free market

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#73

Post by moduspol »

TylerE wrote: post #65
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.

I'd be incredibly surprised if there are even 100 people who:

- Don't know who The Washington Post editorial board would endorse

- Would change who they are voting for based on this lack of endorsement

But I could be wrong.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#74

Post by wumeow »

good8675309 wrote: post #36
wumeow wrote: post #31

"Democracy dies in darkness" and silence, apparently.

[flagged]

The majority of Democrats wanted Biden to drop out and approve of Harris as the nominee

https://apnews.com/article/poll-joe-biden-kamala-harris-dona...

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#75

Post by wormlord »

pyuser583 wrote: post #61
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 f…

The means of production are still privately owned. What you described is not Capitalism by strict definition, but the owners of capital are still at the top of the food chain in such a system. It's not like lack of competition somehow precludes private ownership.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#77

Post by TylerE »

moduspol wrote: post #73
TylerE wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I'd be incredibly surprised if there are even 100 people who: - Don't know who The Washington Post editorial board would endorse - Would change who they are voting for based on this lack of endorsement But I could be wrong.

We’re in. Situation wheee one of the candidates routinely criticizes us and praises our enemies, and still pulls at about 42%. Rationality is not in evidence.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#78

Post by foogazi »

Molitor5901 wrote: post #11

To play Devils Advocate for a moment: Why do we need, or even want, a newspaper to endorse a President? How does it not undermine a paper's journalistic ethics to be neutral and fair?

The editorial page runs on opinion - I expect them to opine

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#79

Post by wumeow »

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.

Musk is a true believer, but Zuck and Bezos probably fear retribution from Trump if he wins and they endorsed Harris.

Re: Jeff Bezos killed Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris

#80

Post by bamboozled »

wormlord wrote: post #39
vermilingua wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really think Harris and co are able or willing to end capitalism? They have nearly as much to lose as the billionaires.

Of course not. However they are like 5% more willing to pursue anti-trust action and enforce regulations. Even a small threat like that will be resisted by the ultra wealthy.

So there isn’t democracy as we thought there was anymore…it’s really becoming an oligarchy.

Look at musk jumping around on stage and handing out money for votes.

It’s really disturbing.

Post reply on HN