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

YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

tampafp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 872 posts

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#81

Post by zouhair »

rsfern wrote: post #58
xiphias2 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meming about and being afraid of WW3 is critical in containing/deescalating it. WW1 happened partly because nobody was afraid of it happenning.

According to Fiona Hill, we’re already in it. She doesn’t really indicate when we crossed the rubicon, but I guess there doesn’t always have to be a Franz Ferdinand moment? https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/02/28/world-war-...

If I learned anything about Tsars history, most of them do not get to have a natural death.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#82

Post by pyuser583 »

TameAntelope wrote: post #26
cm2187 wrote: post #8

Quoted post unavailable.

Curious about where you see an institutionalized support on the left for election tampering claims, if you have any sources.

The 2000 Presidential election was attacked as illegitimate.

I was watching the latter seasons of X-Files and Fox Mulder made a comment on 2000 elections, something like “that sounds about as reliable as our elections.”

Plenty of folks, Howard Dean comes to mind, said they were straight up illegitimate.

Even now many on the left insist it was a tie or something.

This thing of “if you don’t win the elections, question the results” started then.

The press had no problem allowing baseless speculation and outright dishonesty in 2000. But when it was a Democratic cadidate, suddenly the truth matters.

To make matters worse, so many journalists are Democrats … it’s insane. Not just Democrats, but urban, college educated Democrats. Not exactly a cross section of the country.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#83

Post by hobs »

freedomben wrote: post #40
TameAntelope wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious about where you see an institutionalized support on the left for election tampering claims, if you have any sources.

Not GP, but Hilary Clinton 2016 [1]: > “There’s just a lot that I think will be revealed. History will discover,” the Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential nominee continued. “But you don’t win by 3 million votes and have all this other shenanigans and stuff going on and not come away with an idea like, ‘Whoa, something’s not right here.’ That was a deep sense of unease.” [1]: https://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton-ma…

The difference is that with Bush you have hanging chads and a court decision that after the votes were counted would have probably come out differently, and a concerted political effort to turn that to their advantage.

The republican party just literally spent months on questioning the election in places like Arizona with no evidence of any fraud, and there's plenty of documentation on how (almost always republican) politicians use lies to get people to not vote: https://lawyerscommittee.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Dece...

Basically, if you want to argue that its a "he said, she said" thing, you're going to need to come to the table with receipts about it, and trump is just completely full of shit on a level that's untenable and weirdly turned into this January thing where we almost had lawmakers killed.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#84

Post by aiisjustanif »

rsfern wrote: post #58
xiphias2 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meming about and being afraid of WW3 is critical in containing/deescalating it. WW1 happened partly because nobody was afraid of it happenning.

According to Fiona Hill, we’re already in it. She doesn’t really indicate when we crossed the rubicon, but I guess there doesn’t always have to be a Franz Ferdinand moment? https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/02/28/world-war-...

According to Fiona Hill that is not the definition of a world war. World Wars have been defined by battles in multiples countries and continents.

The Syrian civil war was over 15 countries and factions. War in Afghanistan over 5 countries, technically much more.

None of these wars were consider WW3, and just because the war between Ukraine and Russia is in Europe doesn’t make it any different.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#85

Post by jmalicki »

erichocean wrote: post #39
bashinator wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. Google is a private concern with the right to publish or not any content they see fit. That they can defacto censor opinions they don’t approve of is a failure of the market.

Corporations do not have rights, they are government-defined entities—not people. There's no "Bill of Corporate Rights" or "UN Convention on Corporate Rights." Corporations have locally-defined privileges and exist by, and at, the will of the people where they reside. Governments can change what those privileges are at any moment, for any reason—or no reason at all. If we don't like what Google is doing, we can simpl…

Corporations are people, at least within the United States [1], with all rights available to (groups of) individuals. Just not natural people.

[1] https://www.history.com/news/14th-amendment-corporate-person...

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#86

Post by [deleted] »

freedomben wrote: post #40
TameAntelope wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious about where you see an institutionalized support on the left for election tampering claims, if you have any sources.

Not GP, but Hilary Clinton 2016 [1]: > “There’s just a lot that I think will be revealed. History will discover,” the Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential nominee continued. “But you don’t win by 3 million votes and have all this other shenanigans and stuff going on and not come away with an idea like, ‘Whoa, something’s not right here.’ That was a deep sense of unease.” [1]: https://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton-ma…

[deleted]

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#87

Post by andrewjf »

ncallaway wrote: post #42
coolso wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only Republicans lie about elections — when we do it, it’s “fortifying” and “election integrity”. Bingo, it will be couched in those terms as well as "voting rights". To them, if you aren't picked up and given a free ride by an Uber to a polling place, then fed and given free water while waiting in line, then given a free ride back to your house, the election is being interf- I mean, "voting rights" are being tramp…

> then fed and given free water while waiting in line Is this a complaint that people are opposed to the GA law that doesn’t allow people to hand out water to voters in line? https://www.fox61.com/article/news/verify/yes-its-illegal-to... If so, can you provide any compelling reason why that should be illegal? If someone has to stand in line for hours to vote, you’re damn right that people should be allowed to receiv…

When republicans systemically and intentionally close polling places[1, 2] to concentrate the same amount of people into fewer places in order to deter people from voting by causing long lines and crowding. An then on top of that, preventing people in line from, you know, drinking water.

This stuff isn't an accident, it's intentional voter suppression by one party.

1: https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/19/politics/poll-closures-rural-...

2: https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/23/texas-voting-polling...

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#88

Post by slg »

jorgesborges wrote: post #22

I’m becoming more convinced that the future I’ve been planning simply won’t be possible in the decades to come. The world is scarcely recognizable. And having experienced nothing but peace and prosperity makes me feel woefully unprepared. The WEIRD world is becoming increasingly more authoritarian. I’m already detached from real conflict and scarcity, knowing nothing but peace and prosperity, and the TikTok generatio…

I always enjoy a well crafted comment like this in which the reader can't tell if the "authoritarianism" you are decrying is the former president trying to circumvent democracy or the censorship of people who are spreading that message. It allows you to collect upvotes from people on both sides thinking you are accusing the other of authoritarianism.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#89

Post by slowmovintarget »

choward wrote: post #50
xiphias2 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meming about and being afraid of WW3 is critical in containing/deescalating it. WW1 happened partly because nobody was afraid of it happenning.

Not when the meming calls for escalation by sending weapons to Ukraine and imposing sanctions.

Escalation is what Russia is doing: cluster munitions, rolling elite troops in, and shelling apartment buildings. Sending weapons to the people who live there to fend off invaders, and imposing sanctions is a fairly tepid response.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#90

Post by freedomben »

kemiller wrote: post #64
freedomben wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those of us who lived through the years of "selected not elected" it is a remarkable double standard. Or, being charitable, a remarkable reversal of opinion. (I tried to slip the expression "flip flop" in there as a joke since that was a popular and widely over-used term at the time too, but I couldn't make it work).

There's a huge difference: in Bush v. Gore, Gore stepped aside for the good of the country, choosing to respect the institution of the courts even if the decision was dodgy. Trump is willing to burn down the institutions if it gives him an edge. The danger from the Trump narrative is not that die-hards are still grumbling, it's that the candidate doesn't seem to care about anything beyond his own interests.

eh, I think you're being pretty generous to Gore there. It was a long, drawn, fought out battle involving many lawsuits and lots of court coverage. In the end, when Gore had basically lost all of his challenges, he did "step aside" as far as dropping the lawsuits. But he continued to be a presence and he was still pretty bitter about it many years later (and brought it up nearly every time he was on TV). 6 years later in 2006 his movie "Inconvenient Truth" he reopened the wound all over again.

Now that said, Gore is a lot better than Trump on this for sure.

Post reply on HN