Summary
Former vice presidential nominee Tim Walz criticized Trump for economic chaos while taking personal responsibility for the situation during an MSNBC interview.
“We wouldn’t be in this mess if we’d have won the election — and we didn’t,” Walz told Chris Hayes. He called Trump the “worst possible business executive” and praised the Wall Street Journal’s editorial criticizing Trump’s tariff war.
Walz emphasized Democrats must offer something better, not just criticize Trump. Recently, he acknowledged a leadership void in the Democratic Party and admitted spending too much time combatting Trump’s false claims about immigrants.
Looking at the disinformation on social media I don’t think they could do much.
I saw people being convinced that Harris had positions that were compete opposite of her actual stances.
I even saw people have complete opposing view. For example about situation in Gaza, I saw:
When narrative is already controlled by social media that already is biased toward specific candidate, it is impossible to win.
I don’t think Harris, Walz or even Biden could do anything when everything was attack against them.
We either need to make sure that non far right is also represented in social media.
Alternatively Democrats would have to use a celebrity, for example somebody like Jon Stewart of whose popularity could cut through the disinformation.
Progressives like Bernie and AOC, they are after what we actually need, but they are not immune from this disinformation, only people who actually pay attention to politics know them the rest of population can be easily persuaded that they are just “commies that want to kill America”
Losing on both sides of an issue is the whole reason triangulation isn’t a political cheat card.
It’s purely vibe based. Everyone is just pick a choosing whatever specs of information drift their direction.
I disagree with you about what everyone picks and chooses. The reason why people complain about Mastodon as an alternative to Twitter is because they have to choose what to see, they are used that the website would choose things for them.
Social media for dangerous, because they build profile about you and they know what topics will trigger you. So people who are pro Israel will get one content, people pro Palestine get different, but both of them will tell them to vote for Trump.
This is so much more dangerous than TV, which of course could manipulate people to make them react in certain way, but at least it couldn’t target individuals like social media can.
Twitter has a chronological timeline
Pro Palestine dems were voting for Jill Stein not trump
That way part of the “not vote”. There were some that did vote for him.