Hacker News Reader

Comment by spinach | Hacker News Reader

And many platforms had a pro-Democrat lean, especially in the 2020 election. Blaming tiktok seems like scapegoating instead of looking introspectively at the Dem's failings like having a weak leader and pushing various insane ideologies.

View on HN

What insane ideologies do Dems push? That seems like a weird characterization of either party, although fits Trump specifically -- and I think a lot of Republicans are actually afraid of him.

People can't make up their minds, did dems push insane ideology or did they fail to stray far enough from the status quo?

I'd argue they ran one of the least controversial campaigns in comparison to the current global political climate. I think those in disagreement were successfully convinced by the opposing party.

Trump's first few weeks makes it clear he was the big mover and shaker.

I can make up my mind. They pushed insane ideologies. At the convention the other day not a single nominee said, "Maybe we shouldn't fund sex changes for illegal immigrant prisoners." In fact they supported it.

You've been successfully convinced that this is not only a primary concern for democrats and their voters, but also that this would affect you or anyone you know in any conceivable way.

We question the leadership and judgment of someone who would take such a position, and refuse to walk it back. It is not the case that we expect our lives to change materially as a result of taxpayer-funded illegal immigrant sex change operations.

You realize this is a decision the courts made. Harris agreed to follow the law. That's it. And you know what -- these same laws were on the books under all four years Trump was President. See this document from the DoJ while Trump was President: https://www.justice.gov/d9/pages/attachments/2018/02/13/28_f...

In a way it is revealing that Trump apologists' idea of an "insane Democrat policy" is sticking with existing law which affects almost nobody and they had no interest in discussing as part of their political platform, whilst the new President is pondering the idea of hitting Denmark with tariffs if they don't let him annex Greenland...

A court saying something doesn't obligate everyone to agree that is the way it should be. That basic concept, applied to several other issues, explains most of what is happening now.

- Martin v. Boise. This was overturned, but for 6 years, insanity ruled.

- The general situation with asylum at the border. It's insane that millions of people can just walk across the border, turn themselves in to an immigration officer, tell a sad story (this included domestic violence according to the Biden administration...), get a court date ~10 years in the future, and just live your life in the US until then.

- Seeing clearly dangerous/crazy people with rap sheets a mile long, including violent offenses, released with slaps on the wrist for the 30th time, only to kill someone.

- Less insane but still questionable and a potent issue: various affirmative action laws/rulings, very "Harrison Bergeron"-esque diversity motivated laws/rulings.

If you force people to choose between the rule of law, and... that, then the rule of law might lose. That's what is happening now.

Can you provide proof that such operations are, or were, ongoing at the time of the convention? And if they were happening, in what scale or magnitude?

And once that's done, please also show real-world examples of some of POTUS47's claims that "they're eating the pets, they're eating the cats, eating the dogs".

Because we all know, Donald Trump is known for pushing bullshit, and having lackeys that will ignore reality to believe him. This is not a new trend, it's one with 50+ years of examples.

That biological sex is a social construct, for one, and elementary school children need to learn about it.

When did you see Harris push that in her campaign? Her campaign was extremely basic and as uncontroversial as possible (to the detriment of the dems in my opinion)

I've always heard the opposite. That biological sex is biological. Gender is socially constructed. That's the standard progressive position, although I'm sure you can find someone that says otherwise, or in casual usage conflates sex and gender.

Yah. That's what I meant. It's so nutso I can't keep the claims straight.

No one said biological sex is a social construct.

As a center-lefty I cannot believe people are so silly to not be capable of self-reflecting the left's massive blunders.

Do you not remember "DEFUND THE POLICE!"? That is actually insane policy that the entire party got taken over and was forced to follow along with... even Kamala got slammed for it in the 2024 election! One of many things.

So yes, Trump and the far-right have some off-the-wall crazy stuff, but the left does too. Remember your bias. What seems crazy (i.e. abortion restrictions) does not seem crazy to an entire other segment of the country that you don't share the same exact values to.

And your values and things you don't consider crazy may be considered insane by others.

First, if you read my comment, I said "either party". I actually don't find almost anything pushed from Reps/Dems party as insane (specific politicians I do find genuinely insane though). I think they're almost all somewhat rational, even "defund the police". "Defund the police" has bad marketing, but to this day it still makes sense to not overfund police to do things they aren't well suited to do. This is something Musk would probably even agree with, if not for the marketing.

I don't recall the entire Democratic Party getting taken over, no. I recall Biden saying things like "No, I don‘t support defunding the police." I remember Biden's 2022 crime prevention plan which called for $13 billion to hire 100,000 police officers around the country over a five year period.

If you are incapable of identifying some of the insane positions that clearly lost them the 2024 election, I'm afraid you may be in a bubble and no amount of someone explaining it is going to help.

Or, consider that "insane" is a word that's excessive for pretty much every position of every candidate of every party, primarily used to generate immediate emotional responses and shutting down conversation.

There are positions which I think are dumb, or potentially harmful, or counter to what I believe, etc. But there's rarely been a position I consider "insane" (from all parties!).

If you're immediately jumping to calling every position you disagree with "insane", you're just being hyperbolic.

That may be true, but what matters is perception. It doesn't take very much of the perception of insane to push the winner over the edge. Elections have been known to be decided over single issues. To take a position of "I can't possibly see anything wrong with any of our policies" after a resounding defeat is not very self-reflective.

Zionism

Reply on news.ycombinator.com