-36 points

Oligarchs dont care who wins since for them either one is W lol

Normies in shambles to finally figure out that elections are a clown exercise to provide owners puppets legitimacy.

Didnt LA times have a similar situation haha

permalink
report
reply
46 points
*

>“Oligarchs don’t care who wins”

>Jeff Bezos provably and directly interfered with an endorsement of Kamala Harris.

You could not have picked a dumber time to comment this, could you have?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-41 points

You have poor understanding of the situation lol

He is keeping his options open bc there is a real possibility that trump will win.

Yall aint coping well at all.

Again DNC botched it and yall too dim to appreciate this lol

Enjoy the fASCism 🤡

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

>“Oligarchs don’t care who wins.”

>“But wait, actually, if Trump wins and his newspaper endorses Harris, then that could actually be bad for him because who the POTUS is suddenly does affect oligarchs whenever it’s convenient for my bullshit rhetoric.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I’ve never agreed with journalistic organizations endorsing candidates. Report on them? Yes. Scathe them if necessary? Yes. Endorse them? No thank you.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Key pull quote from TFA:

Post chief executive Will Lewis, in an online explanation of the decision, wrote, “The Washington Post will not be making an endorsement of a presidential candidate in this election. Nor in any future presidential election.”

“We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates,” Lewis wrote.

“We recognize that this will be read in a range of ways, including as a tacit endorsement of one candidate, or as a condemnation of another, or as an abdication of responsibility,” he wrote. “That is inevitable. We don’t see it that way. We see it as consistent with the values The Post has always stood for and what we hope for in a leader: character and courage in service to the American ethic, veneration for the rule of law, and respect for human freedom in all its aspects.”

permalink
report
reply
9 points

That’s the corporate excuse statement, and only significant if you ignore all context.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

The phrase I’ve seen bandied about for this is “world-class bullshit.” Very fitting.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

What a fuckin hypocrite. I hope he stubs his toe really really hard, then steps on a lego.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points
CNBC - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

Information for CNBC:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America


Wikipedia search about this source

Search topics on Ground.News

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/10/25/jeff-bezos-killed-washington-post-endorsement-of-kamala-harris-.html

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

permalink
report
reply
-4 points

long as he doesnt force a trump endorsement in its place, it could be an arguement for impartiality

permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 479K

    Comments