Why would you ask him anything? His answer will always be the same: Biden, Harris or foreigners are to blame is what he would say. Why bother? It’s a waste of time.

It’s not some anonymous force forcing you to act like many of your fellow citizens do on social media. It’s what the US believes, I’m affraid. Even on Lemmy. It’s all “I don’t like Trump” but strangely enough many still agree to some of his key positions when his name is not mentioned. It’s weird.

You might want to check out the Patriot act (especially section 215) and how that plays into your believe of your constitutional rights. If there are any questions, just ask Clarence Thomas - he knows his stuff. I really don’t get how you could be so blind to issues like that just because this post is about China. This is not a popularity contest - it is not US vs the world. This is about your rights, your data and your democracy. I’m from Europe and I’m kinda getting tired of reminding people from the US that your blind patriotism is just that…a blind spot that is used against the US citizens on every corner.

1984 is already a reality - in every country of the word, especially the US. Apple’s famous Superbowl commercial from the same year, which suggested that data privacy (…) was important with regard to their strongest competitor at the time (IBM), does nothing to change this. On the contrary - none of this was even halfway true even back then. I really don’t get why people think this is just an issue in China. It is an issue all over the world. For years and years.

That is certainly not wrong. However, I believe that it’s not just the Chinese but that the US government (and other states around the world) has very far-reaching access to its citizens’ data as well. Among other things, the Patriot Act makes it very easy to demand user data from companies without appropriate checks and balances, if the NSA is not already aware anyway. Without somewhat decent legal regulations such as those that exist in the EU for example, citizens have to trust that the state will not abuse this largely unregulated power. With regard to the question of who will form the next US government, I see a significant problem in this context: I think that Trump’s right wing GOP will use this power against their political opponents and also, as a precaution, against ordinary citizens. I don’t think they would shy away from setting up a surveillance state based on the Chinese model - the conditions for this are certainly met in the current legal situation.

Once again, we see what the debate between Harris and Trump illustrated very clearly: The GOP in its current state is not pursuing any program whatsoever, but merely builds up imaginary enemy stereotypes that they blame for all their problems - without any even halfway factual reasons. Democratic processes are impossible with this tedious kindergarten approach because they are based on factual arguments, cooperation and the willingness to find common ground. I sincerely hope that there are some rational thinking conservatives left who will refuse to vote for this hateful orange moron and his ridiculous henchmen.

He probably remembered his tasteless lie that he owned the tallest building in Manhattan after the Twin Towers collapsed. He said this to a TV station on 9/11/2001. No one asked him for this interview; he found it necessary to call there in order to flatter himself with falsehoods instead of mourning the victims. He hasn’t changed a bit since then.

I think you meant to comment on OP’s post. If you ask me, I’d say he rather belongs in jail. Given the countless serious cases that have been and are being brought against him, it’s inexplicable to me that he managed to get around jail time - and is even a presidential candidate instead.

I think the only way to solve this problem for good would be to tie social media accounts to proof of identity. However, apart from what would certainly be a difficult technical implementation, this would create a whole bunch of different problems. The benefits would probably not outweigh the costs.

Well, unfortunately, the internet and especially social media is still the main source of information for more and more people, if not the only one. For many, it is also the only place where public discourse takes place, even if you can hardly call it that. I guess we are probably screwed.

Also, despite the fact that he is a criminal, a racist, a misogynist, denies climate change and pretty much exclusively pursues policies contrary to the interests of ordinary citizens.

At least internationally, the Coke advertising campaigns definitely had a big impact. In Germany, for example, there was the “Christkind”, who was usually depicted as a little girl bringing presents to children. Today, the “Christkind” has largely been replaced by the Coke Santa Claus, although this character also resembles St. Nicholas, who is often depicted with a white beard and a (red) bishop’s outfit.

Dunno about the presents, but that old white man character was popularized by coca cola in the 1930s.

TIL, thanks. Data is beautiful even if it’s just descriptive like in this case. It’s good to know how the representatives voted even if that cool graph does not say why.

It’s probably true that Reagan and his cronies started this - especially with their instrumentalization of supposedly “Christian values”. But I’m referring more to the direction of “politicians” who no longer compromise at all if it doesn’t serve their personal power interests. It seems to me that this has only become really popular among conservatives since the Tea Party movement. Could be wrong tho.

I think the Conservatives had little choice left. The extreme forces in this party without any values have been on the rise since at least the Tea Party movement. Even then, they decided to focus on extremism, racism and pretty much every other “ism” there is - just because this made it possible to hide their actual political agenda behind that, which is - of course - exclusively in the interests of a wealthy minority. Trump is simply the consequence of that decision. Since his presidency, he has managed to take over that party completely. While doing so it surely has played into his hands that the conservatives are so spineless and power-oriented that there was hardly anyone to counter Trump. Now he has already filled all the key positions with family members or minions who are dependent on him. I don’t think that there is a GOP anymore; just the Trump cult that’s left of it. The good thing about all this: If Trump loses the election, the GOP is probably finished.

I don’t think so. It’s just the same lies he repeats over and over again.

I can’t argue with that.

Yes, it’s certainly not easy to check facts live. But you can at least be well prepared, especially as the questions are asked by the journalists and they should also know the usual claims made by the candidates. I also don’t think it’s necessary to check every figure. I just mean that it makes sense to name obvious false statements as such - Trump has made enough of them, and most of them were anything but new. And yes, it is of course also true that there are fact-checks after the fact, but I think that this is often not noticed at all. The presidential debates are an event that many people watch, but unfortunately only a few inform themselves afterwards. That’s why I think it’s necessary to expose at least the grossest untruths immediately.

No, but I thought the US public wouldn’t let him get away with never engaging in a (factual) debate. That would make him look weak, because that’s how democracy usually works. You know, arguments and counter-arguments - that sort of thing.