Obviously they were raised by owls and speak an owl language.

Dems could have had Bernie, Warren, Buttigieg, even Klobuchar, but Biden won pretty handily. That’s on people people.

Is it though? The media confusing people by claiming Biden is more electable because his policies are closer to what republicans want isn't on people, nor is every conservative candidate dropping out at once to endorse Biden, while Warren remained in to keep Bernie's share divided (ensuring that none of the popular policies the former Reagan campaigner ran on were actually implemented), nor is the DNC giving Biden debate questions before hand.

I have been saying this since Obama.

In 2020, people believed they were voting for healthcare, defunding the police, emptying the migrant concentration camps, protecting Roe v Wade, etc.

When you fail to do the things that brought people to the polls, and do the things the opposition wants instead, the opposition's voters still won't vote for you and your own voters just don't vote.

Trying to appeal to moderate republicans just lowers your own voter turnout. The republicans will always vote for fascism over diet-fascism.

But no, pointing out these very obvious mechanisms just gets me labeled as an evil conservative Chinese Putin-bot trying to disrupt the election.

dropping out of the race at the convention

The face of the party is infinitely less important than the impact the policies have on people's lives. It doesn't matter if it's Biden or Pete Buttigeig at the front, the dems only shot in hell is to use every power at their disposal short of drone striking Trump and the SCOTUS (maybe) to demonstrate to voters that 1. They want the same thing the voters want (eg, not genocide) and 2. They will actually do those things (no blaming the parliamentarian or norms or some rules you set or fear the SCOTUS might ask you to stop).

That site is garbage. The atomic unit of propaganda is not lies, it's emphasis. NYT (and most western news media have supported every single military action the US has done when it mattered.

This isn't reflected in their ratings, since they don't need to use lies to get people believing wild misconceptions. It is reflected in the way the American people are mobilized to support each military action.

Old enough to remember there were lots opposing it as well. Just.like the current Gaza war.

Except none of them meaningfully oppose the gaza war. The closest thing to criticism you'll hear from a mainstream source is how Netanyahu personally isn't carrying out the war out humanely enough. Note that this is not actually opposition to the war, since it just calls for a return to the state of slow ethnic cleansing that spawned the war. They oppose the way and rate the settler colonialist ethnostate carries out ethnic cleansing, not the settler colonialist ethnostate whose national project requires ethnic cleansing.

Just as in the Iraq war, nobody was saying "This is bad, and we should leave now, there's a million people protesting it outside" until like 2006, when the plans to leave were already drawn up (a schedule Obama maintained).

There was a million "The war is good, but it's being done poorly" and later on "The war is bad, but we're here and have to carry it out more competently", but the idea of not pursuing the war was so toxic, republicans would accuse democrats of wanting to "cut and run" (in the same way they accuse democrats of being insufficiently supportive of Israel, despite literally going around congress to keep the weapons flowing).

Are you old enough to remember how every single mainstream journalist promoted the Iraq war? (no, "maybe the war could be executed more competently" is still supporting the war) How about Libya?

Isn't it funny how the mainstream media just happens to align with the state department every on every single issue?

We'll be able to push the wolf to the left after the election!

Well if they can't convince the billionaire, maybe she can convince whoever inherits the billionaire's ownership. If not, there's always the next in line.

Historically this has had mixed results

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeFzeNAHEhU

Edit: This still cuts off the end of the video, but it does show more

There's also a bigger picture with Tank Man, that shows the mostly empty square the tanks were leaving, with a handful of soldiers and bikes.

And a bunch of other photos showing the battle that took place in the surrounding streets, with cops that had been lynched and burned and protesters gunned down.

The evidence disproves the western narrative of tanks machine-gunning protesters inside the square, then liquefying bodies, that were then burnt and washed down the drain (and getting stopped by Tank Man on the way out).

That's not to say the Chinese claims should be taken at face value, but nothing I've seen contradicts their claim of 300 dead and several thousand wounded.

smh, 30 years ago, all the Japanese car manufacturers advertised lower HP than their engines could output, now they're lying in the other direction?

Honda got caught doing it too: https://www.news.com.au/technology/motoring/motoring-news/toyota-honda-mazda-and-suzuki-fall-foul-of-officials-over-falsifying-data/news-story/61b5393556e69d7b056af1628a7da2c6