this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
688 points (98.3% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2684 users here now

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

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump is trying to brush off the fact that he shared A.I.-generated images of Taylor Swift endorsing his campaign to his Truth Social account earlier this week, now claiming that he doesn’t know “anything about them.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 76 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

The law suit isn't what matters. He's got a massive collection of those already and it won't matter until it all eventually catches up to him assuming he fails to get elected.

What matters is that if he pissed Taylor off enough she might actually endorse Harris openly. We know she leans blue but she's refrained from open endorsements. Her fans are absolutely crazy and she could probably sway a bunch of Republicans easily. This is great.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 3 months ago (5 children)

I find it hard to believe that anyone who votes Republican will care enough about Taylor Swift's influence to change their vote, but I can absolutely believe that her endorsement would swing the numbers in a big way if she just motivates politically apathetic Swifties to go to the polls.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Perhaps, but Swift's endorsement might encourage people who were otherwise unlikely to vote.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

It's always been about turnout. When you have like only 60% of voters going to the polls, a spark of inspiration can be way more important than attempting to convince current voters to sway.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 months ago

It might even be a "normie" to "activist" pipeline.

That's hard to predict. On one side, Trump convinced people that he won an election he lost, and committed violence in his name.

Maybe Swifties will phone bank?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago

Young adults in republican families would def switch vote.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago

I don't know, cults are hard to predict

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago

Republicans show the effect that peer pressure has on them with their insane belief that people undergo gender reassignment surgery solely because of liberal peer pressure. Republican swifties (assuming there is such a thing in the first place?) would absolutely vote Kamala if Taylor told them to.