“New clue unlocked!”
Because Biden wouldn’t threaten you with lawsuits if you said mean things about him.
I don’t think it’s lawsuits that the journalists are worried about.
But it is what their corporate bosses are worried about.
The corporate bosses are worried about falling out of favor with the fascist administration. The lawsuits are small potatoes compared to other tools available to a dictator.
The fascist administration they ACTIVELY HELPED GET INTO POWER. That’s what they’re afraid of
It’s cowardly, but it’s also rational. Nobody’s opinion is going to be changed by something like that. And doing it would just result in Trump retaliating against them. Lawsuits are only one tiny portion of what they’d face. CBS arguably axed Colbert because Trump was using the FTC’s approval of their merger as leverage. The AP didn’t rename the Gulf of America and as a result they were barred from his press events.
Is it better to use the term “Gulf of America” if it means that you can still have reporters at his news conferences to ask tough questions? Probably. Is it better to avoid asking questions that are too tough if if means you get to go to the next news conference? Um… Is it better to not have op-eds that piss off Trump if it means that you can report on factual stories without too much interference? Err…
We’re in a new situation now. It used to be that the press had some power because it was the only way for the President to get a message to the people. Even things like the Fireside Chats that were carried unedited still required that the NBC radio stations carry the broadcast. If the president tried to prevent the press from doing their job, they could cut him off from getting a message to the people. Now the press no longer has that power, the president can talk to his supporters directly using his own media platform.
A news conference used to be something where there was a balance of power. The president had some leverage because the news stations wanted to be there to report the news. They wanted to be able to ask tough questions that would make viewers tune in, or readers buy the newspaper. The news had some leverage because if the major networks didn’t show up to a news conference, the things said at that news conference wouldn’t reach the people.
Now it’s completely one-sided. The press reporting the president’s statements is nice to have, but he can reach people through his own media platform(s) if he chooses to. So he no longer needs them, but they still need him.
They know that he’s way too narcissistic to ever step down and the republicans controlled legislative branch has no shot of impeaching him again
It’s almost like conservatives control the vast majority of media conglomerates and subsequently control the types of content that their outlets put out.
bUt tHe lIbErAl mEdIa
I heartily chortle anytime someone tells me that.
Impossible! I saw a Democrat on CNN once, they’re taking over!
This is what frustrates me about all the Ground News ad reads I see on youtube channels that I otherwise respect (Legal Eagle, and Some More News for example). Despite the claims about ‘left’ or ‘right’ media, they’re still all corporate owned media, and will only serve corporate interests.
No, it’s almost like “the left” in the US (such as it is) is tacitly allowing it at best and complicit at worst.
The people in control of the media switch side back and forth as it suit them and they never lose because red and blue are the same shit.
if i had a nickel for every time conservatives propped up a dementia riddled alzheimers patient in order to cling to power despite not being popular i’d have two nickels which isn’t a lot but it’s fuckin depressing it happened twice
Reagan wasn’t nearly so damned obvious. Trump is a fucking train wreck. If any of us had a relative talking like him we would have been planning on a nursing home 3 or 4 years ago. At this point he can barely speak at all.
Just a couple of days ago, right here. He’s rambling and making shit up and has no clue he’s doing so.
I mean, there was shit like this going on with Reagan.
That’s just if you’re talking about the presidency. Mitch McConnell still holds his office in the senate today, years after publicly freezing in confusion multiple times.
Why would they, Trump has been nothing but good to the capitalists, while Biden was merely kept the status quo.
He’s been in office for 8 months Lib … He has constitutional lawyers around him to make sure he isn’t breaking the law…
Calm down!
🤡
No he doesn’t.
I find it odd that everyone made the dementia claim for Biden mis speaking. Go look at his Wikipedia page, he’s been known for flubbing words his whole life.
He’s spoken many many times about it.
Don’t waste your time going to bat for Biden. He was very obviously not fit for office anymore, and the democrats ruined their chances of winning by keeping him in there until it was too late.
What’s weird is this has a new timestamp but I’ve seen this text verbatim for months now…
It’s also completely wrong, fucking everyone talks about how trump’s brain is mush
Point being it’s not mainstream news, not in the way they hammered Biden. There’s an article now and again, with a low key criticism or question, but that’s it.
They’re out there…
Here’s one from 2 days ago
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-dementia-alert-touch-grass/
It’s not exactly a secret, when a neoliberal normalizes the shitty thing republicans do, it’s newsworthy. Then people aren’t as upset when Republicans keep doing it
That’s literally what “normalizing” means and leads, do people honestly still not understand all of this?
What is there that people are so shocked by, that they keep spamming the copy paste social media comment in OP picture?
Again: not mainstream news.
Again: not mainstream news.
Funny that.
Why do you think that is? Has someone told them to back off? Who?
There’s no need for anyone to tell anyone anything.
The rich shitweasels who own one media conglomerate have enough common interests with the rich shitweasels who own another media conglomerate that they tend to arrive at more or less the same decisions and same policies even if they do so wholly and completely separately.
That’s generally the case broadly too - not just in this instance, or even just regarding media conglomerates.
bUt AlL nEwSpApErS aRe LeFtIeS pRoPaGaNdA
LEFtIes pRoPaGaNaA 2025: but Hitler made a lot of good points, both sides had issues
The revolution will not be televized.
Ah I see you also like the music that Rand Paul enjoys
All seriousness fuck Rand Paul and the Revolution will most certainly not be televised
Gil Scott-Heron?
He’s the one
Who likes all our pretty songs
And he likes to sing along
And he likes to shoot his gun
But he knows not what it means
KNOWS NOT WHAT IT MEANS
Questions about Biden’s fitness were brushed aside until he had an unprecedented meltdown during a live debate. Also, Trump’s health was a major news story just last month, when he was diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency. This also came up again this week when people spotted badly applied makeup to his hand. Also, it was a minor news story when Trump fell asleep during Pope Francis’ funeral. And his meeting with the Saudis. And his press conference wirh Dr. Oz. And his trial last year.
Also, here are 10 articles, ranging from 2023 to two weeks ago, about Trump’s cognitive decline, including op eds from CNN and the Boston Globe questioning his fitness and an article from the Atlantic about why questioning his cognition isn’t as effective as it should be:
CNN-11/13/2023: Trump’s mental gaffes can’t be ignored
The Atlantic-2/16/2024:Why Attacks on Trump’s Mental Acuity Don’t Land
The LA Times-9/25/2024: Trump’s rhetorical walkabouts: A sign of ‘genius’ or cognitive decline?
NBC-10/15/2024: Trump’s bizarre music session reignites questions about his mental acuity
The Hill-5/7/2025: Is Trump losing his mind à la Biden?
Boston Globe-5/17/2025: Biden is no longer President. Let’s talk about Trump’s mental acuity.
Rolling Stone-5/25/2025: Jasmine Crockett: ‘It’s Time for Republicans to Question Trump’s Mental Acuity’
Penn Live-6/2/2025: Donald Trump accused of ‘crazy cognitive decline’ after fumbling ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ press conference
The Economic Times-6/24/2025: ‘Constant lapses and verbal aphasias’: Republican advisor drops a bomb on Donald Trump’s mental health
Salon-8/13/2025: Trump’s Soviet slip revives concerns about his mental acuity
How dare you give sources when they wanna circlejerk about their favorite out of touch boomer!
I’m just so sick of this bullshit narrative. The media ignored Biden’s decline until it was undeniable, and Democrats act like a few journalists doing postmortem well after the election is a huge betrayal. Meanwhile, Trump’s aging is getting far more coverage than Biden’s got, but liberals are pretending there’s a conspiracy to ignore it because the cabinet hasn’t invoked the 25th amendment. It’s infuriating.
I think it feels this way because - while articles are one thing - social media “atmosphere” was very different. I couldn’t go two posts without someone calling for Biden’s resignation, and it was all over the place, whereas with Trump it’s… Like, yeah, a couple of more prominent Democrats do that, but not really, and otherwise it seems like everyone just goes “such is life now”.
Criticizing their favorite politician means they’re un-American, and must be purged to ensure the security of party unity.
Democrats are just becoming more like Republicans every day. Next time a comedian calls out Newsom, they’ll say they need to be deported back to Russia.
The comment clearly states in a major newspaper, this year.
Granted you’ve linked some major newspapers, and some stories from this year, but not a single story in a major newspaper from this year.
That’s the point. It’s clearly dialed back, because he’s in power and crazy.
Boston Globe-5/17/2025: Biden is no longer President. Let’s talk about Trump’s mental acuity.
Pay walled
Archived link, because I guess that headline was too ambiguous. The Hill op ed was also written this year, and while they aren’t op eds, I shared three other articles from 2025 about Trump’s mental state, and this was just from a cursory web search. The point is, the press is talking about this, even if its not leading to the outcome we want.
I love that so many on the American left are still enthusiasticly defending the candidacy of an elderly man in rapid mental decline, who at the end of his (then) current term was set to be the oldest ever president, older than the four (4) (!!!) people that most recently held the office before him, out of which three served two consecutive terms, their combined terms totalling 28 years. At the time of the 2024 election, there were five living ex presidents in the US.
Nobody should have to explain how batshit fucking insane that is.
The hole the US is in wasn’t dug by people who weren’t motivated to vote for Biden or his unpopular ad hoc replacement. By the 2024 election it was plenty deep already, more than a decade in the making. Ceding ground in the vote might have been foolish, but would ultimately not have changed the trajectory. The sooner you realize things were already broken, maybe you can get to work fixing it.
This post isn’t even defending Biden. It’s just pointing out the hypocrisy.
The message is the same whether you think Biden was high-functioning or senile.
Who’s hypocrisy then? Do you mean that it’s – completely pointlessly – pointing out Trump voters’ hypocrisy? Sure reads like an argument aimed at other than Trumpists that were critical of Biden’s candidacy, though.
Democrats are not the left
Fair enough, by “left” I really mean anyone not subscribed to the Qanon death cult in charge.
I don’t disagree on your last point, but age is a factor that I don’t think matters as much as you imply at first. In the sense that different people are affected in different ways. A good president or politician won’t be defined by their age. You know who is older than Biden? Sanders, and he might be one of the most lucid and seemingly good politicians all around (but I’m not in the USA so my understanding is limited, at least what I have heard of him is extremely positive).
That’s not to say that I’d rather have younger people involved in important roles in politics, there’s too many that should be completely retired, and Biden is one of them. But age is not the main issue.
I think it’s complete nonsense that a president (or any person) will not be defined by being of an extremely high age. It’s not just about their health, though the risk that a very old person will be affected by diseases related to old age within a four year term obviously is high compared to the population in general.
Another particularly disturbing thing is that people that old are not accountable to death. They’re living on borrowed time and are not expected to live to see the long term consequences of their decisions. Biden was several year past the average life expectancy in the US when he left office (i.e. would have started his second term).
Age may not have been the main issue, but it – gerontocracy – for sure is an issue on its own. That there aren’t more prominent leaders that are younger and have strong popular support is surely more worrisome though.
Generic statements such as “X age is too old for anyone to be president” is the issue. Some people at 80 could be healthy and lucid enough to be president and some at 60 might not. Age is not a limiting factor equally for everyone, so such judging should be made individually for each person and not with a blank statement.
Not accountable to death is a complex topic, for the same reason that they won’t see the consequences of their ruling, they might also rule for more “pure” reasons and not to make friends in high places or pocket all they can to retire and live life. So I’m not sure that’s the negative point you seem to think it is.
The fact that someone is more likely to die soon shouldn’t be a reason to block them from doing something long term, or think they can’t provide a real positive effect.
What we do agree on is that the lack of younger representation in politics is indeed a worrying topic.
I don’t think you truly appreciate how old 80+ is.
Politics, as a business, is about the future – not the past. I really don’t believe someone who’s formative years were in the post-war era and first entered national politics during the fucking Vietnam war (!) has perspective that is very representative (as opposed to occasionally valuable) of the populace that, themselves or their spawn, have to face the challenges of living in the current era – whether you consider it a new golden age or ”late stage capitalism”. Furthermore, I really don’t subscribe to ideas that have so little resonance that they couldn’t be represented by a gamut of people. If you think you need to rely on the elderly (Sanders) or those with feeble, Trump adjacent minds and actual brain damage (Fetterman), you don’t believe enough in the ideas themselves – and that’s a huge fucking problem. Don’t downplay that part we’re in agreement over to justify that someone, hypothetically, somehow, could be above it all and be a great representative even if they are completely removed from the people that will actually have to inhabit the Earth they leave behind.
That’s not to say I think your points are entirely moot. I just think you’re overplaying hypotheticals that we really should not accept at face value.
