I don’t know much, but “just wait out the striker” is a skill too, no? The judoka seemed good at feinting and dodging punches, which isn’t something you practice in judo.

For the average person, there is less inequality (Gini coefficient has gone down), high employment, and historic wage increases. Not saying there aren’t still lots of problems, but the economy is hands down better under Biden.

Having lived there for a few years, I don’t think this describes Japanese child raising culture at all. I’m not sure how you can infer so much about the culture based on a single visit to Japan without any ability to speak the language. You may have just had culture shock.

That’s good to know. Though I wish people I knew, both apple and android, would switch to Signal instead.

The problem is that, in the US and Canada, android users don’t tend to use those apps en masse. The vast majority use SMS.

Criticism is not a scarce quantity to be preserved. It spreads, like a fire. Take literally any social movement, like #metoo or BLM. People don’t suppress smaller stories to “save” criticism for bigger stories. The small stories add up. Right now, the F150 is one of the best selling cars in the US. The average American is no where close to criticizing it. But everyone already makes fun of the cyber truck. We can use that.

“Let’s not criticize this dangerous truck design because we should save our criticism!” is the worst way to get people to criticize dangerous truck design.

“I don’t like x but it can’t be worse than y” is a construction which serves to minimize how bad something is. Instead, let’s scrutinize both: “This cyber truck is ridiculously dangerous. While we’re at it, let’s also regulate the 4 feet tall wall of grill on other trucks.”

Your wording makes it sound like the existence of even more dangerous trucks somehow excuses this dangerous truck. Both the 4 ft wall and the sharp metal blade edges are dangerous and irresponsible designs.

Who is the Bernie of 2024 in your analogy?

Alas, “generic Democrats” don’t exist. All the ones we can actually vote for have pesky details, like names and histories. Generic candidates pretty much always outperform specific named candidates. That’s true of Biden, sure, but it’s also true of alternatives to Biden.

Instead, name a specific Democrat that you think will do better, and we can compare their performance to Biden. Who specifically do you propose?

According to the polling, Trump enjoys 75-85% favorability amongst Republicans. So, unfortunately, it seems Republicans really do love Trump that much.

I think the leading guesses are perceptions about his age, the economy, and his effectiveness. Biden’s favorability is similar to Trump’s at the same point in his presidency, which was, itself, one of the lowest in modern history.

It’s nonsensical but I’m not surprised. Even here on Lemmy, some people refuse to give Biden credit for anything. Cynicism is rampant on the left. I think those who are paying attention see that Biden is governing pretty progressively. Sanders recently said that, “I think he is a much more progressive president than he was a United States senator.”

But can you name someone specific? The fact is, Trump is enormously popular with Republicans. Biden isn’t well liked by anyone right now, but who is the competent and well regarded alternative? Sanders, Warren, and AOC are divisive with the electorate. Harris and Buttigieg are even less popular. If there’s a consensus candidate, it’s not obvious to me.

yeah totally. I’d even go so far as to say that a lot of the things he says are intentionally ambiguous, so that he can’t be pinned down on the truth of any claim and his supporters can do mental gymnastics when he’s wrong.

Indeed, it’s an empirical fact that most people cannot tell the difference between opinion and news.

Given how many people mistake opinion for news, I don’t think it’s realistic to solve this through media literacy. I think the major reputable outlets need to start applying journalistic standards to opinion pieces, including basic fact checking. I don’t know why anyone would be opposed to that.

Then you are also intellectually lazy, because there is no way you are verifying the truth of every claim made in the articles you read. The role of newspapers is to inform people, not make random claims of dubious truth and have readers “do their own work”. It’s astounding that people are actually against basic fact checking.

What? I’m sorry I hurt your feelings but I don’t really understand what you’re so angry about.

Do my words say that I didn’t notice it was an opinion piece or something? How is this related to your strange diatribe?

I was addressing your strong claim that they can’t do anything about it. I see no technical or theoretical reason to believe that. Give it at least a week.

You seem to think my objection has something to do with whether it’s obvious that this particular piece is an opinion piece? I have no idea why you think this. Completely bizarre, and what an unnecessarily aggressive tone.

I am against opinion pieces because most consumers do not know that they have lower editorial standards, making them a big source of misinformation. If opinion pieces had the same journalistic standards, I would not be opposed to them.