this post was submitted on 12 May 2025
1390 points (98.8% liked)

Political Memes

8064 readers
2475 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 41 points 6 days ago (3 children)

True story. Back in 2008 there were two op-ed pieces on the smae page of the Murdoch owned New York Post.

One said that voting for Obama was a waste of time, because he was a centrist neoliberal who'd only serve up milder versions of GOP programs, so you'd be better off with an actual Republican.

The other screamed that he was a radical Socialist who would destroy America.

Same newspaper, same page, no irony

[–] jve@lemmy.world 21 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Isn’t this what the opinion page is for?

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 15 points 6 days ago

Not only is it what Op Eds are for, it's also extremely common practice to have two contrasting views on the same page to give voice to a variety of different opinions.

Complaining about two Op Eds on the same page with different opinions is like complaining that a dictionary has two definitions of two different words on the same page.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Brace yourself for all the “gotcha!” comments from enlightened centrists that don’t understand the core concept of controlled opposition or propaganda.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

People nitpicking on the internet?

Un-possible!

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Theres nitpicking, and theres just disingenuous horse shit from centrists telling you that ummm actually both sides are the same.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 1 points 5 days ago

Don't get me started....

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Are you unfamiliar with the concept of an Op Ed?

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

So, you read what I wrote and concluded that in life I'd only seen one Op-Ed page?

You funny, in a sad way.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Apparently so. You seem surprised that there were two people who had different opinions on the same page in the Op Eds. That's what Op Eds are.

Again, I ask, are you familiar with the concept of an Op Ed? Or are you just confused that people might have different opinions?

[–] cuerdo@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Both opinions agree that you should not vote for Obama, that is the editorial strategy, the different motivations are to capture the whole range of voters.

Nowadays it is even easier to do this, thank to personalized news. They can tell unemployed people that immigrants are stealing all the jobs, while they can tell taxpayers that immigrants are leaving off grants. They can even tell cat lovers that immigrants are eating all the cats.

The idea you are pushing that Op-Eds are a whiteboard for diverse opinions is either innocent or malicious.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 days ago

Op Eds are obviously influenced by the bias of the newspaper that runs them. But, there's no need to veer into conspiracy theories just because two of them happen to be anti-Obama for different reasons.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

You get funnier and funnier.

Please keep telling me about how much smarter you are than I am.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'm just letting you prove it yourself.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

So, you got nothing?

Too bad, I could always use another laugh.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

The rest of us are laughing at you, so you could try that?

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Op Eds are obviously influenced by the bias of the newspaper that runs them. But, there’s no need to veer into conspiracy theories just because two of them happen to be anti-Obama for different reasons.

Here you are, making the exact same point I made, in slightly different terms.

The post is about Schrödinger so me pointing it out was cromulent.

Thanks for both proving my point and making me laugh at you. You're Schrödinger's commentor; both an idiot and smart at the same time.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Apparently you don't understand Schrodinger.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

lol!

And now you're an expert in physics too.

How can one person be so incredibly smart and talented as you think you are?

Keep the laughs coming, joke boy!

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 1 points 4 days ago

Keep the laughs coming, joke boy!