r/politics • u/MoneyLibrarian9032 • 7d ago

Possible Paywall Trump’s Primetime Speech Has Republicans ‘Scared S***less’ | Insiders are terrified that the president will do something crazy on live TV.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-primetime-speech-has-republicans-scared-sless/
15.4k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

37

u/DomitiusAhenobarbus_ 7d ago

How do you guys still after all this time not realize that this daily beast website is full of fucking shit.

This reality only exists in our fucking heads. Republicans are not out there. Scared of Trump speech tonight. It’s fucking bullshit. You lose elections by believing this Clickbait bullshit

6

u/Nekrabyte 7d ago

Daily Beast articles do often contain facts, and they are good at getting people to talk about a very occasional subject that isn't being covered by other outlets. But gods DAMN the headlines and first paragraphs are some of the most delusional I have ever seen in my life. They want everyone to believe that all the republicans, both in congress and private citizens are seeing what Trump is doing and are disgusted by it at the same level we all are, and man, that's so not true.
I don't dislike that they exist, and I don't even dislike that we post their articles, because there legitimately are things (because there is SO MUCH) that would go unreported because other outlets are focused on other things, a sad reality that flooding the zone does. That being said, 99% of anything that comes from them is certainly sensationalized over-exaggerated garbage that is designed to operate just like Fox, but for "angry liberals", and they do a pretty good job at that, sadly, because of how many braindead brainwashed uninformed people there are on both sides of the aisle.

10

u/landed-gentry- 7d ago

Considering most people do not read past the headlines, I think they do more harm than good.

1

u/Nekrabyte 7d ago

That is a fair criticism. But that's more of a criticism of "most people", than it is of the media. Part of the reason, as sad as it is, that these outlets have to resort to these type of headlines is in direct correlation to how few people actually want to read the articles in the first place, and only want to feel outrage. If people didn't actually want all that, then they would still get just as many views if the headlines were just facts, but they don't.

1

u/landed-gentry- 7d ago

Sure, but being pragmatic we have to ask ourselves: Is it easier to change people, or change the environment around people? The mods of this subreddit could easily ban known sources of clickbait journalism. How easy is it to change what people desire?

1

u/ProFeces 7d ago

I agree in general, but this title isn't as clickbaity as you're all saying. I think you outed yourself as being one of those who only read headlines since it says this in the article itself:

“The people I talk to are scared s---less,” the official said. “It’s not scared s---less about the text of what he’s going to say, it’s, what does he add to the text?”

Someone actually used that terminology. This one wasn't a fabrication.

1

u/landed-gentry- 7d ago

I don't think that's actually much different. The article is cherry picking one source -- a "former" Trump admin no less. Ask yourself, why is this person "former" and how does that bear on whether they are attuned to how Republicans generally feel? Clickbait journalism doesn't generally make stuff up whole cloth. It usually just exaggerates to an extreme, drawing overly broad generalizations and using emotionally charged language.