5 upvotes, 1 direct replies (showing 1)
View submission: Introducing r/popular
You were literally responding to a comment about the donald, so the implication that's what you were referring to as politics "alter ego". While your description of the politics sub isn't too far off, it's leagues away from the flat out lies and misdirection of the Donald and its pizzagate bullshit. Are you russian?
Comment by lardbiscuits at 15/02/2017 at 22:55 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
I was probably a little defensive since anytime someone faults /r/politics for being a biased dumpster fire, the easiest and cheapest deflection is just to shit on /r/the_Donald. In fairness to myself, I'm confident that is at least half your motivation.
I pretty clearly say you can add both into the list of biased circlejerks I don't need in my life. I'm not coming to the defense of either, which I think your kind of trying to implicate me as doing. So don't.
Is /r/the_Donald manipulative? Definitely. Deceitful? Eh. I dunno about that. I think we are getting lost in translation. Again. If you visit r/the_Donald it's immediately clear who they are and what they're doing. You may disagree. You may hate their guts. That's all fine. But they're upfront that this is a fanclub circlejerk and not a place for bipartisan discussion. You may disagree with that, but that's not deceitful.
/r/politics on the other hand is absolutely trying to push themselves as an accurate thermometer of the political temperature of this country, of which it isn't. Ideas or discussions that don't fit the current mood of rich white kids from top 25 universities aged 25-35 living in Brooklyn, SF, or DC aren't welcome there. The most upvoted comments are cheap one liners. The sources are for the most part partisan rag blogs like MotherJones or Salon, which have the credibility of Breitbart but just happen to fit the mods' narrative.
It's not really a question as to who is more deceitful.