#how do you snopes

[cough-cpr-is-fake]

“Cough CPR” is misinformation

What is “cough CPR”?

“Cough CPR” is a myth which claims that rhythmic coughing can reduce the impact of a heart attack. It has been circulating for over two decades via email and on social media platforms (Wikipedia, 2023).

Why doesn’t it work?

A heart attack happens when the blood flow to the heart is restricted due to blockage. Cardiac arrest is when your heart stops pumping completely (British Heart Foundation, n.d.).

These definitions alone should demonstrate the problem with “cough CPR”. If you have a heart attack, your heart is still pumping, so you do not need CPR. If you experience cardiac arrest, you will fall unconscious within seconds (Resuscitation Council UK, 2021) and therefore won’t be able to perform “cough CPR”.

In many cases, “cough CPR” could even worsen the problem or prove fatal if coughing is undertaken to the wrong rhythm (Snopes, 2003).

Is “cough CPR” ever useful?

Coughing creates pressure that forces blood to flow to the brain (Cleveland Clinic, 2020).

It may therefore be possible for someone experiencing sudden arrhythmia to maintain consciousness for a few seconds by coughing. However, the patient would already need to be under constant monitoring for the arrhythmia to be detected. It should also only be done at the instruction of a doctor, as a medical professional will still be needed to treat the abnormal heart rhythm (American Heart Association, 2023).

Cases where “cough CPR” has been useful have all been isolated incidents performed in this kind of clinical setting (see Snopes, 2003; UChicago Medicine, 2019; American Heart Association, 2023).

Reference list

American Heart Association. (2023) Cough CPR. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20231204210831/https://www.heart.org/en/health-topics/cardiac-arrest/emergency-treatment-of-cardiac-arrest/cough-cpr (Accessed: 4 December 2023).

British Heart Foundation. (n.d.) Could something called ‘cough CPR’ save my life? Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20231204210457/https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/heart-matters-magazine/medical/ask-the-experts/cough-cpr (Accessed: 4 December 2023).

Cleveland Clinic. (2020) The dangerous truth about cough CPR. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20231204205549/https://health.clevelandclinic.org/can-you-cough-away-a-heart-attack (Accessed: 4 December 2023).

Resuscitation Council UK. (2021). Resuscitation Council UK’s statement on cough CPR. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20231204211021/https://www.resus.org.uk/about-us/news-and-events/resuscitation-council-uks-statement-cough-cpr (Accessed: 4 December 2023).

Snopes. (2003). How to survive a heart attack when alone. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20231204214909/https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cough-cpr/ (Accessed: 4 December 2023).

UChicago Medicine. (2019) Can coughing stop a heart attack? Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20231204213936/https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/heart-and-vascular-articles/can-coughing-stop-a-heart-attack (Accessed: 4 December 2023).

Wikipedia. (2023) Cough CPR. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20231204211113/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cough_CPR (Accessed: 4 December 2023).

[catboymoments]

I'm so incredibly sorry but you are the only sane adult I have access to.

I'm trans, and if tomorrow the worst thing happens, what should I do? How can I be safe? I'm scared, but extremely sorry for telling you this, I understand if you don't want to answer

1) don’t be get caught up in fearmongering- a lot of the time people will love to doompost and make things seem like the end of the world or worse than they are for clicks and ad revenue. Do your own research from unbiased sources like snopes or ap news if you have concerns about issues, and learn what you can do to stand up against bad policies or what you can do to defend yourself, what you as an average citizen can do to fix it. There is always a solution!

2) get close with your community, make sure you know your resources and your fellow queer people and strengthen those bonds. Find out what you can do to support your people.

3) we will persist. We will always be here.

[mcbitchtits]

they sure do but this is AI slop

[vesicapiscean]

i just read through 3d workers island. I was going to post this onr eddit but it was immediately removed so im going to post it here. its really long sorry, feel free to not even read it. eventualyl ill post it somewhere else and expand more on it.

I just finished reading through 3dwiscr for the first time. I actually read it twice, and took notes on the second read through. There are a few things I find compelling about this work, and I haven't read almost any other theories so I just want to dump my thoughts before I read more about what others think.

The first thing that I find important to mention is the "Computer Philosophy" pages. It's a confusing read, and I'm not certain that that geocities site has any direct relevance to 3dwi, besides the content written in it relating to what we are seeing on screen. The "window" talked about on Computer Philosophy is the monitor (we do see this work through the lens of windows 95), and the author talks about how we can see into the window, as well as be seen through the window. You never know who's watching, and you never know what you might see. They talk about how you can bring the inside (fiction) into the outisde (reality), and they may be interchangeable. This read to me as something like; "you can look into reality through fiction". I believe that is what is happening in 3dwi, and others have likely come to this same conclusion. At the end, the author briefly mentions how you may look through the window and see "something bad you're responsible for", yet you do nothing to stop it because it's "not real". Curious. I also noticed that the image at the bottom of the Computer Philosophy page depicts a red object and a green object, transitioning from being a flat, 2d image on a computer monitor, to being a 3d image on the screen, to then being a 3d image outside of the monitor. This imagery directly relates to the Snopes ratings screenshot posted by PLawler, which is accompanied by the rating "multiple truth values". Could more than one thing be true?

I think it's easy to assume that PLawler is Pat in the screensaver. I also believe that it is Pat who is responsible for creating the 3dwi, and she gets a satisfaction from exposing others to it. I think she is purposefully creating the narrative that there is nothing weird going on; no faces, and no sounds in 3dwi to encourage people to keep watching and be shocked by what they see. However, there is allusion to the idea that 3dwi sources information about the viewer from what can be found on the computer it's running on. So it's possible that Pat is clean, and she genuinely doesn't see or believe what other people have reported. She does keep 3dwi running on as many screens in her home as possible, and finds it pleasant to tune in to. Pat in 3dwi is also shown messing around with a laptop that has an image of Earth on it, aka "WORLD", aka "reality".

PLawler/Pat expresses her disdain for Amber more than once. She calls her lazy, despite Amber being shown mowing the lawn and walking around. PLawler also chastises another poster on the forums for doing their child's homework for them. This to me is another accusation against children for not working hard enough. This, I feel, reinforces the idea that PLawler/Pat is the perpetrator of Amber's mistreatment. PL does admit an attraction to Rebecca, which I think is also depicted in the scene where Pat and Rebecca are shown clipping together in odd movement. In 3dwi, Pat is seen coming in between Amber and Holland when Amber approaches Holland (I'm assuming to engage in some sort of play). She stands ominously between them, despite them ostensibly being close in age and sibilings. Pat is also shown scolding or somehow reprimanding Amber behind the house. It seems as if Amber is being intentionally isolated from Holland. It is questionable why PL would relate so much to Pat.

Onto Amber. She doesn't seem to be able to interact with her fellow workers in the way she would like to. She is interrupted by Pat when approaching Holland in the sand. In one scene she is seated with Holland and reaches out to him, but Holland runs away back into the house. She is seated at the table with Joe and Holland in one scene, but Joe gets up and leaves, and Amber and Holland don't interact at all. Another poster refers to Amber being "slow" and "tired", and her mistreatment by the other characters. One claim on the Inside3dwi website says that she becomes redder and redder, eventually slowing down and "crawling", before turning into a red ball and being ignored by everyone else on screen.

Amber is a fan favorite. When asked, everyone in the forum agreed that amber was their favorite, but it was also implied that talking about Amber being the favorite was a risky topic. Reality Priest says "I'm not going to pretend my favorite character is Holland or Grace just so things can stay clean...". This comment ties in to what is revealed on the Inside3dwi site, wherein we are told that certain events involving amber will trigger events depicting images of a real human girl. These events occur after what is called a "JPR pin" where the three adults corner Amber. This is all alluding to something I would prefer not to talk about, but good grief and alas.

I think the reason that so many people (one poster refers to them as "freaks") like Amber is because of the ... media ... that appears regarding her. I think they are intentionally seeking out this type of stuff, and that's why they love Amber. There are no degenerative states involving the other characters, and there is no "JPR pin" triggered events for Holland or Grace. In fact, Holland and Grace are hardly mentioned at all. These so-called "Amber shitheads" are deemed responsible for shutting down the discovery pages according to the IM sequences. This thought leads me to another, which is that 3dwi works off information from the computer it's running on. Perhaps many people in this forum have questionable hard drives and are thereby shown the more extreme secrets behind the screensaver. Why else would their favorite character be Amber after seeing all the disturbing things this screensaver has to offer regarding her?

Holland is interesting, because she is not given much attention through the forums, but she displays some concerning behaviors in 3dwi. She is shown with a toy rabbit, often falling or laying down, and at one point is walking into a wall. In another scene, Holland is shown standing in a "diamond" pattern with Joe, Rebecca, and Grace. Concerningly, Holland is shown to bend over and turn away from the group she is with. I found that to be distasteful, and perhaps indicative of some learned behaviors from what Holland has been exposed to. I'm not sure what to make of the scene where Holland brings the blue lamp out of the house, so I'll leave it at that.

The last character I'd like to dive into is GoodKid. I fully believe this poster is not actually a "14 year old teenaged kid". I'm closer to believing that GoodKid is actually Rebecca or Grace, but I lean away from them being Grace because according to Inside3dwi, "Grace's Guilt" is a recognizable aspect of her character, and I don't feel that she would be unabashedly posting on the forum. The term "sweet angelic mommy" is dubious, and seems to be an attempt at flattery. To who, I'm not sure. They mention getting in trouble for "dress code violations", which to me reads as "dressed inappropriately for a school setting". The most often dress code violations at school are shorts/skirts/dresses that are too short, or graphic tees with unsavory messaging. I'll leave it at that.

I believe that GoodKid is the one who wrote Inside3dwi. The posts there are signed with "-GKey", which is similar to GoodKid - same initials. Both GoodKid and GKey seem intent on exposing the truth about Plawler and 3dwi in general. GoodKid is banned on the forums as well as discussion about the Inside3dwi website. GKey also mentions having a brother, which I thought was interesting as the first forum post we see, from Mawgirl, mentions having a brother as well. And that first post is the only post we see from Mawgirl. There may be overlap with members of the forum and people submitting posts to Inside3dwi, perhaps even double accounts. I noticed as well that NedHucker suggests to "be cool" and 3dwi will reveal more to you. The poster whose username is ImCool says "Amber motherfucker" in the thread about favorite characters, and then later on Inside3dwi someone called JaketheMadCow ends his post with "there's sound mother fucker". Could NedHucker, ImCool, and JaketheMadCow all be the same person? Maybe I'm reaching too much.

There are more connections between the various posters, such as 12pt having an icon of a creepy looking face that seems like it might fit into 3dwi with the "details" setting toggled up higher, and there are mentions of "strange faces" on Inside3dwi. Another submission on Inside3dwi is attributed to FallingIntoAsphalt, which is the only other reference to the Computer Philosophy page found in this 3dwi universe. User Jomsom relates another posters story about their child being afraid of 3dwi to a movie wherein a character gets trapped in a cartoon, which reminds me of another post on Inside3dwi by Thomas, in which Thomas is convinced everything that's happening on screen is all in his head.

Who is Jonn Sorroway? What are "stories of reality"? Who is Sam Ferraro?

I've lost the plot at this point in writing this post, so I'm just going to post it and hope for some interaction becasue I'd really like to work out some of the kinks with people who have also taken the time to dive into this project. Another Amazing story from Domenico.

[brandyllyn]

It is July 25, 2024 and what may be the greatest political moment of my life is happening.

As far as anyone can tell this is the nexus of the rumor. Twitter* user @rickrudecalves posted on July 15th, 2024 that JD Vance fucked a latex glove in a couch cushion.

Now, look, I want to be upfront that this is not true. There is no such passage in Hillbilly Elegy.

However, however, the internet could not give one flying fuck if it was true. It meandered around a bit, and various blue checkmarked accounts reposted it with apparent shock but belief without fact checking.

I can't pinpoint when and how it exploded, but on July 24 the Associated Press wrote about it.

And then, and I cannot stress this enough, pulled the story. And they did it because they bypassed their editorial process so couldn't verify the fact-check.

But the damage was done. AP had commented and now every other new outlet could run the same headline. "Did JD Vance fuck a couch? News at 11." It was now mainstream headline news because AP bothered to report it - and then had to PULL THEIR NEGATION. Folks I cannot tell you how amazing that is.

I mean, I personally feel they had to grapple with the fact that you can't prove a negative. The best they can say is that no, that is not in Vance's book.

Look, it takes all kinds and who among us can cast the first stone on weird sex stuff. If J.D. Vance fucked a couch it would make me like him more. But J.D. Vance is an evangelical nutjob who believes that a man wearing a skirt is pornography and criminal. It is objectively funny that this rumor has been attached to him.

The right-wing party in America is not serious. They are laughably stupid and believe stupid things. You do not combat this by giving them airtime and treating them like they are serious.

You combat them by pointing and laughing.

Further Reading: The Cut Snopes

*I will call it X over my dead body.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Charis Hoard at MMFA:

Former president and current GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump recently called for CBS’ and ABC’s broadcast licenses to be revoked, a continuation of the kind of adversarial rhetoric he has used against the press since his presidency. Project 2025, the right-wing policy blueprint for the next Republican administration, has also argued for the defunding of public radio and broadcast networks.

Throughout his reelection campaign, Trump has called for broadcast TV licenses to be revoked, promised investigation into media outlets, and painted the media as “so bad for our country”

Trump called for CBS’ broadcast license to be revoked while accusing the network of editing interview footage to the benefit of Vice President Kamala Harris. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Trump called for the network’s broadcast license to be revoked and claimed that it is trying to “hide [the] fact” that Harris “is a Moron.” In a later post, Trump claimed that CBS’ 60 Minutes “unscrupulously replaced an answer” that Harris had given during an interview with the program with “another answer that had nothing to do with the question asked,” baselessly calling the action “illegal.” [The Hill, 10/10/24; Twitter/X, 10/10/24, 10/14/24; Snopes, 10/11/24]

In September, Trump called for ABC’s broadcast license to be revoked. The morning after his presidential debate with Harris, Fox News host Ainsley Earhardt asked Trump why the ABC moderators didn’t “correct” Harris during the debate. Trump responded, “They’re dishonest, and because I think ABC took a big hit last night. I mean, to be honest, they're a news organization. They have to be licensed to do it. They ought to take away their license for the way they did that.” [Twitter/X, 9/11/24]

Trump also attacked debate moderators, ABC’s David Muir and Linsey Davis, for fact-checking his lies and described them as “low lives.” During a speech in Arizona, Trump claimed, “The public was not fooled. They saw right through it, Kamala’s lies and unprecedented partisan interference of two low-life anchors. They’re low lives.” [The Hill, 9/12/24]

Trump threatened The New York Times, saying, “Wait until you see what I'm going to do with them.” In an interview, The Daily Wire’s Ben Shapiro asked Trump, “How do you fight a legacy media that is once again rigging the informational environment of the election?” Trump replied, “The New York Times is one of the most dishonest of all. I watched this, New York Times, and it's a classic. Wait until you see what I'm going to do with them, you're going to have so much fun.” [The Daily Wire, The Ben Shapiro Show, 10/8/24]

While discussing his live streamed X interview in August, Trump attacked the media, writing, “I absolutely HATE the Fake News Media. So bad for our Country!” Trump: “All the Fake News wants to report is that the servers crashed (because of the tremendous volume!), and the show opened a little late. What they should be reporting was the incredible number of people that were listening. I absolutely HATE the Fake News Media. So bad for our Country!” [Truth Social, 8/13/24; The New York Times, 8/13/24]

During an appearance at the 2024 National Association of Black Journalists Convention, Trump attacked moderator and ABC correspondent Rachel Scott for citing his track record on race. Trump: “I don’t think I’ve ever been asked a question in such a horrible manner. A first question. You don’t even say, ‘Hello, how are you?’ Are you with ABC? Because I think they’re a fake news network, a terrible network. And I think it’s disgraceful that I came here in good spirit — I love the Black population of this country, I’ve done so much for the Black population of this country.” [The Hill, 7/31/24]

In October 2023, Trump questioned whether CBS News should be able to access public airwaves after its interview with President Joe Biden. In a post on Truth Social after CBS’ interview with Biden, Trump stated: “The show ‘60 Minutes’ should be ashamed of themselves. They just interviewed Crooked Joe Biden, and led him along like a lost child. … Why should CBS get free public airwaves for this highly partisan ‘show’[?]” [MSNBC, 10/17/23]

In late 2023, Trump accused media outlets such as NBC and MSNBC of “Country Threatening Treason” and asserted that he would investigate them if reelected in November. Trump: “They are almost all dishonest and corrupt, but Comcast, with its one-side and vicious coverage by NBC NEWS, and in particular MSNBC, often and correctly referred to as MSDNC (Democrat National Committee!), should be investigated for its ‘Country Threatening Treason.’” [Forbes, 9/24/23]

The right-wing authoritarian war on supposed “fake news” are part of both Donald Trump and Project 2025’s plans to attack and delegitimatize all non-MAGA-friendly sources.

The MAGA-friendly sources are the biggest fake news purveyors in America, not the “MSM.”

[montyshistoryblog]

Agonies surrounding milkmen

What better way to distract myself from activist burnout and the horrors of the carpet-bombing of civilians by exploring the Blitz!

I recently started a module at my university called History As Mythmaking: The Myth of the Blitz. In the seminar, we were discussing how the public image of the Blitz of London was created in part through propaganda, especially certain attitudes such as the stiff upper lip (despite popular belief, Keep Calm And Carry On was scrapped before the Blitz and only rediscovered at the turn of the millenium), and the subject of the milkman photo came up. For those of you who have somehow escaped such a pervasive image, here's the photo.

[Ownership: Getty Images | Credit: Fred Morley working for Fox Photo (defunct)]

This image, the tale goes, is actually a staged image. Fred Morley, the photographer for a Fleet Street firm called Fox Photo, was sick of the fact that the censor board would prevent press photographers from publishing any photos that showed excessive bomb damage. In some instances this would be cropping images to cut out ruined buildings, while other instances were outright blocked from publication. So Morley came up with a clever work-around: play into the themes that the propaganda aimed for while showing bomb damage. Supposedly, Morley or his assistant dressed up in a milk-man uniform, grabbed a crate of bottles and patrolled London until they found fire-fighters actively fighting the damage, before capturing this photo. The theme of "stiff upper lip" and "the unflappable Englishman" were so strong in the photo that it was published regardless of the rubble.

But is it true?

It's a compelling, neat little story that perfectly encompasses the concept of positive propaganda, and that's that is exactly the problem with it. It's a very neat, clean little story which is told almost verbatim all over the internet.

The oldest reference I've been able to find to the idea that the photo is staged is from ancient ancient... September 2015, not even a decade. A publication on the Telegraph website titled "The spirit of the Blitz: picture special". On slide 7 of 25, the website reads this almost exact story from the then-Letter Editor Christopher Howse. This is already strange, since Howse is a specialist in religious news, but this is also the Telegraph and qualifications are often secondary to a good story there. Howse is incredibly difficult to contact, and I've resorted to sending a physical letter to the Telegraph's offices in hopes he will answer. Considering his old-fashioned sensibilities and his current work being the designated old man for articles by Young Conservatives, he may appreciate slightly outdated format. I will keep you updated if he ever answers, I included my email in the letter thankfully.

Now, dear reader, this could in fact be the woozle effect in play, wherein everybody is just citing each other. What makes this especially evident is that all of the websites that discuss this idea are the typical fodder, with names along the lines of "HISTORY SLAM" and the likes. Their citations, if any exist, typically refer to either a Snopes article that references the Telegraph article, or directly refer to the Telegraph article without linking it, because the link is now dead. All of these articles are suspiciously similar in grammar and sentence layout too. Every day, I come closer to agreeing with the Dead Internet Theory.

So why care?

It's such a minor thing, what does it matter if it's wrong? Now, for the vast majority of people, yeah frankly who would give a shit? But stories such as these do feed into what is ultimately an incorrect narrative surrounding the Blitz, especially the concept of Blitz Spirit. Any Brits who were conscious during the first years of COVID-19 may remember the constant references to Blitz Spirit and how we can survive anything because of our British "Keep Calm And Carry On" attitude, before looking out the window at the toilet paper hoarding and realising that Blitz Spirit is a load of bollocks.

Jenny Draper has an excellent video on how Blitz Spirit didn't really exist, and she references the idea that this very photo is fake in her video. I'm looking at contacting her when I can find an email or phone number to go through without being intrusive (seriously who the fuck is putting Youtubers' phone numbers on the internet?), since I wonder where she picked this up too.

The myth of Blitz Spirit does have an important place in British culture, and if you want a good but slightly dated discussion of the Blitz and British culture, I suggest you read The myth of the Blitz by Angus Caldwell. Some of the current affairs and politics of it are a bit stuck in the 90s, but the overall book and discussion is very useful.

Catching untruths regarding such a culturally important event in British culture, one that was playing into government policy in 2020, is an important part of actually learning from history, instead of learning from a historical mythology.

More updates to come once I've been contacted back by experts and/or journalists.

[frostyreturns]

All the "debunkings" of my canadian healthcare genocide post were so retarded but even if they were true just look at the defenses these people will mount to defend the doctor killings. Just a reminder that no matter how indefensible something is the usual suspects for mind numbingly retarded takes will get arm lengthening surgery to reach harder than you thought a thinking person could reach.

It's not the federal government doing it directly, it's handled through the provincial governments.

It's not 50 000 people who were killed it was only 14 000 (not true 14 000 were killed in 2022 alone)

You just are looking for an excuse to criticize trudeau and the liberal party

Yeah but they are not killing minors just 18 and up

Yes they plan to expand the killings to include mental health issues but they put that on hold for now.

the sad part is there's a lot of people in my notes who looked at those arguments and went oh thank goodness its debunked and tagged my post as misinformation on the basis of these arguments that were either correcting things i never said or were just flat out wrong. I now see how snopes can get away with marking stuff false even when their own articles reinforced that it was true.

[mcbitchtits]

This is AI and 100% not what BHG was talking about in August, 1979

Rick James' House

Better Homes & Gardens (August 1979)

[yuk-tepat]

I’ve seen a post floating around telling people to cough hard if they are having a heart attack but can’t get to a hospital in time. Im posting the partial rebuttal from Snopes which is buried at the end of the reblog thread.

To summarize, coughing advice is problematic because

Coughing can work, BUT…

It has to be done a particular way, at a particular time, in particular kinds of cardiac events

Most people won’t do it right

Doing it wrong could make stuff worse

So doctors generally recommend you don’t try and cough, and instead call an ambulance fucking immediately and take an aspirin (don't just swallow it, chew it up and swallow).

[darkmaga-returns]

Most readers have probably seen tweets with these maps since yesterday. The captions vary, but the idea is: Kama Sutra only won in states that don’t have any voter ID requirements:

Do you believe in coincidence on this scale?

Snopes has done a helpful fact check on this: Misleading Post Says Harris Only Won in States Not Requiring Voter ID in 2024. If you read the Snopes post, what you’ll quickly see is that, while the claim is not strictly true, it’s MOSTLY true. Snopes even adds the useful information that PA only requires ID for first-time voters—otherwise, no ID. So, look at it this way. CA, NY, IL, MA give the Dems one helluva guaranteed head start on the popular vote and electoral vote combined. New York City, LA, Chicago, Boston, San Fran. That head start—call it the Blue Wall—allows the Dems to reallocate resources to peel off a few other states, by hook or by crook.

What does this tell you about how elections have been going since, say, 2008? And especially in 2020? You don’t have to deny all American demographic dynamics to see the degree of corruption here. Of course there are large numbers of foolish people across the country. What voter ID laws do is blunt the worst effects of human nature in the context of electoral processes. Do Big Cities vote heavily Blue, for all sorts of reasons? Yes, of course they do. But do the majority of the biggest cities also happen to be situated mostly in non-ID states? And have those states become the epicenter of election fraud? That’s like asking, is it coincidence that Dems so rabidly oppose honest voting rolls and registration and ID laws, and so viciously slander those who work for honest elections?

Trump’s 2016 win was the shot across the Ruling Class bow that led to the over the top 2020 steal—not even subtle. One commentator pointed out that, in a sense, Zhou saved the Dems for four years because, but for Zhou, they would have had to run Bernie, and how do you pull off a steal for Bernie? Hello, Bill Barr and Mitch McConnnell—and many others. You think they didn’t know all this?

So we owe Lara Trump and everyone else who did the hard work to prevent another steal. These people forced the Ruling Class to stand down from an attempted repeat of 2020. Part of that, of course, was the Too Big To Rig strategy, but Trump’s vote totals were nearly as big in 2020 as they are this year. The big difference is in the Dem vote totals. Yes, there was an enthusiasm deficit, but the amount of missing votes we’re talking about shows that the Ruling Class was faced down because of the GOP legal and ground game.

[emptymanuscript]

So, Trump keeps bringing up the Governor of Virginia allowing infanticide.

He is referencing this specific question and answer statement made on January 30th, 2019 by Governor Northam in a live radio Interview on Washington, D.C.'s, WTOP, as quoted in the Snopes article about Trump's claims from back in 2019.

Julie Carey: ... There was a very contentious committee hearing yesterday when Fairfax County Delegate Kathy Tran made her case for lifting restrictions on third-trimester abortions, as well as other restrictions now in place. And she was pressed by a Republican delegate about whether her bill would permit an abortion even as a woman is, essentially, dilating, ready to give birth. And she answered that it would permit an abortion at that stage of labor. Do you support her measure? And explain her answer. Ralph Northam: You know, I wasn't there, Julie, and I certainly can't speak for Delegate Tran, but I would tell you -- one, the first thing I would say is this is why decisions such as this should be made by [healthcare] providers, physicians, and the mothers and fathers that are involved. There are -- you know when we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of, obviously, the mother, with the consent of the physicians, more than one physician by the way. And it's done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that's non-viable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother. So I think this was really blown out of proportion ...

So Trump's argument here is the same disingenuous argument it is most of the time.

It's presenting a discussion about what should happen legally when profound tragedy strikes and everything goes wrong and there's no possible life ahead for the child BUT it's politically convenient to ignore the actual horror and pain of the situation to pretend something entirely different is happening.

This was about Northam saying he didn't want to get involved in a family's end of life decisions for their new born infant who was going to die as soon as they were taken off life support. No future. No life. Unfortunately, it happens. It's about life support at the point of no hope. And that that entire conversation should be between a patient and doctor.

And Trump is framing it, not as a discussion over what the state's role should be in the process of an infant's inevitable death - not even the situation of a possibly viable but extremely unhealthy child as some sort of edge case - but as a discussion over the state's tacit approval of killing a perfectly healthy child for some undefined reason, with the implication that it is mere inconvenience instead of utter tragedy.

It's bullshit.

It's all bullshit.

It has always been ALL bullshit.

And still it rolls on. And on. And on.

While Trump plainly states that he "believes" in exceptions in the case of rape, incest, and the health of the mother - with no mention of the health or viability of the baby because he doesn't actually care - because he has to get the votes. He doesn't care. It's only about the votes. It is purely strategic speaking out of both sides of his mouth without a moral position one way or the other.

But I strongly suspect he's going to be seen as winning this debate just because he has better vocal projection, is trying to say less to keep it simpler, and his lies are emotionally provocative. Like, yeah, he does SOUND better than Biden, if you utterly ignore the god awful content coming out of his mouth.

How? HOW?!? How is Trump a viable candidate for President??? AGAIN!?!

This is such a nightmare. A repeating nightmare.

[mcbitchtits]

a CGI illustration by Ben Fearnley from 2020

[woman-respecter]

the misinfo is so wild, like I've seen people I previously respected and considered to be smart & thoughtful dutifully reblogging 'news' in the form of tweet screencaps on a subject that if you take 3 seconds to google, the first thing that comes up is a snopes fact check (that it did not pass). and it's one thing that this stuff happens here (this is the site that once believed you could make infinite chocolate, after all), but it's another to see people you know doing it. like wtf is happening

it’s licherally like everyone has been infected by some kind of insanity-inducing disease about this topic. or maybe they never knew how to fact check in the first place and this is just revealing that :/

[chargetheintruder]

One crisis ends, two more begin . . .

and a third one resumes as always.

On the one hand . . . Joe is Biden, dropping out, isn't so much good news as it is necessary news. So can this bought and paid-for psycho Media FINALLY SHUT THE HELL UP??

On the other? Yes, Kamala Harris, our President Pro Tempore under the 25th Amendment, really REALLY ought to be the candidate seeing as how we voted for her too, back in 2020. But that doesn't mean Big Money won't pitch a bitch about her. No really, this is something Media folks and Big Donors alike refuse to get: sometimes it isn't about the perfectly calculated candidate, but rather the one you hope for. Nobody asked IF Barack Obama was electable, because the game was different. With Obama, it was about the vision of putting the first man of color in the White House.

Likewise I don't know how "betrayed" women of color can be if Harris runs, seeing as how a) they voted for her too, and b) she literally is one of them. It both solves a problem, follows normal procedure under the Constitution and is still doing the vision/"candidate we hope for" thing.

Mainly though it puts convicted felon Donald Trump up against a trial lawyer. It changes the dynamic. It takes Trump out of the gloating/"I win" position and puts him back on defense. All we have to hope for is that Kamala can actually GO OFF on Trump, for the women voters, properly, without being lumped in with Hillary Clinton as "unlikeable" when hello, you're not going to be friendly when under threat from a fucking fucknut like Trump.

The ongoing problem though, is that our completely traitorous One Percent has gone almost entirely Team Trump "because they're bored" and inbred rich bitches (gender neutral) that way. Essentially, the bastards who own the Media and own the Internet, and have ruined Twitter and Snopes alike, are hellbent on being as favoritist towards Trump and his as possible, throwing only softballs at the crazy Hitler Wannabe and making damned sure nobody questions the Asylum Rules Monstrosity on the ballot.

No really, too much of our lives in this nation already run on the rules of the psychiatric ward as it is. Too much of the USA has become bleak and dystopian as it is. Do you really want a dictator with a personality disorder in charge, possibly for the rest of his life? Voting to keep Trump out seems like a chore, but doing that, keeping him OUT, also means we can still fix the United States.

We won't even have a country to fix if Trump wins. We won't be able to help anyone else if we refuse to save ourselves from Trump. Get it through your heads: everything we hope for, out there in the world, goes down a toilet if we don't save ourselves from Trump. Palestine, Ukraine, Taiwan and more will suffer and perish if we don't save ourselves and preserve our ABILITY to save others.

Under Trump we become Vladimir Putin's COLONY. Then we become Xi Jinping's COLONY depending on what new fucking plague that plague pimp coughs up next week. Then we become beholden and a COLONY OF whoever else Trump and his whore us out to, the week after that.

Suck on that.