General Discussion

Skepticism of any media is healthy and necessary, though some might go a bit overboard. Blanket statements that all of the MSM is the same and that they're all illegitimate or in the tank for Trump or that all polls are funded by the GOP are just silly. I suppose for some it's easier to just write it all off than to find a way to filter through the noise.

At the same time, some "facts" get posted from random blogs or some guy on X no one has ever heard of or Meidas Touch and they proliferate like bunnies, often even after they're debunked. It's actually kind of funny, but sad at the same time.

We do need alternative media, though social media and monetization has made even some outlets that used to be very objective and trustworthy lean toward tabloid-like sensationalism in the interest of clicks and ad revenue. That noise filter again becomes necessary, and everything you mentioned about the 20+ years DU has been around is what got us here. It's hard to find hard news in a post-fact, short-attention-span society.

I do recall Trump's run in 2000 and have referred to it often. It was that run that made the 2016 campaign even more unbelievable for me personally. The contrast between 2000 and 2016 does show that the current political and social climate are much more suited for someone like him to arise. Even then, I call the 2016 the perfect storm, because Trump needed 100 things to go right (or not go wrong) to win, and every single one of them happened. He'd also been, for practical purposes, running for president for six years by then.