A: vox isn't a valid news source for this kind of news.
B: "a survey of 2000 experts from around the world" is not a valid way to collect such data
And finally the actual article says:
"Its closest peers are, almost uniformly, radical right and anti-democratic parties. This includes Turkey’s AKP (a regime that is one of the world’s leading jailers of journalists), and Poland’s PiS (which has threatened dissenting judges with criminal punishment)."
Since concluding the Republican party is like those is ridiculous on it's face, one can only conclude this survey is garbage if it generates such results.
To be specific: the survey isn't measuring how the Republican party actually is. Rather it's measuring how these experts think the Republican party is - informed mainly by a liberal American media.
I've seen it over and over: Decide how you think the opponent will behave, then criticize them, in advance, as if they have already behaved that way.
Think about it: Do you think Republicans would "jail journalists" and "threaten judges with criminal punishment"? Next, think Did Republicans actually do that? And consider why your opinion on what you think they would do doesn't match what they actually did.
If Trump sued for libel every time (which, IMO, he should, to provide some negative feedback to the system that's otherwise unstable), he'd put half the press in the country out of business by now.
But he does not "threaten journalists and the media with criminal punishment", which is what I was pointing out. And if we were to react to name calling, they've called him far worse.
And an even lower bar for the "free press": to refrain from driving the country towards a full blown civil war to generate clickbait, and maybe even consider doing serious reporting again, for the first time in 20 years. Trump is not entirely wrong. The US press is full of radical propaganda at this point because it's good for "engagement". People have been radicalized because of it. People died because of it.
Trump actively milks it, witness his coziness with FOX and, when they weren't sufficiently sycophantic, OANN, which, while not being state-funded, comes as close as possible to the propaganda arm of the Trump government, and he actively encourages it.
So forgive us if we take "The press are the enemy of the people" from Trump with a grain of salt, when his sentiments are more accurately "The press that don't support me, the President, unequivocally and uncritically, are the enemy of the people".
Everything other than FOX and OANN are propaganda arms of the DNC though, and they are _actively lying_ to the people about literally everything, all the way to "austere religious scholars" and "revered military leaders". If you were only watching CNN you wouldn't even know there have been riots in Portland nearly every night for almost 4 months.
Well, they apparently aren't taking his "threats" seriously then. Just watch any of his pressers, and compare it to those of Joe Biden. Oh, I forgot, Joe Biden doesn't have any pressers where questions aren't pre-approved in advance.
> vox isn't a valid news source for this kind of news.
Argumentum ad hominem.
> Since concluding the Republican party is like those is ridiculous on it's face,
Why?
> Do you think Republicans would "jail journalists" and "threaten judges with criminal punishment"?
They may not (yet) be doing those specific things. However, the article goes on to state which "anti-democratic" things they're actually doing:
"Over the past decade and a half, Republicans have shown disdain for procedural fairness and a willingness to put the pursuit of power over democratic principles. They have implemented measures that make it harder for racial minorities to vote, render votes from Democratic-leaning constituencies irrelevant, and relentlessly blocked Democratic efforts to conduct normal functions of government."
There are additional examples of this in the article:
"For example, Republicans won about 50 percent of the US House vote in North Carolina in 2018’s election. That translated into 70 percent of House seats due to heavily gerrymandered districts. Wisconsin Democrats won every statewide election in 2018 but did not win majorities in either chamber of the state legislature. While Democrats are also at a disadvantage due to concentration in urban areas, gerrymanders share much of the blame."
"North Carolina Rep. David Lewis, who chaired the state redistricting committee that put together a map so racially contorted that it was struck down in court in 2016, openly professed the power politics behind extreme gerrymandering in a speech on the statehouse floor."
"Lewis is notable mostly for his unusual honesty. Republicans believe they ought to win elections, and are doing everything in the power to make that the case — including changing the rules to stack the playing field in the favor. The effect is a party committed to an anti-democratic creed outside the norm of advanced Western democracies that insists that it is the true guardian of American democracy."
Unlike your assertion that these experts are only going off what "liberal media" tells them, they seem to be looking at what's actually happening. And it's deeply concerning.
That "small bit" is the entire thing. The problem with the vox article is it's rating the Republicans based on their image (specifically their image with liberal media), not their actions.
And you did the exact same thing. Are you even aware you did that?
Comparing Republicans to Turkey’s AKP or Poland’s PiS is absurd on it's face, yet vox doesn't seem aware of that.
And "Argumentum ad hominem" is not a valid rebuttal here, because every word vox says on this subject can not be taken as fact, yet you have quoted large sections of it. Even the study they have quoted can not be used, because vox chose the study to quote.
Saying "vox isn't a valid news source for this kind of news" is another way of saying "you need to start over if you want to analyze Republicans", this vox article is not a valid starting point.
> The problem with the vox article is it's rating the Republicans based on their image (specifically their image with liberal media), not their actions. And you did the exact same thing. Are you even aware you did that?
If you read my entire comment, or the entire article, you'll find that to not be the case. The rating is based entirely on actions, not "liberal media reporting".
B: "a survey of 2000 experts from around the world" is not a valid way to collect such data
And finally the actual article says:
"Its closest peers are, almost uniformly, radical right and anti-democratic parties. This includes Turkey’s AKP (a regime that is one of the world’s leading jailers of journalists), and Poland’s PiS (which has threatened dissenting judges with criminal punishment)."
Since concluding the Republican party is like those is ridiculous on it's face, one can only conclude this survey is garbage if it generates such results.
To be specific: the survey isn't measuring how the Republican party actually is. Rather it's measuring how these experts think the Republican party is - informed mainly by a liberal American media.
I've seen it over and over: Decide how you think the opponent will behave, then criticize them, in advance, as if they have already behaved that way.
Think about it: Do you think Republicans would "jail journalists" and "threaten judges with criminal punishment"? Next, think Did Republicans actually do that? And consider why your opinion on what you think they would do doesn't match what they actually did.