What's objective to me is the uptick in anti-supreme court articles largely based on strawmen and rhetoric. At least it "feels" objective to me. Like a meta tre

What's objective to me is the uptick in anti-supreme court articles largely based on strawmen and rhetoric. At least it "feels" objective to me. Like a meta trend, cultural undercurrents, etc, which I try to pay attention to as it helps me make more sense out of the "why" behind story trends. Beyond that its just guesswork. So more data is better. Maybe it's just trendy to crap on democracy, as our culture seems to enjoy crapping on anything that used to be deemed good/noble/just. Bad is good, right is wrong, etc. Or maybe it's just the old political tactics used by authoritarians... When winning they tend to talk about how "just" and "overdue" the ruling/decision/policy is. When losing they tend to resort to strawmen and character assassination, an Orwellian way of associating decisions they don't like with people of bad character. "Big brother can't be bad" "Oceana can't be good" etc Personally I don't like all the "crap on democracy" rhetoric that seems to be more and more pervasive. Especially in young people. I've heard it said "Democracy is the worst form of government – except for all the others that have been tried".