Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old Today, 02:00 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,350
Let me just say this: If someone come up to you and repeatedly says "You hate me!!!" out of context, and in non sequitorial fashion, (as you can see in the R behaviors at the hearings) it seems to me that you need to deal with the probability that that person actually hates you. There is no other interpretation of this that is viable and worth investigating.
  #52  
Old Today, 05:26 PM
RioRico is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
The right hates liberals all over the place: in here, on tv, on the internet, in the mouths of politicians.
I have seen KILL LIBERALS mudflaps on semi-trucks. I've not seen KILL CONSERVATIVES mudflaps. I've yet to see HANG GOP TRAITORS bumper stickers. Perhaps my observed sample is biased. But I note that in my conservative rural county, which went over 2/3 for Tramp, nobody flies Tramp banners or posters. Maybe they don't want to display their [insert characterization here].
  #53  
Old Today, 05:37 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by RioRico View Post
I have seen KILL LIBERALS mudflaps on semi-trucks. I've not seen KILL CONSERVATIVES mudflaps. I've yet to see HANG GOP TRAITORS bumper stickers. Perhaps my observed sample is biased. But I note that in my conservative rural county, which went over 2/3 for Tramp, nobody flies Tramp banners or posters. Maybe they don't want to display their [insert characterization here].
At the risk of being sealioned I think that "Hang GOP traitors" as a bumper sticker would not be hateful, in todays context. It barely qualifies (and probably doesn't) as hyperbole.
  #54  
Old Today, 06:11 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
How bad would things have to get before they’ll be willing, do you think?
Willing to get votes by pandering to white-supremacism and pro-autocracy leanings and general hate-mongering against The Other? Is that what you mean?

If that is what you mean: the solution for Democrats seeking votes is not to become anti-Democrats; it's to enforce existing laws that counter vote-suppression, and work to prevent the passing of new laws that suppress voting.

The FoxNews viewers aren't going to become Democratic voters. No matter how bad things might get, Democrats would concentrate, instead, on getting the other 70% of the population registered and committed to vote.

In addition, Democrats would need to work to expose the Kremlin/GOP messaging that seeks to suppress voting not by legislative means, but by social pressure means---the messaging about voting being something that Cool People Don't Do and the messaging that seeks to convince black people (for example) that they shouldn't vote because that just rewards Democrats who are allegedly Using Them. (Of course their refraining from voting actually rewards Republicans.)

So, 'things getting bad' wouldn't impel Democrats toward becoming more Republican-ish, or to court the white nationalists---things getting bad would impel Democrats to try to get a larger proportion of the eligible US population to vote.
  #55  
Old Today, 06:39 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
Willing to get votes by pandering to white-supremacism and pro-autocracy leanings and general hate-mongering against The Other? Is that what you mean?
Well, not necessarily, no; unless that, exclusively, was your point. You said they’re astonishingly easy to manipulate; so, (a) yes, if what you meant was that the above approach is the only way to manipulate them, then, yeah, that’s what I’m asking; but (b) if you meant that there are any other methods that could be used to manipulate ‘em with astonishing ease, then I’m asking about those methods.

Did you only ever have the former in mind, or do you think there’s any other way to manipulate them with — as it were — astonishing ease?
  #56  
Old Today, 06:43 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
Well, not necessarily, no; unless that, exclusively, was your point. You said they’re astonishingly easy to manipulate; so, (a) yes, if what you meant was that the above approach is the only way to manipulate them, then, yeah, that’s what I’m asking; but (b) if you meant that there are any other methods that could be used to manipulate ‘em with astonishing ease, then I’m asking about those methods.

Did you only ever have the former in mind, or do you think there’s any other way to manipulate them with — as it were — astonishing ease?
You can manipulate them with Astonishing Ease if you are willing to pander to their deplorable views.

What, you were postulating a switch on the back of their necks or something?
  #57  
Old Today, 07:14 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
You can manipulate them with Astonishing Ease if you are willing to pander to their deplorable views.

What, you were postulating a switch on the back of their necks or something?
Er, no; I wasn’t postulating much of anything, really; I was genuinely curious to see what you had in mind; you said they were astonishingly easy to manipulate, and I thought to myself, if that’s true, then why aren’t the Dems doing it? Why *not* manipulate them, with astonishing ease, into bankrolling candidates and causes? Why not rack up needed votes with astonishing ease? I’m not sure why Sherrerd thinks it’d be astonishingly easy, but I sure do wonder why the Dems aren’t already bothering; when, if ever, will they start?

If the answer is that you think the right can’t be manipulated into doing what the left wants, but only into doing what the right wants, then — well, shucks, I’ve already been accused once in this thread of being disingenuous, which sure did hurt and I sure don’t want to get stung with again; but for the life of me I just don’t see why you’d think that type of astonishing ease was worth mentioning.
  #58  
Old Today, 07:30 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
Er, no; I wasn’t postulating much of anything, really; I was genuinely curious to see what you had in mind; you said they were astonishingly easy to manipulate, and I thought to myself, if that’s true, then why aren’t the Dems doing it? Why *not* manipulate them, with astonishing ease, into bankrolling candidates and causes? Why not rack up needed votes with astonishing ease? I’m not sure why Sherrerd thinks it’d be astonishingly easy, but I sure do wonder why the Dems aren’t already bothering; when, if ever, will they start?

If the answer is that you think the right can’t be manipulated into doing what the left wants, but only into doing what the right wants, then — well, shucks, I’ve already been accused once in this thread of being disingenuous, which sure did hurt and I sure don’t want to get stung with again; but for the life of me I just don’t see why you’d think that type of astonishing ease was worth mentioning.
When you "manipulate" someone to do something it's based on negative emotions: envy, greed, gluttony, rage, resentment. So yes I agree with you that the republicans are masters at manipulation. But I don't see any inconsistency in it, if dems can't or won't "manipulate " people as the rebuplicans are doing.

You can't "manipulate" people to be decent and conscientious.

Last edited by drad dog; Today at 07:31 PM.
  #59  
Old Today, 07:36 PM
MacTech is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Posts: 6,583
Here’s my insignificant take on the whole mess...

I’ve been an Independent my whole life, I lean more towards old school “Traditional Republican” mindset of small government, low taxes, strong *DEFENSIVE* military (we don’t need to be Team America Fuck Yeah!), the government needs to keep their grubby mitts out of personal decisions between consenting adults (abortion/SSM/legalizing marijuana/etc.)

The one thing I refuse to yield on is the Second Amendment, we should ENFORCE the 20,000+ laws already on the books, punish crimes where a firearm is used extra harshly (throw the book at the perps), and make sure those in need of mental health help get the help they need without being stigmatized (or turned into The Stig, for that matter... )

However, registering/banning/confiscating/“buy backs” firearms and components will not reduce gun crime and only serve to criminalize law abiding citizens, making firearm ownership more difficult for law abiding citizens will not reduce crime, because criminals don’t obey the law in the first place.

Background checks already exist, the “gun show loophole” is actually a ban on private sales person to person (a hornets nest on its own, so I won’t clutter this thread with further irrelevancies)

What would a Democratic candidate need to do to gain my voice? Simple...

Simply abandon their anti 2A/ anti gun platform, and enforce the existing laws already on the books, and I’d cast my vote for a Democratic candidate, after all, I did for Obama’s first term...

Thanks to Francis’s “Hell yes” comment though, good luck convincing any 2A supporters that they aren’t looking to confiscate legally owned property, the Democratic Party is going to have to do some major damage control to rebound from that faux pas, or risk losing the votes of both (D) and (R) firearm owners

Trump isn’t an option at all, and he’s also no friend to the 2A either, problem is, he’s pulled the wool over many staid republicans that think that (R) automatically means “2A freindly”...

It doesn’t.

Lose your anti 2A stance, back off on the “ hell yes” “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in” crap, actually *mean it* and you have my vote.

That’s the only thing holding me back from voting (D)
__________________
Freakazoid> dumb, Dumb, DUMB!, NEVER tell the villain how to trap you in a cage!
Gutierrez> You probably shouldn't have helped us build it either...
F!> I know, DUMB!
  #60  
Old Today, 07:43 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
When you "manipulate" someone to do something it's based on negative emotions: envy, greed, gluttony, rage, resentment. So yes I agree with you that the republicans are masters at manipulation. But I don't see any inconsistency in it, if dems can't or won't "manipulate " people as the rebuplicans are doing.

You can't "manipulate" people to be decent and conscientious.
That seems like a silly place to draw the line. Say a guy votes for Democrats, and donates money to them, and so on, but never the Republicans; how am I to reply to someone else, who says that said voter is astonishingly easy to manipulate? Sure, he readily grants that Republicans can’t actually manipulate him into doing a damn thing; he just clarifies that it’s the Democrats who can and do manipulate that guy with ease. “With astonishing ease,” he slowly and patiently explains.

To me, that claim is as pointless as the other one: of course people get talked into supporting the side they support ‘with ease’, and don’t get talked into doing the reverse ‘with ease’. Is that interesting? Am I missing something?
  #61  
Old Today, 08:11 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
That seems like a silly place to draw the line. Say a guy votes for Democrats, and donates money to them, and so on, but never the Republicans; how am I to reply to someone else, who says that said voter is astonishingly easy to manipulate? Sure, he readily grants that Republicans can’t actually manipulate him into doing a damn thing; he just clarifies that it’s the Democrats who can and do manipulate that guy with ease. “With astonishing ease,” he slowly and patiently explains.

To me, that claim is as pointless as the other one: of course people get talked into supporting the side they support ‘with ease’, and don’t get talked into doing the reverse ‘with ease’. Is that interesting? Am I missing something?
Yep. You're missing that the manipulation being worked on the FoxNews viewers is to get them to vote for candidates who will act against the best interests of the majority of their voters. (How many of those voters are in the top 1% of the economy, after all?)

By contrast, people with more left-leaning or even centrist views, who are urged to vote for Democrats with the goal of supporting a rule-of-law platform, will be voting for measures that are in their own best interests.

The Republican "might makes right" platform will not benefit the majority of their voters, so getting those votes requires manipulation. Fortunately, due to the psychological makeup* of those voters, this can be accomplished with--you guessed it--Astonishing Ease.



Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
When you "manipulate" someone to do something it's based on negative emotions: envy, greed, gluttony, rage, resentment. So yes I agree with you that the republicans are masters at manipulation. But I don't see any inconsistency in it, if dems can't or won't "manipulate " people as the rebuplicans are doing.

You can't "manipulate" people to be decent and conscientious.
Well said.

As with any other con job, getting people to vote against their own interests partakes of exploitation of the weaknesses of the marks.



*The right-wing cultural distaste for education plays a role here, too.
  #62  
Old Today, 08:13 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
That seems like a silly place to draw the line. Say a guy votes for Democrats, and donates money to them, and so on, but never the Republicans; how am I to reply to someone else, who says that said voter is astonishingly easy to manipulate? Sure, he readily grants that Republicans can’t actually manipulate him into doing a damn thing; he just clarifies that it’s the Democrats who can and do manipulate that guy with ease. “With astonishing ease,” he slowly and patiently explains.

To me, that claim is as pointless as the other one: of course people get talked into supporting the side they support ‘with ease’, and don’t get talked into doing the reverse ‘with ease’. Is that interesting? Am I missing something?
Well Democrats and Republicans are different. You can't just say that as a conservative you are entitled to do whatever I do as a progressive and have it mean the same thing, because we are all equal, or something. You would probably be seen as disingenuous under those conditions in the rw. The conversation about how republicans vote has gone way beyond where you want it to go. So you are trying to make a big mud puddle and try to make everyone dirty.

I think the conversation has turned to why the right has gone in big for Putin and his platform, and seemingly committed moral/political suicide. When that happens people are going to look at your party and wonder what's up. If you don't then you are missing something or determined to miss something.

I get it. It's hard to be a rightie.
  #63  
Old Today, 08:47 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
Yep. You're missing that the manipulation being worked on the FoxNews viewers is to get them to vote for candidates who will act against the best interests of the majority of their voters. (How many of those voters are in the top 1% of the economy, after all?)

By contrast, people with more left-leaning or even centrist views, who are urged to vote for Democrats with the goal of supporting a rule-of-law platform, will be voting for measures that are in their own best interests.

The Republican "might makes right" platform will not benefit the majority of their voters, so getting those votes requires manipulation. Fortunately, due to the psychological makeup* of those voters, this can be accomplished with--you guessed it--Astonishing Ease.
Well, that helps make some sense of it, I guess. Clearly I disagree; I think what the Dems are pushing wouldn’t be in the best interests of those voters, and so from my perspective those voters are acting in their best interests and the Dems would need to manipulate them into doing otherwise — and so I didn’t get why the Dems wouldn’t, if you’re correct about it being so astonishingly easy.

But from your perspective, the right has an astonishingly easy time getting them to vote against their interests — while the left not only doesn’t get them to vote against their interests, but also doesn’t get them to vote for their interests, which, okay, granted, would be an interesting point.
  #64  
Old Today, 09:18 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,784
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
the whining and complaining and obvious projecting, by rebuplikans about how the dems supposedly "hate" Trump. Where the hell did that word come from? THe dude has been self impeaching for 3 years. No one fucking hates him.
I guess this is what political scientists mean when they say America now lives in two separate worlds of facts.

From what I can see, a great many people, including many Democrats, do "fucking hate" Trump.
  #65  
Old Today, 10:06 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
I guess this is what political scientists mean when they say America now lives in two separate worlds of facts.

From what I can see, a great many people, including many Democrats, do "fucking hate" Trump.
OK. I am allowed a clarification then:

People hate trump but it has nothing whatsoever to do with the fantastic claims of some rebuplikan pols, that somehow, animosity towards him predated his admitted flagrant public human offenses. He is also very notably, a troll, and for someone to describe any one as hating him: well it has no weight whatsoever in getting truth out of this.

Last edited by drad dog; Today at 10:08 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:05 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017