This ‘shibboleth’ is a perennial 800-pound gorilla for me when debating conservatives.
The argument can be about Obama’s birth certificate, Vince Foster’s ““suicide””, John Kerry’s fraudulent war record, Joe Biden’s pedophilia, Hillary’s child sex ring, or whether the purported invasion of Ukraine by Russia is 'fake news" (I just heard that last week from a Facebook friend).
After I’ve gone blue in the face asking for some semblance of evidence, I hesitantly suggest that just maybe, believing and living your life by Bronze Age myths marks you as being more willing to believe something–absent evidence–than the rest of us.
I’m invariably met with a barrage of names, the least ugly of which is “Bigot!”
The freedom of religion baked into American society is a very good thing. But it seems to have resulted in reduced critical thinking among (some of) the faithful.
Sometimes I’m not sure Trump’s fans really believe him. For a lot of them, it’s more about making their political opponents angry. “Owning the libs,” as I’ve heard it described by others. During the 2016 presidential campaign, I recall hearing a lot of people say that Trump didn’t mean what he said, was joking, or we were taking it out of context. This continued into his presidency as his handlers wouldn’t constantly walk back on a lot of his off-the-cuff remarks. “The president didn’t mean what he said he meant…”
But at the end of the day I guess your main thesis has merits. Lack of credibility is no longer an issue for a lot of American voters.
I’m sure you’re right. But it too is consistent with my thesis, at least the part about losing credibility with me when you espouse arrant bullshit. With me, that is. It doesn’t matter to me whether you actually believe the BS in your heart of hearts or if you’re just trying to make libs angry by spouting it. Either way, you’ve gotten on the record as saying it, and I will take you at your word that you believe arrant lies to be true. Your credibility with me is shot.
Used to be, I think, that folks cared if their word meant something, even with their opponents. Now I feel free to disregard every syllable out of GOPers’ mouths, even plausible or (dare I say?) true stuff. I can’t respect you, I can’t work with you, I certainly can’t trust you.
Huh. All this time I thought the phrase was “errant bullshit,” a bit of rhetorical duplication to emphasize how bullshit it is.
What I think changed the most was people’s assumptions. Everyone assumed that lying constantly would be a problem. Those so accused acted like it was. But slowly this started to change, with Trump being the ultimate liar. And, as long as he didn’t act like it hurt his credibility, it didn’t for a lot of people.
That’s not to say there weren’t prerequisites. People had to want to believe him. The stuff about wanting to own the libs, being encouraged to disregard facts, allowing politics to subsume religion and other moral principles, token gestures to throw the base, and a perceived “power”. There’s a reason why his support continues to drop. But Trump showed how viable this strategy is.
It’s always been there, under the surface. But people believed we were better, and so acted like it. Now they don’t.
This is an official Warning for arguing moderation in a thread. Complaints about moderation belong in ATMB or in PMs.
If you feel you were the subject of a personal attack, the appropriate way to handle that is to flag it for a moderator determination. You still have that option.