Jump to content


The Republican Utopia


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, sho said:

 

He's been this way for how long and NOW they decide to drop him?   I'm more upset they even supported him to start with.   Buying power is working but still angry about this.

Oh, I agree.  Like someone else said, these companies are all of a  sudden getting all moral now that it looks like he might lose.

Link to comment

That's the entire right's modus operandi, they push a consistent narrative to their flock of things that aren't true, but they repeat enough across their info sphere that they become "true" to their listeners and viewers and once it's taken in as fact it's designed to scare and outrage the hell out of them.  They do that because people that are afraid don't think rationally anymore and are more pliable to their "suggestions".  They use small boiled down descriptions and nicknames for things because they believe (rightly) their voters are too stupid to understand that saying something like "We want to cut your healthcare and retirement benefits and pass the savings onto corporations" and calling it "cutting entitlements" means the same f#&%ing thing, they test the phrasing in their little boiled down descriptions so they generate the maximum possible outrage.

 

They've been doing it for 30 years nationally and there are some real gems like pushing the narrative that second hand smoke isn't harmful or nicotine isn't addictive, coal/oil pollution doesn't cause climate change, and net neutrality is anti competition and bad for the consumer.

 

A true "skeptic" (or whatever fashionable term they are using now to describe their own believing a load of bulls#!t) would notice those are all narratives that benefit their biggest corporate donors.

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
8 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Protecting the border is a constitutional obligation. The myriad of Democratic handouts to buy votes are gimmicks.

 

 

This, also, is a gimmick. 

 

Let's say this caravan is a real legitimate threat. They're on foot. They're 1,000 miles away. So if they walk 25 miles a day, which would be a pretty impressive feat considering there are elderly/sick/children in the group, they'd get here in....40 days. Hardly an immediately pressing threat.

 

So we have an unprecedented activation of active troops, the largest of its kind in the last 100 years of non-war time, mobilized well over a month in advance to prepare for a conflict with about the same number (and by the time they get here, likely much less) of mostly unarmed, mostly exhausted, also probably mostly poor Central/Southern Americans looking for asylum. We also have the President repeatedly offering baseless claims of the nature of the caravan that have zero evidence whatsoever.

 

That seems at least marginally excessive and unnecessary as an actual precaution, but seems pretty useful as a stunt to galvanize voters who are fearful of illegals.

 

  • Fire 2
Link to comment

7 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

This, also, is a gimmick. 

 

Let's say this caravan is a real legitimate threat. They're on foot. They're 1,000 miles away. So if they walk 25 miles a day, which would be a pretty impressive feat considering there are elderly/sick/children in the group, they'd get here in....40 days. Hardly an immediately pressing threat.

Image result for breaking bad science

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

On 10/31/2018 at 12:04 PM, methodical said:

That's the entire right's modus operandi, they push a consistent narrative to their flock of things that aren't true, but they repeat enough across their info sphere that they become "true" to their listeners and viewers and once it's taken in as fact it's designed to scare and outrage the hell out of them.  They do that because people that are afraid don't think rationally anymore and are more pliable to their "suggestions".  They use small boiled down descriptions and nicknames for things because they believe (rightly) their voters are too stupid to understand that saying something like "We want to cut your healthcare and retirement benefits and pass the savings onto corporations" and calling it "cutting entitlements" means the same f#&%ing thing, they test the phrasing in their little boiled down descriptions so they generate the maximum possible outrage.

 

They've been doing it for 30 years nationally and there are some real gems like pushing the narrative that second hand smoke isn't harmful or nicotine isn't addictive, coal/oil pollution doesn't cause climate change, and net neutrality is anti competition and bad for the consumer.

 

A true "skeptic" (or whatever fashionable term they are using now to describe their own believing a load of bulls#!t) would notice those are all narratives that benefit their biggest corporate donors.

 

And Democrats do the same damn thing. But you seem to have missed it. And no one here on Bubble Board would either notice or point it out.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...