Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Hodgepodge
Jan 29, 2006
Probation
Can't post for 203 days!

Alkydere posted:

If bitcoins are involved, money-loss is guaranteed. Bitcoins seem designed to be lost.

Their whole deal is that you can't trace them when someone steals them, so yes.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Good Citizen
Aug 12, 2008

trump trump trump trump trump trump trump trump trump trump

Dr. Faustus posted:

Challenge accepted.

If you really feel like going to war with the tide then pol already exists so have at it

Kilroy
Oct 1, 2000

Hodgepodge posted:

Their whole deal is that you can't trace them when someone steals them, so yes.
You can usually trace them, you just can't do anything about it :)

VitalSigns
Sep 3, 2011

So they can never be stolen by the government!

Dr Christmas
Apr 24, 2010

Berninating the one percent,
Berninating the Wall St.
Berninating all the people
In their high rise penthouses!
🔥😱🔥🔫👴🏻
There is a bunch of news today that seems like it could either help or hurt either candidate based on how it's presented.

The most popular part of the Colin Powell email leak seems to be him talking about Bill Clinton "dicking bimbos." He has some unflattering things to say about Trump too.

There's the black pastor in Flint interrupting Trump when he starts talking about Clinton. How's that going over?

Finally, Ivanka cutting off the interview when pressed about her dad's misogyny could either make him look bad or make her look sympathetic.

So how's this going to pan out?

MikeCrotch
Nov 5, 2011

I AM UNJUSTIFIABLY PROUD OF MY SPAGHETTI BOLOGNESE RECIPE

YES, IT IS AN INCREDIBLY SIMPLE DISH

NO, IT IS NOT NORMAL TO USE A PEPPERAMI INSTEAD OF MINCED MEAT

YES, THERE IS TOO MUCH SALT IN MY RECIPE

NO, I WON'T STOP SHARING IT

more like BOLLOCKnese

Dr Christmas posted:

There is a bunch of news today that seems like it could either help or hurt either candidate based on how it's presented.

The most popular part of the Colin Powell email leak seems to be him talking about Bill Clinton "dicking bimbos." He has some unflattering things to say about Trump too.

There's the black pastor in Flint interrupting Trump when he starts talking about Clinton. How's that going over?

Finally, Ivanka cutting off the interview when pressed about her dad's misogyny could either make him look bad or make her look sympathetic.

So how's this going to pan out?

Badly for everyone

Let nuclear fire cleanse the world

Hail Satan

Eggplant Squire
Aug 14, 2003


"Turd Sandwich vs Giant Douche" again when even in your own show the choice is between a politician personified as lame and unlikable, and a guy saying he will kill millions of people. Uhhh.

Geostomp
Oct 22, 2008

Unite: MASH!!
~They've got the bad guys on the run!~

Radish posted:

"Turd Sandwich vs Giant Douche" again when even in your own show the choice is between a politician personified as lame and unlikable, and a guy saying he will kill millions of people. Uhhh.

But it proves you are so edgy and irreverent.

Eggplant Squire
Aug 14, 2003


Geostomp posted:

But it proves you are so edgy and irreverent.

See they got the edge on you since they also mocked people complaining about them for that.

Like with the original Douche vs Turd you could maybe make the claim that the Democrats and Republicans both sucked because the last Republican was boring Bush Sr and Clinton was kind of sketchy on a personal level. However after eight years of Bush and then Trump's nightmare campaign of blatant incompetence mixed with hate vs Hillary being as worst a standard politician with some mild scandals I have no idea how you make that equivalence and don't shrink up your own rear end in a top hat.

Also specifically calling the female candidate "Turd Sandwich" when no other politician gets that done is kinda ehhhh...

Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 12:45 on Sep 15, 2016

i am the bird
Mar 2, 2005

I SUPPORT ALL THE PREDATORS
Does anyone have that Steven Crowder tweet where was trying to say he/men had a natural preference for vaginas but poorly worded it and implied he wanted to gently caress his mom?

Levantine
Feb 14, 2005

GUNDAM!!!

i am the bird posted:

Does anyone have that Steven Crowder tweet where was trying to say he/men had a natural preference for vaginas but poorly worded it and implied he wanted to gently caress his mom?

Something about preferring the orifice from whence he came or something. I still chuckle about it every time I think of Crowder, which thankfully is only when I read this thread.

edit: https://twitter.com/scrowder/status/732367986636423168

Jurgan
May 8, 2007

Just pour it directly into your gaping mouth-hole you decadent slut

Notice they didn't say anything about the politics of the story, just the awful writing.

Proust Malone
Apr 4, 2008

Radish posted:

Also specifically calling the female candidate "Turd Sandwich" when no other politician gets that done is kinda ehhhh...

Turd sandwich has an additional layer of meaning in that it's inevitable. "It's a giant poo poo sandwich and were all going to have to take a bite."

Also South Park is terrible and always has been.

i am the bird
Mar 2, 2005

I SUPPORT ALL THE PREDATORS

Levantine posted:

Something about preferring the orifice from whence he came or something. I still chuckle about it every time I think of Crowder, which thankfully is only when I read this thread.

edit: https://twitter.com/scrowder/status/732367986636423168

Perfect, thanks. He tweeted a story about his mom in relation to Tyree King's murder so I felt obligated to ask if he still wanted to bang her.

Sir Tonk
Apr 18, 2006
Young Orc

This is the greatest thing they ever did, other than Orgazmo.

Secret Agent X23
May 11, 2005

Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore.

Levantine posted:

Something about preferring the orifice from whence he came or something. I still chuckle about it every time I think of Crowder, which thankfully is only when I read this thread.

edit: https://twitter.com/scrowder/status/732367986636423168

Yeah. And the thing is, I've seen that joke circulate in a somewhat more carefully worded version. Something like "A guy comes out of one and then spends the rest of his life trying to get back into one." Even that's just a little bit too close to creepy for my taste because it seems to be very obviously trying to avoid that very implication and therefore calling it to mind. But at least it makes the reader/listener work a little bit to make it mean "wants to gently caress his mom" instead of saying it outright.

So there's a better version out there, and there was really no excuse for him to gently caress it up that way.

i say swears online
Mar 4, 2005

wait Jason "Rush Limbaugh" Lewis is running for loving congress? oh my god

Twelve by Pies
May 4, 2012

Again a very likpatous story
The title "When Reality Turned Inside Out" is completely appropriate for this post but not in the way Adams thinks it is.

Drilbur posted:

Do you remember way—-way—-way—back in July, when the public thought Trump was the candidate they couldn’t trust with the nuclear arsenal? That was before we realized he could moderate his personality on command, as he is doing now. We’re about to enter our fifth consecutive week of Trump doing more outreach than outrage.

It turns out that Trump’s base personality is “winning.” Everything else he does is designed to get that result. He needed to be loud and outrageous in the primaries, so he was. He needs to be presidential in this phase of the election cycle, so he is.

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton has revealed herself to be frail, medicated, and probably duplicitous about her health. We also hear reports that she’s a drinker with a bad temper. Suddenly, Clinton looks like the unstable personality in this race. Who do you want controlling the nuclear arsenal now?

You probably thought Trump was the bigot in this contest, until Clinton called half of Trump’s supporters a “basket of deplorables.” That’s the point at which observers started to see a pattern. Trump has been consistently supportive of American citizens of all types – with the exception of the press and his political opponents. The main targets of Trump’s rhetoric are the nations that compete against us. In stark contrast, Clinton turned her hate on American citizens. That’s the real kind of hate. Trump is more about keeping America safe and competing effectively in the world. That is literally the job of president.

Trump was once the candidate that the LGBTQ community found easy to hate. Then it turned out that Trump is the loudest voice for protecting America against the anti-gay ideology that Clinton would increase in this country via immigration. At the GOP convention, Republicans stood and applauded Trump’s full-throated support of the LGBTQ community. While Clinton was talking about a better society, Trump was transforming the Republican Party into one. (Yes, I know there is more to do.)

You might remember a few months ago when Clinton had lots of policy details and Trump had few. Clinton still holds the lead in the number of bullet-points-per-policy, but while she rests, Trump has been rolling out policy details on one topic after another. Perception-wise, the optics of “who has policy details” has flipped. (Reality isn’t important in this context.)

Do you remember over a year ago, when Trump first entered the race? Social media relentlessly insulted his physical appearance. They mocked his orange hair and his orange skin. They called him a clown. They called him a Cheeto. It was brutal.

But over time, Trump’s haircut improved. He softened the color to something more blonde than orange And his fake tan and TV makeup improved too. Today, if you ask a voter to name the candidate for president who “looks bad,” the answer would probably be Clinton, primarily because of her recent health issues. In our minds, Clinton went from being a stylish and energetic personality to a hospice patient dressed like a North Korean dictator at a rave.

Not long ago, you would have said Clinton was the strongest candidate for protecting citizens who need the help of social programs. Then Trump unveiled his plan for childcare and senior care. You can debate the details, and the cost, but nearly everyone recognized the idea as a critical need for working class people.

In other words, the world is turning inside-out, right in front of our eyes. I summarized this surprising reversal in the most popular tweet I have ever created.

[image of Adams' tweet saying "Our next president will either be an offensive, rich, divisive, bigot with a bad haircut or Donald Trump"]

That’s how a Master Persuader does it. A year ago, I told you that Trump was bringing a flamethrower to a stick fight. His talent for persuasion is so strong that he has effectively flipped the script and rewired the brains of the people watching this show.

But I’ll bet you still think Trump is “thin-skinned,” primarily because Clinton’s team has done a great job of branding him that way. The label sticks because Trump has a pattern of going on offense whenever he is attacked. But let me give you another framework to see this same set of facts. Specifically, I’m going to tell you how Master Persuaders convert embarrassment into energy. It’s a learned skill.

I often talk about the benefits I got from taking the Dale Carnegie course. One of the skills you learn in that class is how to convert your anxiousness about public speaking into excitement and positive energy. I personally observed the Dale Carnegie course turning a few dozen introverts into people who were enthusiastic about speaking in front of a crowd. It was astonishing.

Part of the Dale Carnegie process involved each student doing something embarrassing in front of the class just to get used to the feeling, and to know you could survive it. It is one of the best skills you can learn because our egos tend to hold us back. We fear embarrassment so we don’t risk it. That limits our potential.

Now think back to 2011, at the Correspondent’s Dinner, in which President Obama mocked Donald Trump in front of the world – while Trump sat in the audience, stone-faced. The popular reporting was that Trump was humiliated by the event. But Master Persuaders don’t process humiliation the same way as others. They convert it to energy, the same way Dale Carnegie students learn to convert anxiousness to excitement. It’s a learned skill. And it is literally the opposite of having a thin skin. It only looks the same because of confirmation bias.

How do I know Trump has mastered the skill of converting humiliation into energy? The signs are all there. For example…

Trump has entered one high-risk business after another, guaranteeing that he would experience a large number of setbacks, failures, and humiliations. People don’t run toward humiliation unless they know they can convert that negative energy to fuel. When you see someone succeed across multiple unrelated fields, that’s often a sign of a Master Persuader who feeds on both success and failure. You are watching Trump do exactly that, right in front of your eyes. He has converted every “gaffe” into news coverage. He eats bad news and converts it into fuel.

Many of you have watched me do the same thing. You’ve watched as I jumped fields from corporate America to cartooning. Then I became an author of business-related books. I opened two restaurants that didn’t work out. I tried lots of stuff that failed miserably. Now I’m talking about the presidential election. What do all of those things have in common?

I risked public humiliation in each case.

And in each case, lots of people told me “Keep your day job.” On a typical day, dozens of strangers insult my body, my personality, my brain, my integrity, and lots more. Like Trump, I consume it as fuel. And it is a learned skill.

You might have noticed that both Trump and I are quick to attack anyone who attacks us. Observers tell me I shouldn’t do that, because it makes me appear thin-skinned. Observers tell Trump the same thing. But observers are missing one important thing: We use the critics to refuel

If you were an alien from another planet, and you observed a lion killing a gazelle, you might think that lion was angry at its prey. You might think the lion was insulted that the gazelle was using its watering hole. What did the gazelle do to deserve that treatment? Is the lion being thin-skinned?

Trust me when I tell you that sometimes the lion is just eating.

Whole lot to go through here.

  • Trump is more trustworthy than Clinton with nukes even though he repeatedly asked in a briefing why we couldn't use them.
  • Clinton is actually the one hating on American citizens, not Trump. Ignore that Trump literally attacked a judge solely because of his race, and that he claims immigrants from Mexico are rapists and criminals. That doesn't count as attacking American citizens because...um...NEXT
  • Trump has turned the Republican party into a pro-LGBT party. No, really! Quit laughing!
  • Ben Garrison's depictions of Trump and Clinton are now reality.
  • Trump said maybe we should help the middle class with a really bad plan so that immediately makes him better on all social issues than Clinton.
  • It only looks like Trump is a thin-skinned baby who can't take criticism, in actuality people who feel the obsessive need to attack anyone who slightly criticizes them are showing that they're really strong and confident.
  • Trump actually only failed in business ventures so much because he loves failing since it makes him stronger.
  • Here is an analogy about aliens and lions that makes no goddamn sense.

Huzanko
Aug 4, 2015

by FactsAreUseless
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dxcp0pd4k_4

Phone
Jul 30, 2005

親子丼をほしい。
Having enthusiasm for things and emotions outside of disdain and disgust: basic.

anonumos
Jul 14, 2005

Fuck it.

whatsiface posted:

You probably thought Trump was the bigot in this contest, until Clinton called half of Trump’s supporters a “basket of deplorables.”

Calling out bigotry makes you a bigot. Gotcha.

Levantine
Feb 14, 2005

GUNDAM!!!

anonumos posted:

Calling out bigotry makes you a bigot. Gotcha.

Calling someone racist is far worse than racism. "Racist" is the only word that holds any power over whites.

Chilichimp
Oct 24, 2006

TIE Adv xWampa

It wamp, and it stomp

Grimey Drawer

I really hate infowars, and this brittish youtube dickbag is the worst one.

Anyone else think that this video actually fits several of criteria he outlined for basic bitch status?

Chilichimp fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Sep 15, 2016

Huzanko
Aug 4, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

Chilichimp posted:

I really hate infowars, and this brittish youtube dickbag is the worst one.

Anyone else think that this video actually fits several of criteria he outlined for basic bitch status?

He's loving terrible. If Infowars is cancer, that little british poo poo is an infected tumor inside that cancer... or whatever... it's bad.

BigRed0427
Mar 23, 2007

There's no one I'd rather be than me.

Thinking back on South Park, I really wonder how I didn't become a massive libertarian poo poo heel. One that just now sticks out to me is the episode where a music festival comes to South Park. Everyone attending the concert are college kids who smoke pot and talk about how much capitalism sucks and how they are gonna change the world. And depicts this as a bad thing because they are just being lazy. It basically demonizes an entire stage of maturity college kids go through. Plus the show calls them all hippies yet their image of hippies is still the 1960s tye dye and VW buses in mid 2000s. It comes off as a Kelly cartoon, shaking their fists at not only kids these days but kids when they were kids.

Edit: "It's lazy and selfish to spend a week enjoying yourself and wonder how to make the world better" is my take away.

Mechanical Ape
Aug 7, 2007

But yes, occasionally I am known to smash.
I can't want to see Scott Adams' response after Hillary wins. Not even in a schadenfreude way. I'm honestly, clinically curious what eighth-dimensional theory he'll come up with.

BigRed0427
Mar 23, 2007

There's no one I'd rather be than me.

One more hot take on South Park. After the rise of the Alt Right, a character like Eric Cartman stops being funny.

iospace
Jan 19, 2038


BigRed0427 posted:

One more hot take on South Park. After the rise of the Alt Right, a character like Eric Cartman stops being funny.

What do you think inspired them? They all wanna be Cartman.

nine-gear crow
Aug 10, 2013

BigRed0427 posted:

One more hot take on South Park. After the rise of the Alt Right, a character like Eric Cartman stops being funny.

Having known an entire collection of real life Eric Cartmans growing up through junior and senior high school, I never particularly found Cartman to be all that funny.

BiggerBoat
Sep 26, 2007

Don't you tell me my business again.
For anyone who still doubts how pervasive and influential RWM has become, and how it's permeated generationally, all you have to do is look at how close this election has become to confirm it. They've got mainstream media actually tilting their coverage for fear of being accused of bias. Whenever one of their own is called out, all they have to do is play the "liberal media - 'gotcha question'" card and, sadly, it works more than it should.

These folks are absolute experts at framing the narrative and keeping the opposition on defense. For example, take the war in Iraq. Prior to the invasion, it was all "USA, USA!" and if you voiced opposition, your patriotism was called into question. Once it became a quagmire and went to poo poo, for a time it was "Saddam DID have WMD's" and "he hid them in Syria". Smears against John Kerry's service from the "support our troops" party and the outing of a CIA agent whose husband exposed the lies ensued.

As the tide continued to turn, Obama, acting on Bush's timeline for withdrawal, became the reason the region was lost and now they're blaming him for the rise of ISIS, the destabilization of the region, Benghazi, etc. This election season, we've actually come full circle, with the GOP nominee being LAUDED for his (false) opposition to the Iraq War the entire time and Hillary Clinton actually being put on the defensive for voting for it.

The Republican nominee is actually getting points from the RW pundits for opposing a war that these idiots not too long ago used as a measuring stick for gauging one's patriotism and ruthlessly drummed up support for. Somehow, over time and without anyone even noticing, they've wound up championing Trump's lie (that he opposed the invasion), deducting points from Hillary for "voting for it", blaming Obama for losing it and seem to express themselves with the generally accepted fact that, of course, that the war was bullshit and shame on the Democrats for loving it up.

It's an astonishing 180 when you view it entirely in context and watch it evolve (devolve?) over a decade or so. How do they do that? Do they think no one records or even listens to the poo poo they say? That we have no memory at all? How do they pull it off?

Jon Stewart could really do a great segment on this.

This election should be a loving landslide but somehow they've managed to convince the American public of their BS to the point where it's uncomfortably close. I'm not even sure Hillary is going to win at this point.

Instant Sunrise
Apr 12, 2007


The manger babies don't have feelings. You said it yourself.
One of the worst examples of that was after Obama was elected and some memos came out that said that "Yeah the CIA really was torturing people during the Bush years," the RWM's focus shifted from trying to defend the torture of human beings, and claiming that waterboarding wasn't torture etc etc. To attacking Nancy Pelosi as knowing about it as if that made her 100% responsible.

iospace
Jan 19, 2038


BiggerBoat posted:

For anyone who still doubts how pervasive and influential RWM has become, and how it's permeated generationally, all you have to do is look at how close this election has become to confirm it. They've got mainstream media actually tilting their coverage for fear of being accused of bias. Whenever one of their own is called out, all they have to do is play the "liberal media - 'gotcha question'" card and, sadly, it works more than it should.

These folks are absolute experts at framing the narrative and keeping the opposition on defense. For example, take the war in Iraq. Prior to the invasion, it was all "USA, USA!" and if you voiced opposition, your patriotism was called into question. Once it became a quagmire and went to poo poo, for a time it was "Saddam DID have WMD's" and "he hid them in Syria". Smears against John Kerry's service from the "support our troops" party and the outing of a CIA agent whose husband exposed the lies ensued.

As the tide continued to turn, Obama, acting on Bush's timeline for withdrawal, became the reason the region was lost and now they're blaming him for the rise of ISIS, the destabilization of the region, Benghazi, etc. This election season, we've actually come full circle, with the GOP nominee being LAUDED for his (false) opposition to the Iraq War the entire time and Hillary Clinton actually being put on the defensive for voting for it.

The Republican nominee is actually getting points from the RW pundits for opposing a war that these idiots not too long ago used as a measuring stick for gauging one's patriotism and ruthlessly drummed up support for. Somehow, over time and without anyone even noticing, they've wound up championing Trump's lie (that he opposed the invasion), deducting points from Hillary for "voting for it", blaming Obama for losing it and seem to express themselves with the generally accepted fact that, of course, that the war was bullshit and shame on the Democrats for loving it up.

It's an astonishing 180 when you view it entirely in context and watch it evolve (devolve?) over a decade or so. How do they do that? Do they think no one records or even listens to the poo poo they say? That we have no memory at all? How do they pull it off?

Jon Stewart could really do a great segment on this.

This election should be a loving landslide but somehow they've managed to convince the American public of their BS to the point where it's uncomfortably close. I'm not even sure Hillary is going to win at this point.

The logical conclusion is poo poo like this:
https://twitter.com/BrendanNyhan/status/776536518579986432

Crowsbeak
Oct 9, 2012

by Azathoth
Lipstick Apathy

Hang them all from lamp posts. Also lets start including CNN on this forum.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Geostomp
Oct 22, 2008

Unite: MASH!!
~They've got the bad guys on the run!~

BiggerBoat posted:

For anyone who still doubts how pervasive and influential RWM has become, and how it's permeated generationally, all you have to do is look at how close this election has become to confirm it. They've got mainstream media actually tilting their coverage for fear of being accused of bias. Whenever one of their own is called out, all they have to do is play the "liberal media - 'gotcha question'" card and, sadly, it works more than it should.

These folks are absolute experts at framing the narrative and keeping the opposition on defense. For example, take the war in Iraq. Prior to the invasion, it was all "USA, USA!" and if you voiced opposition, your patriotism was called into question. Once it became a quagmire and went to poo poo, for a time it was "Saddam DID have WMD's" and "he hid them in Syria". Smears against John Kerry's service from the "support our troops" party and the outing of a CIA agent whose husband exposed the lies ensued.

As the tide continued to turn, Obama, acting on Bush's timeline for withdrawal, became the reason the region was lost and now they're blaming him for the rise of ISIS, the destabilization of the region, Benghazi, etc. This election season, we've actually come full circle, with the GOP nominee being LAUDED for his (false) opposition to the Iraq War the entire time and Hillary Clinton actually being put on the defensive for voting for it.

The Republican nominee is actually getting points from the RW pundits for opposing a war that these idiots not too long ago used as a measuring stick for gauging one's patriotism and ruthlessly drummed up support for. Somehow, over time and without anyone even noticing, they've wound up championing Trump's lie (that he opposed the invasion), deducting points from Hillary for "voting for it", blaming Obama for losing it and seem to express themselves with the generally accepted fact that, of course, that the war was bullshit and shame on the Democrats for loving it up.

It's an astonishing 180 when you view it entirely in context and watch it evolve (devolve?) over a decade or so. How do they do that? Do they think no one records or even listens to the poo poo they say? That we have no memory at all? How do they pull it off?

Jon Stewart could really do a great segment on this.

This election should be a loving landslide but somehow they've managed to convince the American public of their BS to the point where it's uncomfortably close. I'm not even sure Hillary is going to win at this point.

The Republicans have worked drat hard to ensure that facts, morality, and even what they said less than a week ago don't make a difference if they don't want them to. Hitching onto the endless rage and hatred of white America was the best possible thing for them.

iospace
Jan 19, 2038


https://twitter.com/SykesCharlie/status/776570044419416064

Keeshhound
Jan 14, 2010

Mad Duck Swagger

Dr Christmas posted:

Finally, Ivanka cutting off the interview when pressed about her dad's misogyny could either make him look bad or make her look sympathetic.

So how's this going to pan out?

Earlier I saw Forbes listing an article titled "Ivanka Trump showed Cosmo how a person with class behaves," but when I clicked on the link I got a 404 error; did someone at Forbes finally read the transcript and realize how out of touch that headline was?

McAlister
Nov 3, 2002

by exmarx

Twelve by Pies posted:

He also attacked Hillary as an "elitist" and was like "Do you think she's ever worked a regular job before? She's never washed dishes or waited tables or bartended. She doesn't know what it's like." And the very first thing I thought was "And you think Trump has done those things you goddamn idiot?"

Hillary and Bill were both middle class kids on merit scholarships. They held normal kid jobs.

Hillary volunteered at a free daycare for migrant farm workers as a teen and worked briefly at a factory gutting fish in Alaska in the summer between college and grad school. She was unable to keep up with the production line ( gutting fish at speed is skilled labor ) and let go from that job so she found an office job instead. She worked every summer in college and part time during some school years.

I wonder how many presidents have changed a diaper for one of their own children - never mind the children of others.

Paolomania
Apr 26, 2006

Geostomp posted:

The Republicans have worked drat hard to ensure that facts, morality, and even what they said less than a week ago don't make a difference if they don't want them to. Hitching onto the endless rage and hatred of white America was the best possible thing for them.

They didn't hitch on to it so much as foment and incubate it. After years of taste-testing the "YOU ARE UNDER ATTACK! YOU HAVE BEEN WRONGED!" I've seen well adjusted people with good lives descend into bitter rage-monsters who ignore how good their lives are. My father was one. More recently, I've seen a good friend FDR dem go from Bernie bro to avid Breitbart reader. The power of masterful propaganda is terrifying.

Ivan Shitskin
Nov 29, 2002

BiggerBoat posted:

For anyone who still doubts how pervasive and influential RWM has become, and how it's permeated generationally, all you have to do is look at how close this election has become to confirm it. They've got mainstream media actually tilting their coverage for fear of being accused of bias. Whenever one of their own is called out, all they have to do is play the "liberal media - 'gotcha question'" card and, sadly, it works more than it should.

These folks are absolute experts at framing the narrative and keeping the opposition on defense. For example, take the war in Iraq. Prior to the invasion, it was all "USA, USA!" and if you voiced opposition, your patriotism was called into question. Once it became a quagmire and went to poo poo, for a time it was "Saddam DID have WMD's" and "he hid them in Syria". Smears against John Kerry's service from the "support our troops" party and the outing of a CIA agent whose husband exposed the lies ensued.

As the tide continued to turn, Obama, acting on Bush's timeline for withdrawal, became the reason the region was lost and now they're blaming him for the rise of ISIS, the destabilization of the region, Benghazi, etc. This election season, we've actually come full circle, with the GOP nominee being LAUDED for his (false) opposition to the Iraq War the entire time and Hillary Clinton actually being put on the defensive for voting for it.

The Republican nominee is actually getting points from the RW pundits for opposing a war that these idiots not too long ago used as a measuring stick for gauging one's patriotism and ruthlessly drummed up support for. Somehow, over time and without anyone even noticing, they've wound up championing Trump's lie (that he opposed the invasion), deducting points from Hillary for "voting for it", blaming Obama for losing it and seem to express themselves with the generally accepted fact that, of course, that the war was bullshit and shame on the Democrats for loving it up.

It's an astonishing 180 when you view it entirely in context and watch it evolve (devolve?) over a decade or so. How do they do that? Do they think no one records or even listens to the poo poo they say? That we have no memory at all? How do they pull it off?

Jon Stewart could really do a great segment on this.

This election should be a loving landslide but somehow they've managed to convince the American public of their BS to the point where it's uncomfortably close. I'm not even sure Hillary is going to win at this point.

I've noticed that a lot of Trump supporters are fully aware of how much he blatantly lies about just about anything, and actually celebrate him for it. They think it's funny. Like in a "haha Trump totally trolled the hell out of those reporters" kind of way. "Trolling" is probably the most important word to describe this election IMO. The Pepe meme with the smug face like :smug: and a Trump hat that I see everywhere is an example of it. They think it's hilarious how all the lies and bullshit pisses off liberals, and they love every minute of it. They vote based entirely on white identity politics and don't give the slightest poo poo what Trump's or the GOP's policies actually are. Do they care or are even aware of what the GOP tax plan happens to be? gently caress no. Do they care that Trump lied about support for the Iraq war? Nope.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BiggerBoat
Sep 26, 2007

Don't you tell me my business again.

Geostomp posted:

The Republicans have worked drat hard to ensure that facts, morality, and even what they said less than a week ago don't make a difference if they don't want them to. Hitching onto the endless rage and hatred of white America was the best possible thing for them.

Same thing with tele-prompters. Hannity praises Trump for using one every chance he gets. But Obama uses one and he's a retard.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply