|
Dante Logos posted:I've read some of the literature on political rhetoric and PR and I've never heard about the "we will probably lose, oh well, enjoy Republican rule jerks" tactic before. It was always framed as "we need your help to do X thing". Did they hire these guys from Romney's campaign team? They went with his healthcare plan so why not?
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 10:57 |
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:This and Reagan. Reagan peeled off lots of white democrats and murdered unions. It's a tightrope for establishment democrats to hang on to waning constituencies while expanding the tent to minority ethnic groups. Pretty sure white people are stone stupid then, and I say this as a white guy. I cannot fathom how a person would feel that other folks getting rights would negatively impact them, and enough that they're willing to burn the house down over it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
Dystram posted:Pretty sure white people are stone stupid then, and I say this as a white guy. I don't understand it either, but I see it every...loving...DAY
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
Dystram posted:Pretty sure white people are stone stupid then, and I say this as a white guy. It's corporate politics applied to the US government- just as Reagan wanted. The American public is openly encouraged to compete against one-another.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 04:01
|
|
|
hangedman1984 posted:I don't understand it either, but I see it every...loving...DAY Same. I have to believe ~90% of whites are just terrified morons, scared of their own shadows, and willing to vote for any authoritarian personality that comes along to make the world a worse place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 04:01
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:It's corporate politics applied to the US government- just as Reagan wanted. The American public is openly encouraged to compete against one-another. Maybe, but most don't compete at all. They show up to dead end jobs and go home and watch American Idol. There's no competing; just drooling mouth breathers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
Quote of the night, "I suspect the first thing I would do is to say to the country, 'You're probably in as much shock as I am and we should all go to God in prayer because we're going to need it to get America out of the problems it's currently in'" ~ the Definer of Civilization's Rules and Leader (possibly) of the Civilizing Forces on what he'd do first as President.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
Dystram posted:Pretty sure white people are stone stupid then, and I say this as a white guy. First they lost the right to scream "friend of the family!" at anyone with slightly darker skin color. Now they're in the middle of losing the right to scream "FAG!" at any man that takes care of his body and has better skin than them. In short, they don't see people gaining rights as a good thing, they instead see it as the degradation of their white privilege to insult, degrade, abuse and disenfranchise anyone who's not a member of the White's Only club. It's not a good thing to them because they're afraid they might have to compete and share their slice of the good-life pie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
Reagan brought the modern version of events to a head, but it's not like trying to turn Americans against each other is anything new. I know in SC at least, plantation owners were loving terrified the rural poor white farmers would finally figure out that they had it almost as bad as the blacks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 04:31
|
|
|
Triskelli posted:Reagan brought the modern version of events to a head, but it's not like trying to turn Americans against each other is anything new. I know in SC at least, plantation owners were loving terrified the rural poor white farmers would finally figure out that they had it almost as bad as the blacks. To oversimplify greatly, this was also a large part of why white indenture faded out, particularly after some terrifying (to plantation owners) instances of cross-racial solidarity in some of the early slave uprisings in colonial America.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 04:33
|
|
|
Dystram posted:Same. I have to believe ~90% of whites are just terrified morons, scared of their own shadows, and willing to vote for any authoritarian personality that comes along to make the world a worse place. Yep
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 04:35
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Quote of the night, "I suspect the first thing I would do is to say to the country, 'You're probably in as much shock as I am and we should all go to God in prayer because we're going to need it to get America out of the problems it's currently in'" ~ the Definer of Civilization's Rules and Leader (possibly) of the Civilizing Forces on what he'd do first as President. I'm social friends with his half-sister and I want to give her a wedgie and have it be telepathically transmitted to him somehow
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
All in favor of "Quarantine? More like Qu'rantine" say aye.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 06:55
|
|
|
Dystram posted:Same. I have to believe ~90% of whites are just terrified morons, scared of their own shadows, and willing to vote for any authoritarian personality that comes along to make the world a worse place. It is true. Go ask any white person what they think has happened to crime rates over the past 20 years (they will tell you that crime rates have grown exponentially since The Age of Reagan, to the point that America is one loose lugnut from being a Mad Max dieselpunk wasteland). Then pull up statistics and look at what has actually happened to crime rates over the past two decades (you will see a steady decline since the Age of Reagan/Reagan II). On no account attempt to share this information with the white person, however. All federal statistics were made up by The Democrats to keep sheeple from realizing that they long ago sold the country to The Coloreds in exchange for illegal (for some reason) votes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 07:28
|
|
|
wrong thread
Lycus fucked around with this message at 08:41 on Nov 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 08:17
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:It is true.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 08:45
|
|
|
Has anyone been seeing these Robert Burke commercials on youtube ads where the kids tell you to vote for Robert Burke for governor because he supports marijuana legalization? At first I thought it was real but then the second time I got suspicious and at the end it said paid for by American Future Fund. It's hard to believe they think the rabidly anti marijuana likely voters will outnumber the ironic millenials stirred to action with these.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 09:11
|
|
|
Man election in 20-30 years in Arkansas are gonna be really interesting. I can already see the Atheist MRA Republican candidates squaring off against the goody two shoed Democrat ones.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 09:41
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:On no account attempt to share this information with the white person, however. All federal statistics were made up by The Democrats to keep sheeple from realizing that they long ago sold the country to The Coloreds in exchange for illegal (for some reason) votes. One important thing I learned from following politics, it is that the data doesn't matter, no matter how overwhelming. Obviously this doesn't work for every political issue. It doesn't matter if violent crime has plummeted universally, yet rates of incarceration have increased. We still need to be tough on crime and treat people like animals. Oh, and run for-profit prisons. I'm sure there's no conflict for a company reliant on imprisoning people to lower recidivism among its inmates. It doesn't matter that there's a massive (>95%) consensus of climatologists, scientists and others who know that our planet is warming at an alarming rate and our oceans are acidifying. Don't you know it was cold yesterday and you could still buy Fish at the Long John's Silvers? It doesn't matter that voter fraud is statically insignificant. And that the majority of the population doesn't even give enough of a gently caress to vote, let alone commit a crime to do it more than once. Yet we need voter ID laws because they might try to put communists in the white house. It doesn't matter that the majority of school shooters and mass shooters are mentally ill and can secure easy access to weapons. If we restrict guns to anyone for even the most sensible of reasons, then the government will start taking all our guns. And mental illness is a personal weakness, gently caress treating these people. Having a modicum of intelligence is ridiculed and everything comes down to 'gut feelings'. It doesn't matter how much information you have, how compelling the evidence is, or even if you've conclusively disproved every one of their logical fallacies. They're still coming for your guns, crime is running rampant, voter fraud is a real thing and climate change is a liberal invention. Dapper Dan fucked around with this message at 10:40 on Nov 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 10:33
|
|
|
As a general rule if people get used to a status quo for a few years they will be hesitant to believe that it has changed, especially if it's an issue that doesn't effect them personally. I'm not just talking about politics, mind you. Take a benign subject like anti-virus, for example. For about 3-4 years it was considered gospel that Norton/etc sucked and all you ever really needed was Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE). Then some (potentially flawed) tests came out and now people say that MSE is bad and you should use Avast/Nod/etc instead. And then you have still other people who say that anti-viruses are junk these days and all you need to do is restrict usage of Adobe Flash Player and Java (which seems to be the most correct these days). Or take diets. "Low fat!" "Low carb!" "Paleo!" "Low carb again!" etc. With so much conflicting information it's no wonder that people just tune out after a while and "go with their gut".
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 13:39
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:First they lost the right to scream "friend of the family!" at anyone with slightly darker skin color. Now they're in the middle of losing the right to scream "FAG!" at any man that takes care of his body and has better skin than them. This is the real truth that doesn't like to get put out by either side of the debate. White/christian/straight/male people do lose de facto rights from civil rights reform, but only because these are rights that no man should have had in the first place. Nobody should be put at the front of the line for theses things, but god drat will the detritus fight to keep from having it taken away from them. Think of all the affirmative action court cases. The white people being declined are idiots. Who the hell would actually admit that they are enough of a loser that they couldn't gain admission into a major state school? These are the modestly incompetent high school students who are denied so we can put an at least moderately competent person of color in their place. Society is better for it since we're better off educating the best first, but of course the sense of entitlement has them screaming that they might have to go to a lower tiered school and work a normal job instead of their personal dream. I'd call that progress, but I'm also competent enough and aimed low enough that I could actually get what I dreamed of.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
Dapper Dan posted:One important thing I learned from following politics, it is that the data doesn't matter, no matter how overwhelming. Obviously this doesn't work for every political issue. But don't you see, the reason crime rates have dropped is because we lock up all the nigg..er..um..thugs
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
Dapper Dan posted:It doesn't matter that voter fraud is statically insignificant. Apparently not. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 16:06
|
|
This poster loves police brutality, but only when its against minorities!
|
Samurai Sanders posted:What's weird is that unless I am mistaken, Hollywood actually has reflected the difference between the 70s and 80s, when street crime was heading up with no end in sight, and now. I can't think of any popular Dirty Harry type movie series that started since crime started its decline. Yet, people still haven't caught on that things really are going in a different direction now. Hollywood is a complicated beast. There might not be a ton of films focusing on Street Crime, but the same "man, poo poo sure isn't like it used to be," sentiment is still a common one even when "the way poo poo used to be" falls squarely in the middle of the 80s/early-90s crime epidemic. Hollywood loves to go negative for texture reasons. And then there are the period films that people donk't realize are period films. It'kind of similar to the way Hollywood is supposedly a strong force for liberal social progress (and should legitimately get major kudos for helping to turn the tide on public perception of gays in this country, along with a couple of other things) but tends to be subtly racist and contributes to public anti-intellectualism (of the sort that keeps people from accepting overshwelhing scientific consensus on important topics) by latching onto and sensationalizing conspiratorial views of the intelligentsia. Hollywood is a two-edged sword.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:Apparently not. Okay, on a list of "Things that are killing americans" school shootings are as about as statisitically significant as deaths from Ebola, but the fact that we even have school shootings when other developed nations have few to none is important. We just need to move the discussion away from "no one should ever have guns" and "it's my right to be able to walk into Wal-mart and buy a shotgun no questions asked", and being able to intercept people buying them for emotional reasons. I've always considered doing things like the driver's license would be the best bet, because it's easy to get people to agree that a gun is as deadly as a car. You'd need to have a license to own any firearm, to get a license you need to pass a test demonstrating gun safety and responsibility, and you'd need to renew that license every 3-5 years. If you don't have a license then authorities are allowed to confiscate your weapon until you recieve one. This would come with a ban on interpersonal sale of guns, so that for every shithead that says "criminals will still use guns" we can say "yes, but now when we get them off the streets they'll stay off the streets". Aside from that though all the bullshit about magazine restrictions, what types of guns you're allowed to have, the differences between a concealed and open carry license, those go out the window. Are there any politicians really pushing gun reform rather than "ban all the guns" or "no restrictions ever"?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:What's weird is that unless I am mistaken, Hollywood actually has reflected the difference between the 70s and 80s, when street crime was heading up with no end in sight, and now. I can't think of any popular Dirty Harry type movie series that started since crime started its decline. Yet, people still haven't caught on that things really are going in a different direction now. I suppose one should determine what the demographics are that still think the crime rate is rising. Quite frankly, a lot of "gentrification" wouldn't be happening if people moving in still genuinely believed in threats of criminals running rampant, and you don't tend to associate people moving to hip neighborhoods with grandpa-aged folks. Triskelli posted:Okay, on a list of "Things that are killing americans" school shootings are as about as statisitically significant as deaths from Ebola, but the fact that we even have school shootings when other developed nations have few to none is important. We just need to move the discussion away from "no one should ever have guns" and "it's my right to be able to walk into Wal-mart and buy a shotgun no questions asked", and being able to intercept people buying them for emotional reasons. I'll give you a little hint here on why this doesn't work in arguments online: the people who are angry about having any gun control at all ARE the people who buy for "emotional" reasons.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:Hollywood is a complicated beast. There might not be a ton of films focusing on Street Crime, but the same "man, poo poo sure isn't like it used to be," sentiment is still a common one even when "the way poo poo used to be" falls squarely in the middle of the 80s/early-90s crime epidemic. Hollywood loves to go negative for texture reasons. And then there are the period films that people donk't realize are period films. To be fair people pretty much take whatever message they want from media even when it's trying to make the opposite point. See: people talking about how Mad Men is great because it shows how good it was when men were men and dames were dames, except the show is mostly about how men were self-loathing pieces of poo poo and women were second-class citizens. Also every war movie ever made.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:To be fair people pretty much take whatever message they want from media even when it's trying to make the opposite point. See: people talking about how Mad Men is great because it shows how good it was when men were men and dames were dames, except the show is mostly about how men were self-loathing pieces of poo poo and women were second-class citizens. But anyway, that's still beside my point. Between the 80s and now, Hollywood action movies have shifted away from street thugs being the villains, and towards foreign terrorists and stuff. I THOUGHT that was done in response to Americans realizing that street thugs weren't going to drive the country to ruin or anything, but apparently many people still think that. Samurai Sanders fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Nov 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Yeah, I grew up looking critically at movies, so it's really weird to come across people who somehow miss things that I don't even consider subtext, like that maybe FMJ wasn't actually saying that the Vietnam war was awesome. Yeah, seeing FMJ with a bunch of gung ho wannabe military guys was the strangest experience. I mean, the first part of the movie shows how the military literally drives people to murder-suicide and the second shows how hosed up war makes people, to the point of singing a children's song in the middle of a war zone. Yet most of the guys were like "Yeah, shooting and explosions is cool. I'm Animal Mother, man."
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Yeah, I grew up looking critically at movies, so it's really weird to come across people who somehow miss things that I don't even consider subtext, like that maybe FMJ wasn't actually saying that the Vietnam war was awesome. Again, it's the whole Dunning-Kruger thing. I like to think that everyone is interested in the things I'm interested in (movie subtext, historical analysis), and because I genuinely enjoy this stuff I assume that everyone else is viewing their media this critically. That's not to say that people are too stupid to understand this stuff, it's just that many people don't think to look at their media this way. It's not a statemtent on competence or incompetence in this scenario, it's projecting your level of competence onto other people. That's how a lot of subtlties are lost on a larger audience. Incidently I think that's why Nolan's movies do so well, he's confident enough in his audience to actually explore deeper messages but understands that a lot of people won't "get it" unless the deeper analysis is pointed out by characters in the movie directly (some people want to watch the world burn, you either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain, etc.) That's why they succeed with a wider audience, because it directly lets them in on what might otherwise be considered elitist analysis.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 18:26
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Yeah, I grew up looking critically at movies, so it's really weird to come across people who somehow miss things that I don't even consider subtext, like that maybe FMJ wasn't actually saying that the Vietnam war was awesome. Eh, I think part of it is more that terrorists allow you to have really big action scenes and explosions and maybe a shoot out on an airplane. So while people might still be scared of a black person on the street having a gun or something in real life, the stakes still need to be higher when you're making a blockbuster. Also on a similar topic was I the only one who found it pretty ridiculous in the fourth season of a Breaking Bad when the white nationalist gang had giant assault rifles, Kevlar and some kind of fortified desert compound? They're a bunch of skinhead ex-cons, not COBRA.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
Triskelli posted:I've always considered doing things like the driver's license would be the best bet, because it's easy to get people to agree that a gun is as deadly as a car. You'd need to have a license to own any firearm, to get a license you need to pass a test demonstrating gun safety and responsibility, and you'd need to renew that license every 3-5 years. If you don't have a license then authorities are allowed to confiscate your weapon until you recieve one. This would come with a ban on interpersonal sale of guns, so that for every shithead that says "criminals will still use guns" we can say "yes, but now when we get them off the streets they'll stay off the streets". Aside from that though all the bullshit about magazine restrictions, what types of guns you're allowed to have, the differences between a concealed and open carry license, those go out the window. No, this is unacceptable because it would undermine the ability for my rag tag group of middle aged friends from fighting a successful guerrilla war against the US Army in case they become tyrants.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Quote of the morning, "I'll be very, very honest with you. The South has not always been the friendliest place for African-Americans." ~ Mary Landrieu Quote of the day, "In addition, the south has not always been the friendliest or easiest place for African Americans to advance, and it's been a difficult place for women to be recognized as the leaders we are. Everyone knows this is the truth, and I will continue to speak the truth even as some would twist my words seeking political advantage." ~ Mary Landrieu, continuing to drop truth firecrackers. She has scheduled a press conference tomorrow to discuss her belief that water is wet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:Also on a similar topic was I the only one who found it pretty ridiculous in the fourth season of a Breaking Bad when the white nationalist gang had giant assault rifles, Kevlar and some kind of fortified desert compound? They're a bunch of skinhead ex-cons, not COBRA. Why. This is America. I know several people with assault rifles (tho I'm p. sure it's illegal), kevlar, and one of them is turning his basement into a fortified compound. We've got tons of gun crazies in this country, and we don't really seem all that interested in restricting their access to assault rifles, kevlar, and fortified bunkers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:No, this is unacceptable because it would undermine the ability for my rag tag group of middle aged friends from fighting a successful guerrilla war against the US Army in case they become tyrants. That's why you only need to get it revised every 3-5 years. Plenty of time to buy all the guns you want and show those drat government agents what a crack shot you are, then hide in your bunker while it's still valid and President Hillary shows her true face as the reincarnation of Mecha-Stalin. Bonus: When government agents DO come to insist you renew your license you can snipe them from a distance and start the Revolution rather than jerking off to the thought of it. And because you took the test to get your license you're able to make the shot at 300 yards instead of shooting yourself in the thigh like a dumbass. Just, it's more likely to be Mavis from the DMV than a SWAT team in MRAPs. Triskelli fucked around with this message at 18:53 on Nov 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
Joementum posted:http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/landrieu-race-south "Mark Pryor told me the president just doesn't understand rural America." Seems like he's understood them pretty well for a while, actually. I'm pretty sure the real problem is more like rural Americans don't understand the 21st century. Zeno-25 fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Nov 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:But anyway, that's still beside my point. Between the 80s and now, Hollywood action movies have shifted away from street thugs being the villains, and towards foreign terrorists and stuff. I THOUGHT that was done in response to Americans realizing that street thugs weren't going to drive the country to ruin or anything, but apparently many people still think that. That's more because the Pentagon staffers who tell Hollywood what to write in exchange for getting to use military equipment as props pushed foreign terrorists as the bad guys.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 20:11
|
|
|
Triskelli posted:I've always considered doing things like the driver's license would be the best bet, because it's easy to get people to agree that a gun is as deadly as a car. You'd need to have a license to own any firearm, to get a license you need to pass a test demonstrating gun safety and responsibility, and you'd need to renew that license every 3-5 years. If you don't have a license then authorities are allowed to confiscate your weapon until you recieve one. This would come with a ban on interpersonal sale of guns, so that for every shithead that says "criminals will still use guns" we can say "yes, but now when we get them off the streets they'll stay off the streets". Aside from that though all the bullshit about magazine restrictions, what types of guns you're allowed to have, the differences between a concealed and open carry license, those go out the window. Cars and guns are different things, and they should be regulated differently. Why are people so obsessed with this obviously stupid analogy?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
Zeno-25 posted:"Mark Pryor told me the president just doesn't understand rural America." I just got off the phone with my dad about this and he made a very good point. What Obama said there wasn't the best way of phrasing what's going on there. He, my dad, mentioned that it probably would have been a whole lot more accurate to say that those people have been manipulated into voting for single issues by people who have hosed them over in every other way. Obviously you'd be more tactful, but if the message was that rather than simply leveling what people considered an insult it probably would have resonated a lot more, and still be factually correct.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 10:57 |
|
|
On Terra Firma posted:I just got off the phone with my dad about this and he made a very good point. What Obama said there wasn't the best way of phrasing what's going on there. He, my dad, mentioned that it probably would have been a whole lot more accurate to say that those people have been manipulated into voting for single issues by people who have hosed them over in every other way. Obviously you'd be more tactful, but if the message was that rather than simply leveling what people considered an insult it probably would have resonated a lot more, and still be factually correct. Whats the tactful way to message this which resonates with rural, small-town voters while also avoiding pissing off big-city donors? Serious answer, I'd love to know a more accurate message that can play across the rural/suburban/exurban/urban split.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 20:18
|
|