US Election 2024

mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Democrat TV is like Communist state TV: puppets with no professional integrity, parroting the latest directive in a continued attempt at brainwashing. This is the kind of thing the kind of party who would rig elections would do. I don't think Republican media is marshalled so ruthlessly.

x.com

x.com x.com

weird.png
 
Mr. Tea

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
It also probably wouldn't hurt the Dems to push the 'grifter' angle - namely that the problem with a lot of these people isn't so much that they have terrible principles but that they have no principles at all. Case in point being that Vance called Trump an idiot and privately compared him to Hitler:

Loading…

www.reuters.com
 
shakahislop

shakahislop

Well-known member
Corpsey said:
I wonder if political parties have triggering consultants

Headhunted from 4chan
Click to expand...
i don't think they exactly have this but i have the impression that it's a standard part of the toolkit now. something that you're expected to know about and use if you're working on communications for a political party.
 
Clinamenic

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
And someone else made a good point: that ‘weird’ isn’t inherently pejorative. It’s only pejorative to someone if they pride themselves on being the normative model around which all else is evaluated. This is why plenty of other people, like myself, don’t mind being called weird, but why so many magas seem to foam at the mouth when they are.
 
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
@version agrees with Vivek but is too afraid break ranks and call out the Dems' ridiculous kindergarten political rhetoric.

Tribalism means that the Dems can only change from the top down. What I'm quite sure of is that Rhodes Scholar Bill Clinton or Barack Obama would not be happy to be rightfully scolded by an academic peer on the other side for trying to 'win' a political debate by such vacuous tactics. Those guys would have had more self-respect for sure...and also they would fancy themselves against academic peers like Vivek and Vance and look to wipe the floor with Trump intellectually.
 
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Mr. Tea said:
It also probably wouldn't hurt the Dems to push the 'grifter' angle - namely that the problem with a lot of these people isn't so much that they have terrible principles but that they have no principles at all. Case in point being that Vance called Trump an idiot and privately compared him to Hitler:

Loading…

www.reuters.com
Click to expand...
All the Dems called Trump and Vance fascists and have now decided they're just weird...so that means Vance by their lights was wrong to call him a fascits, which Vance also now thinks.

P.S. people can change their minds about things you know.
 
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Clinamenic said:
The truth is that maga is rather weird, which makes this electioneering rhetoric so memetically viable.
Click to expand...
Given that the swamp has subjected you to this weird claim about 1000 times over the past few days can you be sure that this is an independent assessment?
 
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Clinamenic said:
And someone else made a good point: that ‘weird’ isn’t inherently pejorative. It’s only pejorative to someone if they pride themselves on being the normative model around which all else is evaluated. This is why plenty of other people, like myself, don’t mind being called weird, but why so many magas seem to foam at the mouth when they are.
Click to expand...
They're angry at being called weird because they think they're normal and most of them would be because statistics. It makes sense for conservatives to find progressives weird because progressives do new and unusual things, but the other way round doesn't make sense because progressives should be used to the conservative majority by now.

'Weird' is pejorative to the person who uses it because it means they don't understand the other person. You should be wary of people who call you weird because they don't get you. For this reason it's a burn bridges play a la 'deplorables' in that the Dems are saying they just don't understand the people who aren't in their tribe, and giving them no reason to join them. I think the Dems are too much aimed at dissuading deserters rather than being inclusive.
 
Clinamenic

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
I also kinda feel this as part of the vibeshift against the extremes, both the right wing MAGA extreme and the left wing ivory tower radical academia extreme. My vague sense is that those two extremes, supplemented by whatever non-US state actors may have culture war ops going on social media, have driven this devolution of US politics into kindergarten rhetoric.
 
Mr. Tea

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Clinamenic said:
And someone else made a good point: that ‘weird’ isn’t inherently pejorative. It’s only pejorative to someone if they pride themselves on being the normative model around which all else is evaluated. This is why plenty of other people, like myself, don’t mind being called weird, but why so many magas seem to foam at the mouth when they are.
Click to expand...
This is a good point. Further, I'd say a lot of people consider there to be good-weird and bad-weird. For example, in the US, society has at least in theory been moving in a generally anti-racist direction since at least the civil rights movement in the 60s, and until recently, even conservative politicians agreed with the consensus that racism was bad. Being openly racist was 'weird.' But now an increasing number of high-profile people, including elected politicians, are either identifying as white nationalists or using much the same rhetoric. So, to them, that's the good kind of weird. However, they regard people who psychologically identity with the gender that doesn't match their biological sex to be very much the bad kind of weird.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top