Mindless Partisanship

note the years of this chart


these huge swings are due to Fox "news" coverage of the Issues


these people are edged along on what they believe


they are the idiot rabble of this nation


the ones who can be fooled all of the time

I tried not to state it in such harsh terms, but I agree. I think a much larger portion of the American right than the American left just functions as a pass-through for whatever thoughts and talking points are being pushed by the leading propagandists of their movement.

For example, picture a hypothetical future where a Black Panthers-style movement started arming and organizing blacks en masse, so they'd have the means for armed resistance against unjust police violence. And picture if Fox News, Breitbart, the NRA, etc., started to use race-baiting propaganda in order to strongly support certain gun controls, like registration and universal background checks, in light of that threat. And picture if, at the same time, the NAACP and ACLU started to push liberal anti-gun-regulation propaganda, in light of those guns empowering the racial underclass.

I think if that were to happen, there would be some gradual evolution of viewpoints among rank-and-file liberals. But among conservatives, I think you'd get a radical reversal of opinion in just a few short years, similar to what we saw with free trade agreements. I think they're that sensitive to propaganda aimed at them. Many of the same dudes with "cold dead hands" rhetoric today would be emphasizing the importance of giving police more ability to control the flow of guns, for the sake of "law and order."

It's not that far-fetched, either. Back when the original Black Panthers were publicly arming themselves in the face of white supremacist violence, the right did, in fact, get enthused about gun control. Both the NRA and Ronald Reagan (then governor of California) backed gun control, at the time.
 
proving that Ronny Rayguns was a racist and that the republican party puts their racism first.


their FEAR of people of color destroying their lives is their number one tenant


everything else is secondary and can be tossed on the trash heap as needed


even being fearful of Russian commies
 
nah. you're off.

What's your explanation of the dramatic up-and-down moves of Republican opinion on free trade agreements? Keep in mind there was VERY little change in the major trade deals in that time, nor any major revelations of material we weren't previously aware of. We had the same basic information about the same basic deals throughout that period, yet Republican opinion ricocheted wildly from approval to disapproval repeatedly.
 
proving that Ronny Rayguns was a racist and that the republican party puts their racism first.


their FEAR of people of color destroying their lives is their number one tenant


everything else is secondary and can be tossed on the trash heap as needed


even being fearful of Russian commies

FailTwin powers activate!
 
What's your explanation of the dramatic up-and-down moves of Republican opinion on free trade agreements? Keep in mind there was VERY little change in the major trade deals in that time, nor any major revelations of material we weren't previously aware of. We had the same basic information about the same basic deals throughout that period, yet Republican opinion ricocheted wildly from approval to disapproval repeatedly.
fluctuating economic conditions.
 
I tried not to state it in such harsh terms, but I agree. I think a much larger portion of the American right than the American left just functions as a pass-through for whatever thoughts and talking points are being pushed by the leading propagandists of their movement.

For example, picture a hypothetical future where a Black Panthers-style movement started arming and organizing blacks en masse, so they'd have the means for armed resistance against unjust police violence. And picture if Fox News, Breitbart, the NRA, etc., started to use race-baiting propaganda in order to strongly support certain gun controls, like registration and universal background checks, in light of that threat. And picture if, at the same time, the NAACP and ACLU started to push liberal anti-gun-regulation propaganda, in light of those guns empowering the racial underclass.

I think if that were to happen, there would be some gradual evolution of viewpoints among rank-and-file liberals. But among conservatives, I think you'd get a radical reversal of opinion in just a few short years, similar to what we saw with free trade agreements. I think they're that sensitive to propaganda aimed at them. Many of the same dudes with "cold dead hands" rhetoric today would be emphasizing the importance of giving police more ability to control the flow of guns, for the sake of "law and order."

It's not that far-fetched, either. Back when the original Black Panthers were publicly arming themselves in the face of white supremacist violence, the right did, in fact, get enthused about gun control. Both the NRA and Ronald Reagan (then governor of California) backed gun control, at the time.

you still need a vision to win again. this horseshit armchair speculation and made up horseshit is not gonna work.
 
You misunderstood. Go back and reread. Good luck, pumpkin.

Did I? Maybe it is you who needs to go back to grade school and study reading comprehension? Have some cheese with that pathetic whine you brain dead hack. :laugh:

You misunderstood. Go back and reread. Good luck, pumpkin.

Did I? Maybe it is you who needs to go back to grade school and study reading comprehension? Have some cheese with that pathetic whine you brain dead hack. :laugh:
 
Did I? Maybe it is you who needs to go back to grade school and study reading comprehension? Have some cheese with that pathetic whine you brain dead hack. :laugh:



Did I? Maybe it is you who needs to go back to grade school and study reading comprehension? Have some cheese with that pathetic whine you brain dead hack. :laugh:

fritzy, are they letting you play on the computer at the home for the feeble minded again?
 
he took the right to open carry because black people started open carrying idiot

he then did the welfare queen crap



Ronny Rayguns was a racist
 
Last edited:
One way to figure out whether someone's policy preferences are based on considered principles, or if they're just a symptom of partisan loyalty, is to see if those preferences swing with the partisan winds.

The best way to see if people have mindless partisan loyalty is to see if they can objectively evaluate the political landscape. Are they able to summarize and present the arguments from the perspectives of both sides of the aisle without having to present them in a biased format? Do they demonstrate that they have objectively watched or read equal amounts of media and propaganda from both sides of the aisle? Do they demonstrate that they even know or care what it means to objectively evaluate the political landscape? One does not need charts and graphs to see if people are hidebound to their ideology.
 
you still need a vision to win again.

The vision seems to be doing pretty well. It won the popular vote in six out of the last seven presidential elections, and it won a sizable majority of both House and Senate votes in this last cycle, as well. If the speculation in this thread hurts your feelings, that's fine. I'm sure you can find another thread that doesn't challenge you. But, for my part, I'm fascinated in just how wildly Republican opinion has been swinging on free trade.
 
The best way to see if people have mindless partisan loyalty is to see if they can objectively evaluate the political landscape. Are they able to summarize and present the arguments from the perspectives of both sides of the aisle without having to present them in a biased format? Do they demonstrate that they have objectively watched or read equal amounts of media and propaganda from both sides of the aisle? Do they demonstrate that they even know or care what it means to objectively evaluate the political landscape? One does not need charts and graphs to see if people are hidebound to their ideology.

"Both sides" is insidious propaganda meant to normalize exclusively hideous Conservative principles and actions.

It also says that you're incapable of making distinctions, either because you're lazy or disingenuous; so therefore we must manage our expectations of you downward, and treat you with hostility, doubt, and skepticism when it comes to your intentions.
 
The vision seems to be doing pretty well. It won the popular vote in six out of the last seven presidential elections, and it won a sizable majority of both House and Senate votes in this last cycle, as well. If the speculation in this thread hurts your feelings, that's fine. I'm sure you can find another thread that doesn't challenge you. But, for my part, I'm fascinated in just how wildly Republican opinion has been swinging on free trade.

im fascinated how neoliberal have abandoned the working class, and a working understanding of the bill of rights.
 
The best way to see if people have mindless partisan loyalty is to see if they can objectively evaluate the political landscape. Are they able to summarize and present the arguments from the perspectives of both sides of the aisle without having to present them in a biased format? Do they demonstrate that they have objectively watched or read equal amounts of media and propaganda from both sides of the aisle? Do they demonstrate that they even know or care what it means to objectively evaluate the political landscape? One does not need charts and graphs to see if people are hidebound to their ideology.

I don't see those as a good way of seeing whether people have mindless partisan loyalty. The ability to do that kind of meta analysis (telling you what the talking points of each faction are at the moment) has limited value. I'm more interested in how informed people are about the actual underlying policy issues

Anyway, even if you think people are 'hidebound to their ideology," I invite you to take a closer look at those graphs. If nothing else, they make the point that what it means to be "hidebound in their ideology" differs greatly between the two political factions. Among Democrats and those leaning towards the Democrats, their was gradual evolution in views on free trade, from a slight majority favoring it, to a somewhat larger majority favoring it. Among Republicans and those leaning towards the Republicans, there were multiple dramatic reversals of opinion on the topic. They certainly aren't "hidebound" in support or opposition as to the underlying policy question. They're all over the place there. My argument is that this is because they're hidebound about party politics -- embracing whatever position is being pushed by their faction leaders at the moment, even if that forces them to bounce back and forth on an issue repeatedly.
 
"Both sides" is insidious propaganda meant to normalize exclusively hideous Conservative principles and actions.

It also says that you're incapable of making distinctions, either because you're lazy or disingenuous; so therefore we must manage our expectations of you downward, and treat you with hostility, doubt, and skepticism when it comes to your intentions.


False Analogy

False Analogy - when a comparison is made between two ideas or objects that seemingly have similar characteristics, but the comparison does not hold up. The characteristics of the two things actually differ in the area that is being compared.

Examples of False Analogy:

1. Historically, public schools have done very well, so the problems of public schools today-lack of achievement, lack of discipline - are due to ineffective teachers. (Reality: Public schools have only been truly inclusive of all students since the mid-1900's; also, achievement standards have been raised over time.)

2. The private school down the street has better teachers and children get a better education because 100% of their seniors get into a college. (Reality: The private school only has to accept some students, not all.)

3. That group of teenagers is up to no good - they are out after dark, and they are wearing dark clothes and baggy pants. (Reality: This is a stereotype - the group of teenagers could be a sports team or church group.)

4. People who cannot go without their coffee every morning are no better than alcoholics.

Examples of False Analogies from Speech, Literature, or Advertisement

1. "That's why, under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance -- just as most states require you to carry auto insurance. Likewise, businesses will be required to either offer their workers health care, or chip in to help cover the cost of their workers." President Obama on Universal Health Coverage (some feel that health insurance and car insurance are different on many fundamental aspects, and this is a bad comparison)

2. Women will be attracted to you if you wear Axe cologne or use Axe bath wash. (Axe commercial)
 
Back
Top