politics Post Election Thread: Democracy Dies In Darkness And You Can Help

[Walter_Sobchak]

1 hour ago, Ramlaen said:

I am not sure what to make of Loretta Lynch's video.

At first glance I thought this said "Loretta Lynn."  I was going to to be very upset if we were dragging her into a pig wrestling political forum.

[Ramlaen]

19 hours ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

At first glance I thought this said "Loretta Lynn."  I was going to to be very upset if we were dragging her into a pig wrestling political forum.

Not gonna lie, I had to google Loretta Lynn.

[Donward]

Loretta Lynn dug Donald Trump. Just saying Walt.

http://blogs.reuters.com/talesfromthetrail/2016/01/08/country-musician-loretta-lynn-to-trump-call-me/

 

[Ramlaen]

 

[Sturgeon]

Barack Obama's half-brother is a Trump supporter and a complete troll.

[Sturgeon]

 

[SergeantMatt]

Vox, I know, but the numbers are the important bit. Yet more confirmation of how utterly incompetent Hillary's campaign was. If the Democratic Party wants to win, they need to purge the party of everybody involved. http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/8/14848636/hillary-clinton-tv-ads

Quote

Hillary Clinton’s campaign ran TV ads that had less to do with policy than any other presidential candidate in the past four presidential races, according to a new study published on Monday by the Wesleyan Media Project.

Clinton’s team spent a whopping $1 billion on the election in all — about twice what Donald Trump’s campaign spent. Clinton spent $72 million on television ads in the final weeks alone.

But only 25 percent of advertising supporting her campaign went after Trump on policy grounds, the researchers found. By comparison, every other presidential candidate going back to at least 2000 devoted more than 40 percent of his or her advertising to policy-based attacks. None spent nearly as much time going after an opponent’s personality as Clinton’s ads did.

 

Quote

Evidence suggests that negativity in advertising can have a backlash effect on the sponsor (Pinkleton 1997) and that personally-focused, trait-based negative messages (especially those that are uncivil) tend to be seen as less fair, less informative and less important than more substantive, policy-based messaging (Fridkin and Geer 1994; Brooks and Geer 2007).

In stark contrast to any prior presidential cycle for which we have Kantar Media/CMAG data, the Clinton campaign overwhelmingly chose to focus on Trump’s personality and fitness for office (in a sense, doubling down on the news media’s focus), leaving very little room for discussion in advertising of the reasons why Clinton herself was the better choice.

Trump, on the other hand, provided explicit policy-based contrasts, highlighting his strengths and Clinton’s weaknesses, a strategy that research suggests voters find helpful in decision-making. These strategic differences may have meant that Clinton was more prone to voter backlash and did nothing to overcome the media’s lack of focus on Clinton’s policy knowledge, especially for residents of Michigan and Wisconsin, in particular, who were receiving policy-based (and specifically economically-focused) messaging from Trump.

[LoooSeR]

[LoooSeR]

Well, not that surprising, but we have now doc evidence. And...

...Get your combat memes ready, we are going to clear this house!

Quote

Well, Hideo Kojima confirmed to be Nostradamus I guess. We're now literally living the plot of Metal Gear Solid 2.

 

Quote

"Trump triggered feminist are attacking the white house"
"...send in the Dank Force"

 

[LoooSeR]

For future use:

[Lostwingman]

On 3/7/2017 at 3:56 AM, Sturgeon said:

Barack Obama's half-brother is a Trump supporter and a complete troll.

Malik is a goddamn national treasure. About the funniest I saw was when he asked what traps are.

 

34 minutes ago, LoooSeR said:

Well, not that surprising, but we have now doc evidence. And...

...Get your combat memes ready, we are going to clear this house!

You know, there was a time when I just laughed at all the "Great Meme War" memes. There was also time where I didn't think this timeline could get any stupider. Both times are past I guess.

[LoooSeR]

9 minutes ago, Lostwingman said:

...

You know, there was a time when I just laughed at all the "Great Meme War" memes. There was also time where I didn't think this timeline could get any stupider. Both times are past I guess.

I think that this Military Memes department will be least usefull for CIA. Although... if look at recent examples of memes connected to actual events than "Polite people" meme during Crimea operation was pretty usefull for positive PR of that operation here.

 

Also:

[ShamefurDispray]

2 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

 

politicians and diplomats have connections to the Russian ambassador

businessmen have business connections with Russian businesses

fucking wow

[Lostwingman]

5 hours ago, ShamefurDispray said:

politicians and diplomats have connections to the Russian ambassador

businessmen have business connections with Russian businesses

fucking wow

"People that run multi-national corporations have a lot of assets in multiple nations, further news on the breaking discovery that water is wet to follow."

Some people are just desperate for anything. I feel like Infowars has won the "culture" war of news media since every fucking news outlet has become fan fiction stage for ideologues.

 

7 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

I think that this Military Memes department will be least usefull for CIA. Although... if look at recent examples of memes connected to actual events than "Polite people" meme during Crimea operation was pretty usefull for positive PR of that operation here.

 

Also:

Well it doesn't involve droning brown people and wedding processions so it figures it wouldn't be their forte.

[Donward]

8 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

 

I don't need your fancy flowchart to know that Donald Trump is directly related to the Russkies.

That's right. He is known to pal around with WWF's Vince McMahon (and NO, I'm not calling it the WWE. It's the WW- the F stands for Fuck YOU World Wildlife Fund).

And Vince McMahon's wife Linda has been chosen by Trump to head up the Small Business Administration.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/07/trump-picks-wrestling-magnate-linda-mcmahon-to-lead-small-business-administration.html

Which is all well and dandy until you realize that the WWF has been used as a platform to promote pro-Soviet propaganda! As well as the Russian's lackeys in Iran.

WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!

 

[Ramlaen]

This is more about Trump and the GOP but is good to throw at people who would rather call Trump a fascist than sit down and try to understand why he won.

 

[LoooSeR]

Trump will start to execute Putin's plan to destroy America. First step - destroy healthcare.

 

[Sturgeon]

..Why Putin wants to kill random poor Americans is left unexplained.

[Donward]

2 hours ago, Sturgeon said:

..Why Putin wants to kill random poor Americans is left unexplained.

When comic book movies with idiotic villain plots are the most popular fare coming out of Hollywood, it's little wonder why these idjits can't think of anything more than "Muhahahahahahaha!, *Mustache twirl*, Hitler/Holocaust" as motivating factors in a political opponent.

Also, with a face like that, "Dworkin" has GOT to be a make believe pen name, right?

[ApplesauceBandit]

Meant to post this last night, but the HWNDU stream was moved again, this time to some flagpole in the middle of nowhere, with only the sky and flag in frame.  /pol/ still captured the flag in roughly 24 hours, using plane traffic, stars, ambient sounds, and playing marco polo with car horns to find it.  This is weaponized autism.  It was on some private property near Greeneville, TN.

Was replaced with a MAGA hat and a "Alt-right is alright" shirt, though shia's crew took it down within about 20 minutes.

 

Greentext in spoiler

 

 

[Collimatrix]

Some mad bastards actually found a way to perform a controlled experiment to investigate Clinton's lack of charisma.

[Sturgeon]

 

[ShamefurDispray]

14 hours ago, Collimatrix said:

Some mad bastards actually found a way to perform a controlled experiment to investigate Clinton's lack of charisma.

When you try to prove it's society's fault that she lost but it turns out that it was her fault she lost

[Ramlaen]

21 minutes ago, ShamefurDispray said:

When you try to prove it's _______ fault that she lost but it turns out that it was her fault she lost

Seems like a template response at this point.

[Ramlaen]

On 3/5/2017 at 3:58 AM, Sturgeon said:

Since this is our random politics dump thread, I figured I'd throw this in here.

I've been very interested in what Dilbertman has to say lately, but I think he's off the mark here. In fact, he's so off the mark that he makes me voice my latent concern that he's deliberately trying to convince people to be climate skeptics. (Which, I should note, is not something I'm against, but which runs counter to what he claims to be trying to do. More on that in a bit.)

Tucker Carlson's game looks like this: Attack in whatever way he can, no matter how nonsensical, with the deliberate and calculated aim of getting his guest to flip out or otherwise discredit themselves. And if they don't, just say you've run out of time. That's his game, and as someone who argues like an intermediate level competitive chess player moves Queen to Bishop 6, I respect it for what it is.

So I don't think Tucker induced cognitive dissonance in Bill Nye. I think Bill Nye got MAD. I would, too, in that situation. Carlson specializes in the kind of insane word games that make people like me go completely apeshit and want to start throwing things. Bill seemed to have reasonably simple answers to a simple question. Here's it boiled down to the essentials, without Tucker's asinine interruption tactic:

Question: What would the climate be like if humans hadn't made it artificially warmer?

Answer: It would be like 1750. You wouldn't be able to grow grapes in Britain, you'd still be able to open ski resorts in certain parts of Europe, and *some specific factoid about agricultural pests that I didn't quite get*.

Sounds pretty straightforward to me! You can argue that it's right or wrong, but it is AN answer.

The thing is, I am on pretty much the opposite side of the fence from Bill. I think he and his ilk are doing a disservice in the conversation about this subject, because he's contributing to an oppressive atmosphere that stops people from even asking questions. I don't know what the truth of climate science is, but I can see with my own eyes that the political situation in climate science is a fertile bed for exactly the sort of Inquisition-style witch-hunts and dissent suppression that you don't want in a scientific field.

But I disagree with Dilbertman. Nye isn't experiencing cognitive dissonance - well, he is as part of the human condition, but not because he didn't have an answer to the question.

Now, Scott Adams I think plays a deep game with his blogging. He's not always being truthful to you, and that's on purpose. I feel like his blogging is interactive, which is one reason I keep reading him. He's not just telling you about his theories of persuasion, he is actively using them on you. And regarding climate change, I think he's doing what he'd call "pacing and leading". He's pacing climate change believers by saying that he believes the scientific consensus, to try to build credibility. Then, he tries to lead them by expressing doubts about small areas in climate science. In a few months, I expect him to be an outright skeptic.

That's what's so neat about his blog, you can actually test his persuasion theory as you read, because he is actively doing it to you.

 

 

I think it is safe to say that Tucker got a reaction out of the Science Guy.