The Stupidity of the Average American Voter

[Biff Tannen 45,782]

5 minutes ago, Walden Ponderer said:

I've thought about this a lot. It may be because we're related, but it doesn't change the fact that it is, in fact, my own opinion, formulated after genuinely thinking it over for far too many sleepless nights. The last several presidents who actually gave a shit what happens to most average people?

Carter. Johnson. FDR. Lincoln. Washington.

 

 

That's my complete list. I've read too much history to be convinced otherwise. We've been ruled by people who just don't give a shit for most of our existence.

You don't think Obama gave a shit about people?  What was his goal then?

[High Plains Drifter 11,070]

 

 

41 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

This is great. I would modify it to include not just easy to find but ‘“easy to understand”

 

47 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Well said.

 

The availability heuristic?

availability heuristic - "A cognitive heuristic through which the frequency or probability of an event is judged by the number of instances of it that can readily be brought to mind. It can generate biased or incorrect judgements, as when people are asked whether the English language contains more words beginning with the letter k or more words with k as the third letter, most people finding it easier to think of instances of words beginning with k and therefore concluding that there are more words beginning with k, whereas in fact a typical long text contains twice as many words with k as the third letter. The heuristic was first identified in 1973 by the Israeli psychologists Amos Tversky (1937–96) and Daniel Kahneman (born 1934)."  https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095436724 

 

Need to add "Reinforces preconceptions"

 

[washparkhorn 9,939]

24 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

Need to add "Reinforces preconceptions"

Agree. 

[Pato del Muerto 52,947]

1 hour ago, MoJames said:

Fair. There are plenty of providers who wander outside of their studies and exhibit DK behaviors. However, in today's environment this is dwarfed by the amount of nonsense that is presented to us by patients, imo. Not to get to far off topic, but I've had the microchip discussion probably a dozen times over the past 2 weeks in regards to the COVID vaccination.

That’s just because there’s more patients than there are doctors. If you normalize those data sets...

[Cheeseweasel 26,438]

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Facebook is uniquely toxic in how it’s set up.

"That's a feature, not a bug." = Zuck

[Walden Ponderer 12,639]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

You don't think Obama gave a shit about people?  What was his goal then?

I loved Obama as a politician. But no. His goal was to be right. A common failing of really smart people.

[wildcat09 29,453]

2 minutes ago, Walden Ponderer said:

I loved Obama as a politician. But no. His goal was to be right. A common failing of really smart people.

I think Obama cared about people, just not enough to imagine that the Democratic party could implement policies that would do anything more than marginally help most people.

[safe sex 11,810]

I would add TR to that list.

[Biff Tannen 45,782]

4 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

I would add TR to that list.

100%.  His work on national parks alone proves this.

[Walden Ponderer 12,639]

2 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

I would add TR to that list.

Maybe. But he's probably the hardest to read of all presidents. My wife and I were watching "The Roosevelts" on PBS once upon a time, and it was a real case of emotional whiplash watching the evolution of TR:  "We love this guy!" "We hate this guy!" "We love this guy!" "God, he's an asshole!" "Awww... we love this guy!"

I mean, if there's ever been a guy who could endear himself to, and piss off, everyone in America more than him, hey, name him.

[Mdhorn 6,100]

3 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

This is our concern dude.  And I don't have an answer.

Matthew McConaughey has one.  But I won't post it because after reading it, I can tell he hasn't tried to talk to a RW hardliner or anybody buying into this mindless bs.  

[Mole 4,336]

2 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

History was the first thing I thought of as always biased in favor of those who win. There are definitely biases built into that.  And my comment about religion wasn't meant to be taken as I'm anti religion, but in public schools, religion should simply be taught as survey courses, and not taught as doctrine.

It’s obviously biased towards the winners as far as the status quo goes, but every writer (not to mention every historical person) has a perspective, which is just the more positive side of bias. The 1619 Project is biased, or it has a perspective worth exploring. The Trump patriot response has a perspective, or it’s biased. Some highly biased materials have great educational value; some less biased materials are garbage; everything has a perspective, even if it’s just the inherent bias of the status quo. We need to do a better job of reading and learning about perspectives and bias in a way that gives a rich understanding of the world. Bias is a reality, not the problem. How we deal with it is the problem.
 

As to religion in schools, my middle school was very religiously diverse, with adherents to all of the major world religions and then some. We learned about various religions in class with kids adding their own personal experience. We sang Christmas carols, Hanukkah songs, etc. We participated in each other’s religious and nonreligious lives. It was a very humanizing way to learn about beliefs. It absolutely wouldn’t work in many communities, but it was a great way to learn. 

1 hour ago, MoJames said:

Fair. There are plenty of providers who wander outside of their studies and exhibit DK behaviors. However, in today's environment this is dwarfed by the amount of nonsense that is presented to us by patients, imo. Not to get to far off topic, but I've had the microchip discussion probably a dozen times over the past 2 weeks in regards to the COVID vaccination.

Be honest, how many of those discussions were on Zoom calls with Bill Gates and Fauci? You can’t fool me. I’ve seen Strange Brew like 50 times.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Mole

[Cheeseweasel 26,438]

6 minutes ago, Walden Ponderer said:

I mean, if there's ever been a guy who could endear himself to, and piss off, everyone in America more than him, hey, name him.

Tom Herman?

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, Walden Ponderer said:

Maybe. But he's probably the hardest to read of all presidents. My wife and I were watching "The Roosevelts" on PBS once upon a time, and it was a real case of emotional whiplash watching the evolution of TR:  "We love this guy!" "We hate this guy!" "We love this guy!" "God, he's an asshole!" "Awww... we love this guy!"

I mean, if there's ever been a guy who could endear himself to, and piss off, everyone in America more than him, hey, name him.

Simon Cowell?

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

1 minute ago, Mole said:

It’s obviously biased towards the winners as far as the status quo goes, but every writer (not to mention every historical person) has a perspective, which is just the more positive side of bias. The 1619 Project is biased, or it has a perspective worth exploring. The Trump patriot response has a perspective, or it’s biased. Some highly biased materials have great educational value; some less biased materials are garbage; everything has a perspective, even if it’s just the inherent bias of the status quo. We need to do a better job of reading and learning about perspectives and bias in a way that gives a rich understanding of the world. Bias is a reality, not the problem. How we deal with it is the problem.
 

As to religion in schools, my middle school was very religiously diverse, with adherents to all of the major world religions and then some. We learned about various religions in class with kids adding their own personal experience. We sang Christmas carols, Hanukkah songs, etc. We participated in each other’s religious and no -religious lives. It was a very humanizing way to learn about beliefs. It absolutely wouldn’t work in many communities, but it was a great way to learn. 

Be honest, how many of those discussions were on Zoom calls with Bill Gates and Fauci? You can’t fool me. I’ve seen Strange Brew like 50 times.

Yes, every writer brings their own bias. I did the catholic school thing for several years. We learned about other religions, but Catholic was always the top dog of course.  I think teaching/ learning about the major religions in the world gives one a look into other cultures thru their religion.  

[Neonmoon 38,130]

1 hour ago, washparkhorn said:

Agree. 

Does this work?

 

[Dnaguy 12,375]

I think more and more people aren’t as ‘stupid’ as we would like to believe. We call them stupid to make ourselves feel smarter.

What all trump voters that weren’t the string puller-uber rich .1%ers have in common is that they’re afraid.

Afraid of change, afraid of their future, afraid of being able to retire, afraid of a rising China, afraid of young people and their ideas, and ultimately afraid of their death and the idea that they’ve squandered their shot.

Look at his electorate. They run off the fumes of nostalgia. 

To most of these folks, the earth stopped rotating when the wall fell and we won the Cold War. What the hell do we do now?!

Then we had a dot.com bubble, 9/11, multiple endless wars, a Great Recession, social media and its lies, Trump, and now a recession+pandemic.

Every single one of those things chipped away at any credibility the government and the decision makers had.

The Republican Party leaned into this hard as their already had a strategy of dismantling the regulatory state.

So more than anything, the american voter is scared shitless. They don’t have hope in the future. 

That is not a great place to be and I foresee more and more candidates like Trump until we do.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Dnaguy

[Biff Tannen 45,782]

3 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

Afraid of change, afraid of their future, afraid of being able to retire, afraid of a rising China, afraid of young people and their ideas, and ultimately afraid of their death and the idea that they’ve squandered their shot.

Counterpoint:  Being afraid is stupid.  You can be concerned about certain things (a rising China, for instance), but being afraid isn't how you deal with shit in the real world.  You get your ass out there and you find that fucking dog!

[JimmyJames 12,271]

Actually the average American voter seems pretty ok so long as you exclude the average poor White trash, the average retired or semi retired white professional selfish asshole, or the racist white supremacists and hypocritical white evangelicals. 

[Dnaguy 12,375]

4 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Counterpoint:  Being afraid is stupid.  You can be concerned about certain things (a rising China, for instance), but being afraid isn't how you deal with shit in the real world.  You get your ass out there and you find that fucking dog!

Hey man, you know what? You’ve go A Good point.

 

 

 

 

[Dnaguy 12,375]

1 minute ago, JimmyJames said:

Actually the average American voter seems pretty ok so long as you exclude the average poor White trash, the average retired or semi retired white professional selfish asshole, or the racist white supremacists and hypocritical white evangelicals. 

 

Wait...... that’s like A LOT of the electorate and almost ALL of the Republican Party!

[JimmyJames 12,271]

2 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

You don't think Obama gave a shit about people?  What was his goal then?

His goal was mind control over the Jews through the rhythms of his speech, and according to our white evangelical friends, he accomplished his nefarious goal.   

[hayden_horn 11,374]

7 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

I think more and more people aren’t as ‘stupid’ as we would like to believe. We call them stupid to make ourselves feel smarter.

What all trump voters that weren’t the string puller-uber rich .1%ers have in common is that they’re afraid.

Afraid of change, afraid of their future, afraid of being able to retire, afraid of a rising China, afraid of young people and their ideas, and ultimately afraid of their death and the idea that they’ve squandered their shot.

Look at his electorate. They run off the fumes of nostalgia. 

To most of these folks, the earth stopped rotating when the wall fell and we won the Cold War. What the hell do we do now?!

Then we had a dot.com bubble, 9/11, multiple endless wars, a Great Recession, social media and its lies, Trump, and now a recession+pandemic.

Every single one of those things chipped away at any credibility the government and the decision makers had.

The Republican Party leaned into this hard as their already had a strategy of dismantling the regulatory state.

So more than anything, the american voter is scared shitless. They don’t have hope in the future. 

That is not a great place to be and I foresee more and more candidates like Trump until we do.

yeah, this is a good post. 

i was under the apparently mistaken impression that the olds and rural white folk carried trump.                 he got more votes than any president ever had gotten, until they finished counting biden's votes.

that's extremely concerning, because in theory, there should be fewer olds and rural voters in 2020 than in 2016, and hillary wasn't on the ballot. biden may have won by 7 million more votes, but the fact that donald got 7 million more votes than he did in 2016 really concerns me. 

[Dnaguy 12,375]

Just now, JimmyJames said:

His goal was mind control over the Jews through the rhythms of his speech, and according to our white evangelical friends, he accomplished his nefarious goal.   

[Biff Tannen 45,782]

10 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

I do think people are getting dumber and less able to think critically.   It’s actually documented in most first-world European countries that their IQs are declining.  https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/iq-rates-are-dropping-many-developed-countries-doesn-t-bode-ncna1008576.   Ironically, I don’t think an outright decline in raw IQ scores has been observed in America, yet, but it seems to be a matter of time.  Brains are basically atrophying from everything being simplified in real life and from mindlessly watching screens all the time to ruin your attention span.  

However, mobs have always been mobs.   What we’re seeing today with demagogues and irrational followers is exactly what everyone from the Founding Fathers to the Ancient Greeks have written about and warned against.  And, with that in mind, I say the problem isn’t actually one of the mob’s intelligence.   Sometimes intelligence can just be used to give someone a clever and elegant reason to do the wrong thing.

What is missing and what is degrading in our society are (1) gatekeepers, and (2) morality.   The gatekeepers losing control is already discussed in this thread.  That cat is probably out of the bag.  Ironically, if the GOP actually does eliminate Section 230, it would go a long way to fixing the problem because then people basically wouldn’t have interactive social media and would have to rely on more professional sources.  Be careful what you wish for, GOP.   Neutering the internet as we know it would be terribly unfortunate for other reasons, of course, so I’m not saying it should happen.  

As for morality, there have been tons of people in every generation of Americans who could be tricked into believing something stupid.   However, I truly believe there were less people in America during the 2nd half of the 20th century (the reference for “normal” for many of us) who would support such blatantly amoral people in the theory that the ends justify the means.  Even if they didn’t understand all the issues, there were some behaviors that just weren’t tolerated.  

Lying as much as Trump does would have had consequences.  People understand he’s lying even if they don’t understand the issues.  They choose not to care.   They also choose not to care about infidelity, cruelty, trying to overturn an election he lost, etc.  It is the lack of conscience and turning a blind eye part that is new.  I do think it probably originates from a heightened fear and desperation in the people.  The weird part of that is that a bunch of people are left behind and probably have reason to feel scared and insecure, but there’s also a seemingly equal group where the fear is just a result of having too comfortable a life and, I don’t know, nothing to occupy their time except rage porn.

Anyway, we’ve had people justify slavery in the past, so it’s obviously not completely new for Americans to put aside morality when they think it benefits them.  But compared to, say, 30, 40, 50 years ago?  I think there has been a moral degradation.   Gary Hart was immediately disqualified from running for President because he had an affair.  Joe Biden, in a different time, was disqualified for plagiarism.  Even Joe McCarthy was put out to pasture because people had enough of his indecency once they realized he was just making shit up.

You don’t have to know about the intricacies of foreign policy, economics, or healthcare to know if someone is a lying, cheating rat bastard.   You just have to care.

Well said.  I will add that part of it is also just a fundamental lack of understanding about what it means to be a citizen.  There are responsibilities and most people don't give a shit or don't understand.

[workswithseed 2,142]

1 hour ago, Walden Ponderer said:

Maybe. But he's probably the hardest to read of all presidents. My wife and I were watching "The Roosevelts" on PBS once upon a time, and it was a real case of emotional whiplash watching the evolution of TR:  "We love this guy!" "We hate this guy!" "We love this guy!" "God, he's an asshole!" "Awww... we love this guy!"

I mean, if there's ever been a guy who could endear himself to, and piss off, everyone in America more than him, hey, name him.

I'm kinda hard press to hate the guy

[staboner 5,017]

8 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

I know we talk about this in other threads, but I really feel like it deserves its own thread.  Ever since this election cycle has begun, the amount of people who I know to be educated individuals who repeatedly parrott back falso information and propoganda is alarming.  People who I have previously known to be rational, intelligent people, have seemingly lost all critical thinking skills.  How the fuck are we supposed to fix this?

 

IMO there is no fixing. Never has been and never will be. @wild_turkey post midstream about how capitalism and democracy are at odds is spot on. I would however note it a bit more simply as short (money) versus long term (public good). We can toss in various descriptors of that but in essence that's what it boils down to. America had the most successful economic engine ever and while it has been churning along we have left many elements of individual intelligence and collective public good behind.

it ain't fixing till the economic engine stops. Sorry to say but America is likely the longest, most annoying fall from grace ever with the dumbest shit out in the open for all the soak up. Maybe be thankful the pandemic and trumpism sped it up a bit? 

Enjoy the ride if you can

 

 

[Bullneck 19,321]

8 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

I know we talk about this in other threads, but I really feel like it deserves its own thread.  Ever since this election cycle has begun, the amount of people who I know to be educated individuals who repeatedly parrott back falso information and propoganda is alarming.  People who I have previously known to be rational, intelligent people, have seemingly lost all critical thinking skills.  How the fuck are we supposed to fix this?

 

It all has to do with public school education, IMHO.  I think the reason the Republicans try to kill education is it gives them millions of uniquely stupid voters.

[washparkhorn 9,939]

3 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Well said.  I will add that part of it is also just a fundamental lack of understanding about what it means to be a citizen.  There are responsibilities and most people don't give a shit or don't understand.

[TwiceHorn 31,702]

6 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

It all has to do with public school education, IMHO.  I think the reason the Republicans try to kill education is it gives them millions of uniquely stupid voters.

We keep hearing that, but as far as I can tell, decent public schools are better than ever.  Shitty public schools are shitty, just like they've always been.  It's possible that they are shittier, but that's hard to comprehend.

[TexasEd 8,162]

12 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

I know about the Dunning-Kruger Effect, in which people wrongly overestimate their intellect, but is there a phenomenon that explains when a person is intellectually incapable of understanding the information, but won't accept the answers given by someone who does understand the information? 

For example, a scientist has studied a subject for twenty years, has multiple degrees in the subject, but John Q. Idiot comes along, and says XYZ doesn't make sense because of something he read online. The scientist explains to the John Q. Idiot that the article he read doesn't take into account a hundred other variables and studies, and thus the conclusions are incorrect. John Q. Idiot then says yeah but what about this, and the process repeats itself. The scientist waste time trying to convince the idiot of truths they will not accept because they're too ignorant to understand them. 

This is pretty much where society sits right now

Trump Effect

[TexasEd 8,162]

9 hours ago, Walden Ponderer said:

I mean, if there's ever been a guy who could endear himself to, and piss off, everyone in Austin America more than him, hey, name him.

Mack Brown

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19,246]

I think social media and mainstream media has not helped the situation.  

What I would like to see is ALL POLITICS off social media unless social media wants to hire armies of fact checkers to be able to put disclaimers on anything false.  I would like to see any television channel with "News" in the title not be able to have opinion shows at all.  For the dumbest of Americans, I believe you have to be explicit about what is facts and what is opinion.  That would mean that OANN and Newsmax would be shit out of luck most likely.  

In print media, on websites, opinion pieces and letters to the editor need to be in the clearly marked OPINION section.  You still have the right to speak out, but it is going to be clearly named as Opinion.

I would hope some of that would get some of the disinformation out.  

Back to the original discussion, the Founders of this country always thought that citizens should be active.  In the US today, people are too busy watching TikTok videos (the fact that vloggers and social influecers can make more than Doctors, Lawyers, etc.. in this country is a fucking travesty) and scrolling through their Insta/Facebook to actually pay attention.  As I have said previously, if it cannot be said in 140 characters or less, it is lost.  It is infuriating for those of us who do care.  

[Brisketexan 105,673]

3 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Back to the original discussion, the Founders of this country always thought that citizens should be active.  In the US today, people are too busy watching TikTok videos (the fact that vloggers and social influecers can make more than Doctors, Lawyers, etc.. in this country is a fucking travesty) and scrolling through their Insta/Facebook to actually pay attention.  As I have said previously, if it cannot be said in 140 characters or less, it is lost.  It is infuriating for those of us who do care.  

Say what you will....but I would take that dude skateboarding and vibing with Fleetwood Mac and sipping his Ocean Spray over 90% of our elected officials in a straight up trade.  So....point for TikTok.

 

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19,246]

Say what you will....but I would take that dude skateboarding and vibing with Fleetwood Mac and sipping his Ocean Spray over 90% of our elected officials in a straight up trade.  So....point for TikTok.
 

I'm with you, to be fair.

[washparkhorn 9,939]

The Fairness Doctrine might have helped. Reagan killed it early on (in accordance with the stated plans in the Lewis Powell memo).* (link to Powell memo from Reuters) 

Note - if reimplemented, the Fairness Doctrine would need to be expanded to cover news from cable and internet news outlets, as well as over the air broadcast groups. 

A background on the fairness doctrine from the Congressional Research Service is in the spoiler. below.

Spoiler

• In the spirit of this broad mandate, the FCC favored granting and renewing licenses to broadcast stations that presented more than one viewpoint in their programming.
• In 1949, finding its authority in the public interest obligations imposed upon broadcasters by the Communications Act, the FCC issued a report entitled In the Matter of Editorializing by Broadcast Licensees.  
• The report affirmatively established the duty of broadcast licensees to cover controversial issues of public importance in a fair and balanced manner.  The obligation is known as the Fairness Doctrine. 
• The Fairness Doctrine consisted of two basic requirements:
  • (1) that every licensee devote a reasonable portion of broadcast time to the discussion and consideration of controversial issues of public importance; and
  • (2) that in doing so, [the broadcaster must be] fair – that is, [the broadcaster] must affirmatively endeavor to make ... facilities available for the expression of contrasting viewpoints held by responsible elements with respect to the controversial issues presented.
• These obligations were not satisfied by simply granting air time to those who requested it in order to respond to an issue previously discussed during the broadcaster’s regular programming.
  • Broadcasters instead had the affirmative duty to determine what the appropriate opposing viewpoints were on these controversial issues, and who was best suited to present them. 
• If sponsored programming was not an option, the broadcasters had to provide it at their own expense. 
• Further requirements of the Fairness Doctrine were eventually codified into regulation: 
  • The personal attack rule stated that when personal attacks were made on individuals involved in public issues, the broadcaster had to, within one week of the broadcast, notify the person attacked, provide him with a copy of the broadcast (either script or tape), and allow him an opportunity to respond over the broadcaster’s facilities.
  • The political editorial rule required that when a broadcaster endorsed a particular political candidate, the broadcaster was required to provide the other qualified candidates for the same office (or their representatives) the opportunity to respond over the broadcaster’s facilities.
  • Section 315 imposes the requirement upon broadcasters to grant equal broadcasting time to political candidates with certain exceptions. The amendment pertaining to the Fairness Doctrine states the following: Nothing in the foregoing sentence [creating exemptions from the equal time requirements] shall be construed as relieving broadcasters, in connection with the presentation of newscasts, news interviews, news documentaries, and on-the-spot, from the obligation imposed upon them under this chapter to operate in the public interest and to afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views on issues of public importance.

Source: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40009.pdf

 

Edited December 15, 2020 by washparkhorn

[Neonmoon 38,130]

Controlled by the silent and stupid majority 

 

[UpperWestside 6,224]

I believe that our electorate as a whole is not as educated as it should be when it comes to voting and really being engaged in this aspect of our culture. I do not believe it to be helpful to call voters stupid or really any other derogatory names. 
 

The last four years had me burning red hot with folks I did not align with politically. This summer changed that. One of the reasons was reading the John Lewis memoir Walking With the Wind. That guy literally had his skull cracked open by people who did not look at him as being a human being and yet he never stopped trying to help people who did not agree with him. 
 

To be kind, our society is a hot mess, but we can either write off millions of our fellow citizens or we can try to help them. Extending a helping hand is a lot more effective than lamenting that we share the country with morons. My own brother sent me a rant not too long ago that I would kindly say was something the locals back in my hometown in Texas were saying. I took the tact of still being nice and telling him I loved him and was here for him. His beliefs will take awhile to go through and talk about, but that is for another day.

That annoying neighbor with the Stop the Steal sign in his yard or on a shirt or hat? Take time to ask why they believe that. Listen to why they feel so strongly about their position. Some of you posting here used to support a party that you now vehemently oppose after you dug deeper into what you saw happening to it. There are people who latched onto the words of a con man and a party because it sounded good to folks who lost hope in everything else. Try and help those folks out now by just listening and going from there. 

Edited December 16, 2020 by UpperWestside

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19,246]

I believe that our electorate as a whole is not as educated as it should be when it comes to voting and really being engaged in this aspect of our culture. I do not believe it to be helpful to call voters stupid or really any other derogatory names. 
 
The last four years had me burning red hot with folks I did not align with politically. This summer changed that. One of the reasons was reading the John Lewis memoir Walking With the Wind. That guy literally had his skull cracked open by people who did not look at him as being a human being and yet he never stopped trying to help people who did not agree with him. 
 
To be kind, our society is a hot mess, but we can either write off millions of our fellow citizens or we can try to help them. Extending a helping hand is a lot more effective than lamenting that we share the country with morons. My own brother sent me a rant not too long ago that I would kindly say was something the locals back in my hometown in Texas were saying. I took the tact of still being nice and telling him I loved him and was here for him. His beliefs will take awhile to go through and talk about, but that is for another day.
That annoying neighbor with the Stop the Steal sign in his yard or on a shirt or hat? Take time to ask why they believe that. Listen to why they feel so strongly about their position. Some of you posting here used to support a party that you now vehemently oppose after you dug deeper into what you saw happening to it. There are people who latched onto the words of a con man and a party because it sounded good to folks who lost hope in everything else. Try and help those folks out now by just listening and going from there. 

Nope, not after the last 6 weeks. They are absolute hypocrites who are allowing a con man to hurt the United States. They should not be listened to anymore.

[Degenerate Gardner 4,104]

2 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

The Fairness Doctrine might have helped. Reagan killed it early on (in accordance with the stated plans in the Lewis Powell memo).* (link to Powell memo from Reuters) 

Note - if reimplemented, the Fairness Doctrine would need to be expanded to cover news from cable and internet news outlets, as well as over the air broadcast groups. 

A background on the fairness doctrine from the Congressional Research Service is in the spoiler. below.

  Hide contents

• In the spirit of this broad mandate, the FCC favored granting and renewing licenses to broadcast stations that presented more than one viewpoint in their programming.
• In 1949, finding its authority in the public interest obligations imposed upon broadcasters by the Communications Act, the FCC issued a report entitled In the Matter of Editorializing by Broadcast Licensees.  
• The report affirmatively established the duty of broadcast licensees to cover controversial issues of public importance in a fair and balanced manner.  The obligation is known as the Fairness Doctrine. 
• The Fairness Doctrine consisted of two basic requirements:
  • (1) that every licensee devote a reasonable portion of broadcast time to the discussion and consideration of controversial issues of public importance; and
  • (2) that in doing so, [the broadcaster must be] fair – that is, [the broadcaster] must affirmatively endeavor to make ... facilities available for the expression of contrasting viewpoints held by responsible elements with respect to the controversial issues presented.
• These obligations were not satisfied by simply granting air time to those who requested it in order to respond to an issue previously discussed during the broadcaster’s regular programming.
  • Broadcasters instead had the affirmative duty to determine what the appropriate opposing viewpoints were on these controversial issues, and who was best suited to present them. 
• If sponsored programming was not an option, the broadcasters had to provide it at their own expense. 
• Further requirements of the Fairness Doctrine were eventually codified into regulation: 
  • The personal attack rule stated that when personal attacks were made on individuals involved in public issues, the broadcaster had to, within one week of the broadcast, notify the person attacked, provide him with a copy of the broadcast (either script or tape), and allow him an opportunity to respond over the broadcaster’s facilities.
  • The political editorial rule required that when a broadcaster endorsed a particular political candidate, the broadcaster was required to provide the other qualified candidates for the same office (or their representatives) the opportunity to respond over the broadcaster’s facilities.
  • Section 315 imposes the requirement upon broadcasters to grant equal broadcasting time to political candidates with certain exceptions. The amendment pertaining to the Fairness Doctrine states the following: Nothing in the foregoing sentence [creating exemptions from the equal time requirements] shall be construed as relieving broadcasters, in connection with the presentation of newscasts, news interviews, news documentaries, and on-the-spot, from the obligation imposed upon them under this chapter to operate in the public interest and to afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views on issues of public importance.

Source: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40009.pdf

 

Great stuff Wash. Thanks.

I wouldn't mind if we termed the Masked Singer and returned to this

 

[Biff Tannen 45,782]

1 hour ago, UpperWestside said:

I believe that our electorate as a whole is not as educated as it should be when it comes to voting and really being engaged in this aspect of our culture. I do not believe it to be helpful to call voters stupid or really any other derogatory names. 
 

The last four years had me burning red hot with folks I did not align with politically. This summer changed that. One of the reasons was reading the John Lewis memoir Walking With the Wind. That guy literally had his skull cracked open by people who did not look at him as being a human being and yet he never stopped trying to help people who did not agree with him. 
 

To be kind, our society is a hot mess, but we can either write off millions of our fellow citizens or we can try to help them. Extending a helping hand is a lot more effective than lamenting that we share the country with morons. My own brother sent me a rant not too long ago that I would kindly say was something the locals back in my hometown in Texas were saying. I took the tact of still being nice and telling him I loved him and was here for him. His beliefs will take awhile to go through and talk about, but that is for another day.

That annoying neighbor with the Stop the Steal sign in his yard or on a shirt or hat? Take time to ask why they believe that. Listen to why they feel so strongly about their position. Some of you posting here used to support a party that you now vehemently oppose after you dug deeper into what you saw happening to it. There are people who latched onto the words of a con man and a party because it sounded good to folks who lost hope in everything else. Try and help those folks out now by just listening and going from there. 

So I agree with the basic premise, but I think it is woefully undermined by the speed and efficacy of social media.  I've said it before on here, but even if you are able to get them out of their psychotic haze for a moment and you think they see reason, as soon as they go back to their social media echo chambers, everything is reset.  This is not something I have a solution for.  You cannot stop people from retreating back to the horrid caves from which they got these beliefs and they will be reinforced ten fold against whatever gains you may have made.

[UpperWestside 6,224]

4 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

So I agree with the basic premise, but I think it is woefully undermined by the speed and efficacy of social media.  I've said it before on here, but even if you are able to get them out of their psychotic haze for a moment and you think they see reason, as soon as they go back to their social media echo chambers, everything is reset.  This is not something I have a solution for.  You cannot stop people from retreating back to the horrid caves from which they got these beliefs and they will be reinforced ten fold against whatever gains you may have made.

I look at it like this. There will always be an echo chamber that is available to them. The people who hated John Lewis for wanting to have basic rights afforded him and every other black man, woman and child in America had to eventually see firsthand that hate did not triumph. Some people will stick to their beliefs, but we have a responsibility to reach out to those we agree with the least. We cannot just write off 74 million people and treat them like they are lesser human beings. 

[safe sex 11,810]

2 hours ago, UpperWestside said:

I look at it like this. There will always be an echo chamber that is available to them. The people who hated John Lewis for wanting to have basic rights afforded him and every other black man, woman and child in America had to eventually see firsthand that hate did not triumph. Some people will stick to their beliefs, but we have a responsibility to reach out to those we agree with the least. We cannot just write off 74 million people and treat them like they are lesser human beings. 

Social media is far stronger an influence than anything that has previously existed in human history. Trying to be nice and understanding is not nearly as efficacious as bias-confirming Facebook posts. Something has to happen.

[Brisketexan 105,673]

Take a gander at the train wreck that Austin just elected to city council.

We’re poo-flinging monkeys, but not that smart.

[UpperWestside 6,224]

4 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

Social media is far stronger an influence than anything that has previously existed in human history. Trying to be nice and understanding is not nearly as efficacious as bias-confirming Facebook posts. Something has to happen.

The same as propaganda on film was the biggest thing until the next big thing comes along. The thing that remains the same is the human psyche and the propensity to fall victim to con artists. If you want to see any real progress made with the Trump cult you have to take time to talk to them. If you wrote them off as a group they will continue doing things that their con man of choice says to believe and do. Talking and listening helps, but it requires patience that most folks do not have because of the palpable anger over the last four years. 
 

 

Edited December 16, 2020 by UpperWestside

[safe sex 11,810]

Just now, UpperWestside said:

The same as propaganda on film was the biggest thing until the next big thing comes along. The thing that remains the same is the human psyche and the propensity to fall victim to con artists. If you want to see any real progress made with the Trump cult you have to take time to talk to them. If you wrote them off as a group they will into us doing things that their con man of choice says to believe and do. Talking and listening helps, but it requires patience that most folks do not have because of the palpable anger over the last four years. 
 

 

What else was the evolution of the "ECONOMIC ANXIETY" bullshit that we heard the first several years of Trump other than an effort to listen to them? They wrote themselves off. They are the ones who separated themselves from reality; from decency; from honesty. You act as though people haven't been trying to reach out to Trump voters. 

I understand your larger point that scolding people doesn't work in changing their minds. I agree that it doesn't. I'm not saying we should necessarily do that—though a good shaming would do wonders for many of them, if they have any shame left. Something beyond nodding and listening has to be done. We know what they want and why they want it. They have spent about six years shouting it at us.

[TwiceHorn 31,702]

The only decent-ish analogy to the internet and social media is/was the printing press, which brought ideas, mostly good ones, to the masses.  I'm sure there was some hideous dreck in there too, but the underclass couldn't read, so it didn't matter that much.

The internet is faster, more accessible, and has fewer barriers to entry than the written word in the 15 century and for several centuries thereafter.

Hell, I worry about myself in here sometimes.  I think we mostly bandy about good ideas, but it is easy to fall into the echo chamber trap.

[UpperWestside 6,224]

26 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

What else was the evolution of the "ECONOMIC ANXIETY" bullshit that we heard the first several years of Trump other than an effort to listen to them? They wrote themselves off. They are the ones who separated themselves from reality; from decency; from honesty. You act as though people haven't been trying to reach out to Trump voters. 

I understand your larger point that scolding people doesn't work in changing their minds. I agree that it doesn't. I'm not saying we should necessarily do that—though a good shaming would do wonders for many of them, if they have any shame left. Something beyond nodding and listening has to be done. We know what they want and why they want it. They have spent about six years shouting it at us.

I understand your point of view and it is one I shared and is still shared by the majority of the folks who post in the CR. I don't look down on you for the anger you feel towards them. I have a family full of these people who went all in on the Trump train. The question I ask myself is does the actions of others that had some horrific consequences for the country make it okay for me to then shame them and treat them as bad or worse than how they acted towards anyone who wasn't in with their cult? After a lot of time to reflect and consider what happened I decided that the best course of action is not to repeat the same behavior. There is no value in that other than getting a temporary form of satisfaction. There are millions of people who voted for Biden who want to see every Trump voter wind up destitute and bankrupt and suffer everyday they have left on this earth. This is a bridge too far for me and I would rather work towards helping as many of these folks as is humanly possible instead of treating them worse. There is no value in that. 

I honestly do not think most of us have done a whole lot of reaching out and mostly it is because it's hard to want to set aside feelings of anger when the person you are talking to still is in an alternate reality fueled by a lying demigod type figure that millions believe had an election stolen from him. Trumpism is a symptom of a much deeper problem and if we do not try to solve that then we are ALL going to be in a world of hurt, Biden voters included. 

[safe sex 11,810]

Wtf does reaching out and listening even look like to you? What does that mean policy-wise? What does that mean administration tone-wise? What are you personally doing to listen and learn about Trump's victims' motivations? 

Ffs, no one here is seriously saying that Trump voters' families should be separated and locked away in cages (only the actual Trumps). But they shouldn't have any fucking input on how to run the country for the foreseeable future. We know what putting them in charge looks like.

[Bama Chick 28,596]

It is impossible to “reach out and listen” to people who live in a state of delusion and who outright reject objective truth ma and facts.

There can be no common ground with people who actively spurn reality.

Then add in their propensity for hateful and violent rhetoric and in some cases actual violence.

These people are not the Republicans of Reagan and Bush. Heck, they’re not even the Republicans of OG Gingrich and the Tea Party.

I have absolutely zero interest in wasting my time trying to offer an olive branch to a group of Americans who would sooner see me dead.

They absolutely should be shunned and shamed and driven into their dark corners.