is it a mistake to glorify boebert's gun shot by replaying it over and over?

[msongs]

Ive seen it 4 times today but as free publicity, not as a paid ad. it is said one should not mention in your own marketing the claims of the opposition because it just brings attention to the opposition claim. seems like just a mention of the ad contents is better than actually showing it. well that's my opinion anyway
especially on a big day for dems.

[drray23]

1. its important to expose her for what she is.

Maybe they could just discuss the ad but seeing this ad and hearing those gunshots in it makes it impactfull

[leftieNanner]

4. What I found chilling

was the gunshot at the end, and then (I think) the sound of reloading/cocking a shotgun. I'm not an experienced gun person, so I may be wrong about that.

[Caliman73]

10. Yes, that seemed stupid to me, out of place, but put in on purpose.

It seemed to be just the racking of a slide, not necessarily a shotgun, but that is just a detail.

It was anti-immigrant and a threat to Pelosi, as well as an "attack on elites". We don't need to build a stupid, expensive, ineffective Wall along the border. That is just a xenophobic/racist trope. The capital HAS needed to put in security because White Supremacist insurrectionists attacked the Capital just a little over 2 months ago, and had plans to do it again.

Boebert is an idiot and has no place in Congress.

[msfiddlestix]

9. My feeling about your point of it's impact is the offense (for me)

for those of us that feel it should never be played It should only be discussed, but generally speaking never played on air, because I feel that it's like free advertising of a very disturbing and dark political message which should never be given space.

But in this case the gunshots portion of the ad is the point, so my strong suggestion would be for the host to read the transcript of the text, and then air the gunshots audio. That way, it isn't a free campaign ad, it is an indictment in a matter of speaking.

I just wish cable hosts would reconsider their treatment of the breadth of egregious videos by attempting to do a little more work, like read the damn text, play only the portion that matters.

that's my 2 cents, because I always turn off or change the channel unhappily and angrily as host would otherwise listen to, I have to shut down. One would think, they'd care about their viewers just a little bit more than they so far demonstrate as a rule.

Rachel is an exception, and so is Lawrence, but can't say that at all about Chris Hayes.

[Throck]

2. I tune shit like that out.

Not living in my head rent free.

Someone else didn't live there ever.

Although I did watch a lot of South Park and Simpson's reruns.

[Arkansas Granny]

3. I have to tell you, the sound of that gunshot sent chills down my spine.

Someone needs to have a long talk with this fool. She needs to be censured, but spineless Republicans won't do anything.

[IcyPeas]

5. They're too busy with Dr. Seuss and Pepe Le Pew...

To notice a few gunshots.

[alphafemale]

6. It is horrifying not glorifying.

I am dumbfounded at what a clod she is.

[padah513]

7. It should earn her a visit from the FBI

[msongs]

8. agreed nt

[sboatcar]

11. More social media views makes it more popular, makes it generate more revenue.....

[FlyingPiggy]

12. YES. Ignore her.