HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » moose65 » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: NC
Member since: Thu Oct 21, 2004, 09:10 AM
Number of posts: 2,504

Journal Archives

Wow. Just wow

Sometimes we forget this. The Republican party has, since the early 20th century, been the party of the rich and of big business. That is what they really care about - making rich people even richer. Democrats need to be more like Truman, and tell the TRUTH about Republicans.

Republicans have controlled both houses of Congress AND the Presidency only three times in history - in the early 1920's, leading up to the Depression; in the George W. Bush years, leading up to the Recession; and in the first two years of Trump's presidency. There's a reason why they were booted out of office each time - when they have total control, the results are disastrous. They lost the presidency for 20 years after the Depression. They lost the House, Senate, and the Presidency after George W. They were creamed in 2018 and lost the House after Trump's bumbling first two years.

Democrats never learn how to play hard ball. They should be out there screaming from the rooftops that Republican policies are disasters. All they care about is cutting taxes for the rich - the only major legislation passed under Trump was the tax cut bill. They want to starve the US treasury and grab all the dough they can, and they've conned the poor religious deplorables into doing their dirty work for them.

I've seen it with my own eyes!

And it's always people who were very conservative to begin with. No one has been "converted" or anything. It's just a steady drip-drip-drip reinforcing beliefs they already had, but magnifying them with the outrage meter turned up to 11. On Fox News, they repeat the same talking points over and over and over again, until it becomes deafening. It's no longer enough for them that Democrats have different political opinions. They are now telling their viewers that Democrats are evil, and are the enemy of America.

I really, truly think that most people, deep down, think there is a law out there somewhere that says that "news" programs are not allowed to blatantly lie. I've actually heard people say a version of "if it wasn't true, they wouldn't be allowed to say it." They have no idea that Fox News is an entertainment network masquerading as a news network. All those bobbleheads on Fox and Friends, along with Tucker and Hannity, are actors on a set. It's the same with people who blindly share memes on Facebook all day long that are, at worst, blatantly false, or at best a stretch of a grain of truth.

Sometimes it's so depressing, I feel like giving up. You can't reason with the true believers. I've gotten into comment flame wars with people who insist that the Republican Party is the party of civil rights, or who are convinced that Obama kept kids in cages. Or the latest one I've seen, that we could have built the wall with all that money that Obama sent to Iran.

However, there are some who CAN be reached, even if it's just planting a seed in their heads. I have one co-worker who would seem to be a typical MAGA voter. She's 68, Baptist, and was married to a Baptist preacher before he died last year. She is your typical Southern preacher's wife, but she absolutely despises Trump and thinks he's the biggest hypocrite who's ever lived. So there is a little hope here and there!

So what's the best way to respond to this?

We've all seen this on social media, I'm sure: an article, tweet, or post about Trump's cavalier dismissal of receiving information from foreign governments or agents, and someone inevitably replies "But Hillary's campaign got help from a foreigner - Christopher Steele!!1!1!!'"

What's the best way to deflate that line of thinking? By pointing out that Steele is British, so he doesn't represent a hostile foreign government? By saying that Steele was paid, first by Republicans and then by Democrats, and that's not the same as foreigners offering information in return for something later on? By saying that Steele was an intelligence agent who had investigated many things in the past, and he didn't have his own agenda?

I know that the hardcore Trumpers won't listen to reason, but we have to push back, lest that line enters the popular consciousness as just another "both sides do it" alternative fact.....
Go to Page: 1