grumpyduck
grumpyduck's JournalStyle of Republican and Democratic language in the media?
Okay, this is not about throwing spitballs or name-calling. I'm asking a real question which I hope those of you who are on social media (which I'm not) can answer.
From reading tweets here and elsewhere, and seeing Republican comments and responses to various issues in various places, I'm under the impression that the language used by Republicans is different from that of Democrats. And maybe I'm wrong. Republican commentary seems to be very short and to the point: short sentences, catchphrases, slogans. Democratic commentary seems to be longer and often rambling. Okay, maybe "rambling" is not the correct word.
What made me think of this is advertising, where the focus has changed so much over the years. Back in the late 1800s it focused on the product itself, then changed to the features of the product, then to the benefits of the product, and, more recently, screw the product and just focus on the lifestyle to be attained by using the product. "Lock her up" is easy to say and remember, and guaranteed to get people riled up. Democrats don't seem to have anything like that.
Again, this is not about throwing spitballs. I'm just fascinated by the idea that the two parties may be using different language to communicate with their followers.
Bob Woodard's book and the NYT Op Ed: a coincidence?
There are lots of posts already about the Op Ed, so my apologies if this has already been mentioned...
The timing, with regards to the Bob Woodward book, seems funny, like the writer is expecting a load of backlash and wants to defuse some of it before they all have to defend themselves.
It would have probably been too obvious to get it published in the WaPo, so so "they" went to the NYT.
Congressional Republicans are traitors.
'nuff said.
Okay, fine... MANY of them are.
Invitation from Conservative Underground
Okay, before you report me and insist this be deleted, please read on.
As I said in another post, I lurk over at CU now and then, mostly to see how low they will go to bash DUers. 
A few times I've actually seen an argument in defense of a specific position, but mostly their comments seem to be personal (what idiots we are) instead of directed at the issue involved. Please read on.
Now they have issued an invitation for us to come over and discuss stuff. As the fellow who issued the invitation put it, "to have some fun." The responses to his invitation have been... okay, I'll say it... pretty insulting to us: personal put-downs instead of comments on how we disagree or how an exchange of ideas might be useful. Which got me to thinking.
Granted DU and CU are both chat rooms, i.e., places to vent and commisserate with like-minded folks from the privacy of a username. I don't have a clue what would constitute a "serious political discussion forum," but neither one of them seem to be one. What IS noticeable is that nowadays people (and I see it here too) seem to be indulging in a lot of personal put-downs and spitball-throwing instead of addressing the issues involved. "If you don't agree with me, you're a fucking asshole" and such. Maybe it's just easier to call someone a moron instead of responding to what he/she said.
There's a huge difference between saying that somebody's specific comment was galaxy-class beyond-fucking-shitbrained-stupid, and calling that individual, personally, a fucking asshole. One addreses the comment and the other addresses the person.
Over the past few years, and especially over the past year and a half, a lot of people seem to have lost the ability to tell the difference.
Reminds me of name-calling back in grammar school. I thought I had left that behind.
Interesting observation re: McCain and Trump
Okay, here it goes... cards on the table: I occasionally lurk over at Conservative Underground. No apologies from me. Governments and industry do it too, but they call it spying. I just don't get paid for it, I don't carry a gun, and I haven't worn my trench coat in years.
Anyway, I found that some members over there don't like McCain because he opposed Trump. Which brought up something which I thought was interesting.
McCain was a Republican, a long-time Republican. Now that he's gone, it seems Republicans don't like him (or worse) because he opposed Trump. Meanwhile, from I see see here, Democrats do like him (or more) because he opposed Trump.
So now the guy has fans in both parties for the same exact reason.
How many times has that happened before?
Are we all becoming more gullible by the day?
I started to say "Are Americans... " but a lot of people living here are not Americans. In any case, why do we tend to jump at anything DJT says and turn it into a talking point? The MSM does it, but that's just to fill up space and get advertising revenue... but we (most of us, anyway) don't get paid that way.
There have been lots of news clips about him tweeting, within a few minutes, about something Fox said... and then it turns into a talking point. And we pick up on it.
Really?
At one time, it was believed the worst insult you could lob at Americans was to ask if they believed everything they read in the papers. Nowadays we may not believe it, but we talk about it, on and on, anyway. Geez, what a waste of breath and fingertips.
Do we all just need to get a life?
Okay, Mollie Tibbits and illegal aliens
First, I think it's disgusting that her death is being politicized the way it is. Then again, in this day an age, I'm not surprised.
But here's a question for BOTH sides, and I'm asking because I don't know the answer:
Are there any "real" figures -- gathered by legitimate law-enforcement agencies as part of their information-gathering -- on how many violent crimes are committed by illegal aliens versus "everyone else?" I have to believe these figures exist somewhere, but I wouldn't for a split-second believe any numbers that came out of any political organizations.
I don't care about percentages or other "leading" comparisons, since they can be slanted towards whatever you want to prove. I just want to know numbers over a period of time. For instance:
"During the period 20xx to 20xx, there were a total of x violent crimes in the U.S. Of these, y were committed by illegal aliens."
Cuomo interview with Conway
I may old-fashioned and quaint as all hell, but I don't understand how Kellyanne (or anyone) can possibly go on TV with a performance like that and still look at herself in the mirror.
Unfortunately, Chris didn't do himself any favors by engaging in that back-and-forth either. I think of the old-timers like Cronkite, who would have been far more controlled and classy.
Of course (of course), altercations like that do sell advertising time, so what the heck. Take it all with a shakerful of salt.
More parallels to Hitler's Germany
Over the past few nights I've been watching a series titled "Hitler's Circle of Evil" on Netflix. I'm fascinated by the whole 30s - 40s period (not just the war), and this seemed like an interesting program to watch.
But, given the Republican silence with regards to Manafort/CohenGate, a few tidbits from the series stand out:
One of Hitler's original most trusted officials, Rudolf Hess, took it upon himself to fly to Scotland in 1941 to try to arrange a meeting with Winston Churchill to talk about peace. He was captured and spent the rest of his life in prison.
Two other top Nazis, Heinrich Himmler and Hermann Göring, tried to arrange talks with the Allies not long before Hitler committed suicide. In one of his last statements, Hitler referred to both of them as traitors. Both also committed suicide.
There were others, but the fact that these three, especially, tried to distance themselves from Hitler when they realized what was coming speaks volumes for the current Republican silence.
Don Lemon on the Republicans' silence about Manafort and Cohen
Just saw a clip of Don commenting on something that's been more and more noticeable recently: the utter silence from the Reps regardig DJT. As in staying under the radar.
They are distancing themselves from him. Not a good sign.
Even SHS's presser was awkward. Is she putting on weight? If so, that could (possibly) be a sign of stress.
The next week or two will be interesting.
Profile Information
Member since: Sat Dec 16, 2017, 01:51 PMNumber of posts: 6,232
