General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: This is the fallacy, and disingenuous nature of Michael Moore's prognostications. If we lose in [View all]JHan
(10,173 posts)1) I'm reading reviews and if I come across one which suggests I'll learn more about the flint crisis than I currently know, I'm willing to watch the movie while editing out Moore's disingenuous criticisms.
2) It's good that Flint is the focus. The story has died down at a time when the Trump administration is gutting the EPA and stripping regulations governing water safety and pollutants.
3) It's good Moore apparently focused on the connection between Trump and fascism. ( I don't agree that Trump is a Hitler, he's more Mussolini)
Ordinarily, I wouldn't attack an ally, but I don't think I should be silent if that ally attacks other allies without sound reason. I think it's fine to point out logically inconsistent positions. How can one say that it's a tragedy the winner of the popular vote didn't win the presidency but then claim that "bernie should have won the primaries" when bernie lost the primary by the popular vote too? And this is where it seems Moore once again plays to the audience he's cultivated over the past couple of decades, at times prioritizing this audience's biases over facts. It's important to point out when he does this because disinformation can metastasize into false narratives and memes which spread far and wide while truth limps behind.
If I do decide to watch it, now I know what to expect and I'll brace myself for the cheap shots.