sdw at lig.net
Wed Apr 27 15:54:25 PDT 2011
On 4/27/11 2:50 PM, J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
> On Apr 27, 2011, at 1:55 PM, Stephen Williams wrote:
>> I considered pointing out last week that Trump seems to be the Democratic secret weapon, on his own accord or not.
> I do not see how this is helping the Democrats, what Trump has done is far more useful to the Republicans.
Only if the current tainted crop are superseded by truthful erudite conservatives. They haven't seemed to exist, but there have to
be some. Perhaps when crazy or dumb isn't half the test for popularity we'll see someone interesting.
> First, the birther issue is now a Trump issue and not a Republican issue. He owns it. Trump masterfully played the media, undoubtedly for his own media-whoring purposes, but as a side effect it adds some distance between that issue and mainstream Republicans. No one views Trump as a real Republican.
Republicans will always own this, at least all of them that are on the record supporting the issue. The rest are tainted by it. A
simple graph of when facts were known (during the campaign) compared to various instances public comments were made will reveal that
they were in one of two modes: cluelessness or mendacity.
50% of Republicans polled are birthers. One would think the other 50% are rolling their eyes and wondering whether they're
supporting the right crowd.
> Second, any way you slice it Trump made Obama look weak. I was surprised that Obama responded at all, never mind actually giving Trump what he wanted. It is not exactly a secret that Obama is thin-skinned but the extent to which someone of no consequence can apparently manipulate him just adds to this impression.
Weak? I don't see it. As many commentators today pointed out, Obama is having to be the adult again.
> The birthers will be relegated to an out-of-sight, out-of-mind fringe by the time the 2012 electoral cycle comes around.
They wish. It will be too easy to bring up as part of their record.
>> At the very least, it is great performance art at making fun of the dummies who will fall for anything.
> It has been entertaining. I have to give Trump credit for one thing, he really knows how to use the media for his own ends.
I really wonder who's using who to what ends here. Rump has a long history of suggesting that he's going to run for president, only
to find a reason to not quite get there at the last moment. Usually, he benefits by better book sales or something.
>> We're probably going to have to get a lot worse before really curing these goofs of believing anything, but it is an interesting step.
> Curing them of believing? Not likely. People love their nutty conspiracy theories.
True, true. While some may come to conspiracy theories honestly through overactive skepticism and rationalization, the sheeple
flock who believe anything their "reliable" sources spout is impressive. Deliberately feeding disinformation to them is ethically
and morally criminal.
> The Republicans have their Birthers and the Democrats have their 9/11 Truthers (40%!?). The conspiracy nutters will always be with us with their conspiracy du jour and they are legion.
What Democrat has publicly questioned 9/11? What reputable Democrat? I don't think it is even a tiny fraction of the birther thing.
> Let's face it, both political parties are chock full o' nuts. It explains much about the state of the US.
Definitely. Too bad it's not illegal to spread half- and no-truths. It sort of is, but somehow not at all in politics.
More information about the FoRK