Thinking this through: at the end, she implicitly accuses the Democrats of anti-white racism. If I post this on Facebook, someone will watch this to the end and the post on Facebook that she is a racist. I would have to defend myself by saying that being against anti-white racism is not racism. That someone would then ask ‘Why am I defending racism?’ 85% of my Facebook friends would then see, ‘Trump Supporter, racist’, nod knowingly to themselves, as if they had always suspected it of ‘dt’, and move on. Possibly de-friend me. Certainly ignore me. Just by mentioning race, this video poison-pills itself (not deliberately, I think). In fairness, if she had *not* mentioned race, someone would have found another page where she *did* mention race, with the same end result. Or someone would find an associate of hers who had mentioned race at some point in the past, and it would end the same way.
I am totally spamming you today Mr Flaherty, I hope you don’t mind. I guess the only way to make an impact is to have a network of friends who are capable of non-associative thinking. By ‘associative thinking’ I mean that style of thought that reasons “All racists support Trump, therefore all Trump supporters are racist. Trump supporters suspect election fraud, therefore all people who suspect election fraud are Trump supporters. All Trump supporters are racist, therefore all people who suspect election fraud are racists; and that video just *proves* it” You *know* 85% of people think this way. With a network of non-associate thinkers it would be possible to get a video shared sufficiently widely to reach the threshold of ‘social proof’ the other 85% demand.
Defense.gov News Photo 110426-A-7597S-183: U.S. Special Operations service members with Special Operations Task Force South board two UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters following a clearing operation in Panjwa'i district in Kandahar province, Afghanistan, on April 25, 2011. Source: Wikimedia.
That’s one of the most compelling things I have ever seen.
Are any readers here familiar with Patty McMurray’s other work? Before I share this I’d like to know she isn’t some kind of weirdo.
Thinking this through: at the end, she implicitly accuses the Democrats of anti-white racism. If I post this on Facebook, someone will watch this to the end and the post on Facebook that she is a racist. I would have to defend myself by saying that being against anti-white racism is not racism. That someone would then ask ‘Why am I defending racism?’ 85% of my Facebook friends would then see, ‘Trump Supporter, racist’, nod knowingly to themselves, as if they had always suspected it of ‘dt’, and move on. Possibly de-friend me. Certainly ignore me. Just by mentioning race, this video poison-pills itself (not deliberately, I think). In fairness, if she had *not* mentioned race, someone would have found another page where she *did* mention race, with the same end result. Or someone would find an associate of hers who had mentioned race at some point in the past, and it would end the same way.
I don’t know if I’m being cowardly or realistic.
I am totally spamming you today Mr Flaherty, I hope you don’t mind. I guess the only way to make an impact is to have a network of friends who are capable of non-associative thinking. By ‘associative thinking’ I mean that style of thought that reasons “All racists support Trump, therefore all Trump supporters are racist. Trump supporters suspect election fraud, therefore all people who suspect election fraud are Trump supporters. All Trump supporters are racist, therefore all people who suspect election fraud are racists; and that video just *proves* it” You *know* 85% of people think this way. With a network of non-associate thinkers it would be possible to get a video shared sufficiently widely to reach the threshold of ‘social proof’ the other 85% demand.
@dt
Yes, the MSM’s been frothing at the mouth with false dichotomies of late and people are drinking it up like mother’s milk.