TJKMO
Loc: Bicycle Heaven
XXX wrote:
She was only saying what happens with an open border. She never said that her story was from Bidens border. You got the wrong meaning.
Then you do not understand how the English language works.
She takes 2 TOTALLY UNRELATED stories and weaves them into the same narrative.
It is a dishonest use of the language.
TJKMO
Loc: Bicycle Heaven
XXX wrote:
She was only saying what happens with an open border. She never said that her story was from Bidens border. You got the wrong meaning.
Borders did not have anything to do with this.
It all happened in Mexico.
Sometimes it is impossible to defend MAGA.
This is one of those times.
XXX
Loc: Somewhere north of the Mason-Dixon
TJKMO wrote:
Then you do not understand how the English language works.
She takes 2 TOTALLY UNRELATED stories and weaves them into the same narrative.
It is a dishonest use of the language.
You were the one jumping to conclusions and lying to yourself.
TJKMO
Loc: Bicycle Heaven
XXX wrote:
You were the one jumping to conclusions and lying to yourself.
No.
People from all over political spectrum acknowledged that it was wrong.
The border had nothing to do with this story.
And the woman whose story she relayed felt betrayed for using her story this way
TJKMO wrote:
Then you do not understand how the English language works.
She takes 2 TOTALLY UNRELATED stories and weaves them into the same narrative.
It is a dishonest use of the language.
There is also, the lack of substance in most right-wing arguments that leaves people grasping for relevance. There's a certain way to promote MAGA arguments that involves a complete abandonment of logic and a switch to emotional appeal instead. So the argument doesn't have to make rational sense. The objective here is to simply stoke the emotions, during a conversation about a particular topic.
So if the topic of discussion is immigration, you can introduce stories that have nothing to do with immigration but creates emotional outrage and as long as people are experiencing this outrage during a conversation about immigration, it works.
The story that Katie Britt shared occurred in Mexico and actually didn't have anything to do with immigration at all. But since her intended audience generally associates immigration with Mexicans all she had to do is bring it up to stoke that fire.
It's the same thing Trump did when he was talking about agreements with the Chinese regarding the automotive industry and he suddenly says there will be a bloodbath if he doesn't get elected, then went right back to talking about the automotive industry. Of course Trump wanders around when he talks anyway because he's not capable of focus but, the effect is the same.
After all, the power of the MAGA narrative isn't in it's construction but the inability of i***ts to know any better.
TJKMO
Loc: Bicycle Heaven
straightUp wrote:
There is also, the lack of substance in most right-wing arguments that leaves people grasping for relevance. There's a certain way to promote MAGA arguments that involves a complete abandonment of logic and a switch to emotional appeal instead. So the argument doesn't have to make rational sense. The objective here is to simply stoke the emotions, during a conversation about a particular topic.
So if the topic of discussion is immigration, you can introduce stories that have nothing to do with immigration but creates emotional outrage and as long as people are experiencing this outrage during a conversation about immigration, it works.
The story that Katie Britt shared occurred in Mexico and actually didn't have anything to do with immigration at all. But since her intended audience generally associates immigration with Mexicans all she had to do is bring it up to stoke that fire.
It's the same thing Trump did when he was talking about agreements with the Chinese regarding the automotive industry and he suddenly says there will be a bloodbath if he doesn't get elected, then went right back to talking about the automotive industry. Of course Trump wanders around when he talks anyway because he's not capable of focus but, the effect is the same.
After all, the power of the MAGA narrative isn't in it's construction but the inability of i***ts to know any better.
There is also, the lack of substance in most right... (
show quote)
I totally agree.
The entire MAGA movement is about EMOTION.
Like all CULTS,
It about the PERSONALITY of the CULTMASTER that is the power that drives them.
Jim Jones was my first exposure to it.
And many examples exist from Charles Manson to Heaven’s Gate to David Koresh in WACO and beyond.
TJKMO wrote:
I totally agree.
The entire MAGA movement is about EMOTION.
Like all CULTS,
It about the PERSONALITY of the CULTMASTER that is the power that drives them.
Jim Jones was my first exposure to it.
And many examples exist from Charles Manson to Heaven’s Gate to David Koresh in WACO and beyond.
You and Jim Jones were close? You help distribute the "juice"?
TJKMO
Loc: Bicycle Heaven
youngwilliam wrote:
You and Jim Jones were close? You help distribute the "juice"?
Of course not.
I did not know him.
I did not live around his Cult.
I was only 20 when it happened.
The Kool-Aid meme he started has live for 50 years and counting.
That is why MAGA MUST reevaluate their support for Trump, before it is too late.
Why would you even say such thing?
TJKMO wrote:
Of course not.
I did not know him.
I did not live around his Cult.
I was only 20 when it happened.
The Kool-Aid meme he started has live for 50 years and counting.
That is why MAGA MUST reevaluate their support for Trump, before it is too late.
Why would you even say such thing?
Jim Jones was your first exposure. Thought you knew him..
TJKMO
Loc: Bicycle Heaven
youngwilliam wrote:
Jim Jones was your first exposure. Thought you knew him..
I just told you.
I DID NOT KNOW JIM JONES.
Why do you spew such nonsense and LIES?
TJKMO
Loc: Bicycle Heaven
Knightlady wrote:
They do and we do
You have the potential to remove yourself from the MAGA CULT.
Please seek your Better Angels.
straightUp wrote:
There is also, the lack of substance in most right-wing arguments that leaves people grasping for relevance. There's a certain way to promote MAGA arguments that involves a complete abandonment of logic and a switch to emotional appeal instead. So the argument doesn't have to make rational sense. The objective here is to simply stoke the emotions, during a conversation about a particular topic.
So if the topic of discussion is immigration, you can introduce stories that have nothing to do with immigration but creates emotional outrage and as long as people are experiencing this outrage during a conversation about immigration, it works.
The story that Katie Britt shared occurred in Mexico and actually didn't have anything to do with immigration at all. But since her intended audience generally associates immigration with Mexicans all she had to do is bring it up to stoke that fire.
It's the same thing Trump did when he was talking about agreements with the Chinese regarding the automotive industry and he suddenly says there will be a bloodbath if he doesn't get elected, then went right back to talking about the automotive industry. Of course Trump wanders around when he talks anyway because he's not capable of focus but, the effect is the same.
After all, the power of the MAGA narrative isn't in it's construction but the inability of i***ts to know any better.
There is also, the lack of substance in most right... (
show quote)
Sooo; who has driven the cost of food and evry day living up?
Who attacked domestic energy production?
The Demons! That is who.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.