The right thinks what?
this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
482 points (94.6% liked)
politics
19126 readers
2409 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
So, the same people who religiously listen to Ted Nugent are amazed that a different singer could influence people?
load more comments
(3 replies)
I mean most of these huge pop artists are pure astroterf from the record labels. But what does this have to do with Trump?
I agree. I also think successful products are a conspiracy that companies engage in to make money. Later on I am going to engage in a conspiracy to drink beer.
When you're stupid everything is confusing and anything can be a conspiracy.
If your political party can be easily brought down by a pop singer, your political party’s problem isn’t pop singers.
They believe it’s a PsyOp because it’s what they would do if they could. It’s all projection.
Idk it seems pretty reliant on carbon chemistry. There’s people involved and everything.
I've said for years she was designed in a lab and programmed for public consumption.
I'm gonna be proven right y'know. Just waiting for Trav to get back to me and confirm.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Makes me love her even more
You know, even the most batfuck stupid conspiracy theories usually have at least some grain of truth to them, even in a "six degrees of separation" kind of way. At least you could trace the line of thinking back to its roots. But this?
This barely even qualifies as a conspiracy. This is what a Walmart version of ChatGPT would come up with if you told it to come up with a conspiracy theory based on a random word salad that just happens to contain both the words "swift" and "trump". There is no logic here. It doesn't even make sense. It's like trying to treat "Person woman man camera TV" as if it were a real sentence with meaning. It's like saying "Penguins paint rocks because giraffes see in purple." It's a stream of consciousness from someone who hasn't taken his meds today.
This is just Trump and his team's usual tactic of distorting the meaning of words in order to lessen their impact when they're used against him. Ever notice how everything is an insurrection now? Everything is election interference. Every President gets impeached. That way, when those words are used to describe him, at least a percentage of people won't look at it a major scandal surrounding a man engaged in criminal activity. They'll look at it as just another wild conspiracy theory, just like all the others, and to be mentally dismissed just as quickly. And that's the whole point. In his mind, his behavior doesn't look so bad if "everyone is doing it."
Laura loomer, more like Laura groomer
Maybe this is the best simulation/timeline. Idk anymore.