True political supporters

[Nanaboostme]

Those who support Trump and consistently use things like Facebook, which has now been open on being against Trump... doesn't it just end up being bit ironic?

It's like when a celebrity actor ruins his/her reputation affecting his/her marketing in a film or as a role model. (IE Bill O Reilly refusing to watch anything from Sean Penn as Penn was helping out Castro.)

I'd also think these supporters would stop using facebook or any other type of source that has been opened about what they're against or promoting.

[GennGreymane]

Those who support Trump and consistently use things like Facebook, which has now been open on being against Trump... don't it just end up being bit ironic? It's like when a celebrity actor ruins his/her reputation affecting his/her marketing in a film or as a role model. I'd also think these supporters would stop using facebook or any other type of source that has been opened about what they're against or promoting.

People post on FB basically everything.

[Nanaboostme]

People post on FB basically everything.

Posting? I mean Mark Zuckerberg consistently bashing Trump, directly or indirectly. I'm wondering how does one continue using that format when it for those hard-core passionate Trump supporters.

And not necessarily focusing on Trump, but in general like the Bill o Reilly example which he discussed with David Letterman

[GennGreymane]

Posting? I mean Mark Zuckerberg consistently bashing Trump, directly or indirectly. I'm wondering how does one continue using that format when it for those hard-core passionate Trump supporters.

And not necessarily focusing on Trump, but in general like the Bill o Reilly example which he discussed with David Letterman

Well, thats his personal view, he has terms and conditions and supporting trump is not a violation.

[Darsithis]

Posting? I mean Mark Zuckerberg consistently bashing Trump, directly or indirectly. I'm wondering how does one continue using that format when it for those hard-core passionate Trump supporters.

And not necessarily focusing on Trump, but in general like the Bill o Reilly example which he discussed with David Letterman

So what if Zuckerburg does? That's his personal opinion. Facebook itself isn't involved.

[Paula Deen]

I think what OP is trying to ask is why people who support Trump don't stop using Facebook because Fuckerberg hates Trump.

Well the reason is the same reason lots of people post about him on Facebook, they are "internet activists" IE they don't actually do shit. Its why they don't care.

[Nanaboostme]

So what if Zuckerburg does? That's his personal opinion. Facebook itself isn't involved.

his staff and Zuckerberg's political and non-political advisors have mentioned it before, obviously not unanimously, but these were shown through several one on one interviews with an audience like when Zuckerberg and his FB staff met up with Obama

- - - Updated - - -

I think what OP is trying to ask is why people who support Trump don't stop using Facebook because Fuckerberg hates Trump.

Well the reason is the same reason lots of people post about him on Facebook, they are "internet activists" IE they don't actually do shit. Its why they don't care.

Thats a fair point. I'd think thats why Trump doesnt use FB as of now. (or if he ever did)

[Skroe]

Those who support Trump and consistently use things like Facebook, which has now been open on being against Trump... doesn't it just end up being bit ironic? It's like when a celebrity actor ruins his/her reputation affecting his/her marketing in a film or as a role model. (IE Bill O Reilly refusing to watch anything from Sean Penn as Penn was helping out Castro.) I'd also think these supporters would stop using facebook or any other type of source that has been opened about what they're against or promoting.

I was talking with some family members kind of about this topic over the weekend at a wedding. My family is from Massachusetts and generally a little more liberal than they are (they're from Miami and much wealthier). I'm kind of down the middle.

They're disgusted by trump and Cruz. They aren't voting this fall.

Something we agreed upon is that essentially, people are rilled up, and after this election, we need to have a national conversation about the pervasiveness of political infighting across all forms of media. We talk as if this age of political polarization is an accident. Like it's a force of nature or something. It's not. It's an emergent property of the information age.

Thirty years ago as an American, your source of information about the world was the daily paper, usually the city paper and/or New York Times. It was the news at six, and later the news at eleven. Were you less informed? Absolutely. But there was a pacing, a moderation enforced by time by the media cycle. Events would go about a day between happening at the very least. And the upper limit for the most involved everyday American was the cycle in which news was delivered to them, also about a day (the time between two airings of World News Tonight).

Let's compare this to the past decade, and while this applies to trump, it is also pre-Trump.

Every minor update to political fighting is covered on 24 hour news networks - which emerged to cover global news, but in the US largely cover political news because it's much more economiocal for them to cover ($300 for talking head for 8 minutes versus supporting a lavish network of foreign offices). American today are exposed to the backroom of politics, the ugly underside, to a degree they never have before. Managers and strategists for campaigns, party operatives, formerly obscure figures, are now "opinionmakers".

From the smallest detail as the US staggers towards a fiscal cliff, to every thing Trump says to anybody, the Newsmedia reports all of it in a kind of stream-of-events mode. Most of it is irrelevant. But it is happening NOW so it is technically news. And in the last few years, it's become even more pervasive through ever more sophisticated apps.


Even things that have nothing to do with Politics we're seeing this. The BBC app goes bananas whenever 4 people drive off a mountain cliff in Peru. Or whenever some Kashmiri asshole throws a grenade at a Indian soldier that doesn't actually hurt anybody. As my buddy in Afghanistan told me, he chuckles when he hears about mortars being launched at a FOB being reported - it's like saying the wind is blowing on the other side of the world.

The WHY this has happened is well cataloged. But I strongly believe people are not at all equipped to deal with it or contextual it. Any of it. There really isn't that much different between getting bombarded with all the shitty tragedies that happen in the world - again, 4 people driving off a mountain cliff in Peru - and getting bombarded with the smallest political update at 15 minute intervals. It's going to have a cumulative effective. A warping effect. It'll make people angry.

ISIS is a perfect example of this. ISIS is a rapist and terrorist army of 30,000 people on the other side of the planet. They control a couple dozen towns and cities along some roads, and a lot of empty desert. They are nasty, terrible people and a threat for the region. But they aren't remotely close to an existential threat to the United States. They have in fact, an extremely limited reach. And yet many Americans have been so amped up on "ISIS is the enemy" they'd almost do Iraqi War II without thinking. And they can be forgiven for that: if you're a moral, freedom loving person who wants to help those under the thrall of radicalism, then using our vast power to slay that particular dragon is an extremely logical thing to think.

When it comes to politics, for all the rage people have against "libtards" and "gun loving nutjobs" or whatever, most people don't even realize that half the people on opposing sides of the debate on TV have known each other for decades, are occasionally married, and often have worked or went to school together. In the UK right now for example, there are Americans who worked for both Obama, McCain and Romney's 2008/2012 campaigns working together, on contract, for both the "Stay" and "Leave" campaigns. Professional campaigners of opposing political strips go into business together to wage campaigns when contracted, across an ocean.

So of course people are going to rant on facebook or on twitter. Of course they'll say stupid shit that has no basis in becoming policy. They're being fed a stream of raw data they'll ill equipped to contextualized. As sad as it is, it isn't important for everyday American to know every little maneuver of any political campaign than it is for them to know that 4 Japanese tourists drove over a cliff in Peru.

It really needs to stop. The world isn't so bad. Americans aren't that angry. And our problems are not that serious.

[TZucchini]

snip

Interesting read. But how exactly do we go about changing this? Short of nationalizing the media, I can't see any way. The political infighting and the 24 hour news cycle is incredibly lucrative for major corporations. Unfortunately, I only see it getting worse.

[Skroe]

Interesting read. But how exactly do we go about changing this? Short of nationalizing the media, I can't see any way. The political infighting and the 24 hour news cycle is incredibly lucrative for major corporations. Unfortunately, I only see it getting worse.

I got no clue. Seriously no answers for this one.

I mean I got a personal story here, because this is EXACTLY the kind of person I'm talking about.

My Godmother did not come to my brother's wedding this weekend. She's always been a quirky person. This year, she's a hardcore trump supporter. I mean hardcore. her Facebook is NASTY, and her nephew's facebook is borderline racist against black and latinos. She's completely lost it. Her facebook is the just a factory for the kind of worst comments you see on a pro-Trump website or blog.

She's become this tremendously angry person about these hypothetical things which don't effect her life. ISIS. "Syrian Immigration". Black Lives Matter. "The border" (she lives in fucking New Jersey). And now NATO and geopolitics. How the hell does she have an informed opinion about NATO defense spending?


She has a steady job. She's never been laid off or anything. She lives in a decent community (well... New Jersey...). Her anger at the world is this abstraction that didn't exist before she got bombarded with this stuff without the context.

She's not alone. I know others like her. I'm sure many people do. I have a hard time holding every day Trump supporters TOO responsible. It's the talking heads that should know better.

[BuckSparkles]

Posting? I mean Mark Zuckerberg consistently bashing Trump, directly or indirectly. I'm wondering how does one continue using that format when it for those hard-core passionate Trump supporters.

And not necessarily focusing on Trump, but in general like the Bill o Reilly example which he discussed with David Letterman

Plenty of Trump support as well. FB would only be a problem if it banned pro-trump speech.

[Caolela]

deleted...

It really needs to stop. The world isn't so bad. Americans aren't that angry. And our problems are not that serious.

All of that to reach this conclusion? As I said in the Sanders thread, your disinformation train seems to be running full steam ahead. I'll post a definition here though so readers can be made aware:

Disinformation is intentionally false or inaccurate information that is spread deliberately.[1] It is an act of deception and false statements to convince someone of untruth. Disinformation should not be confused with misinformation, information that is unintentionally false.[contradictory]

Unlike traditional propaganda techniques designed to engage emotional support, disinformation is designed to manipulate the audience at the rational level by either discrediting conflicting information or supporting false conclusions. A common disinformation tactic is to mix some truth and observation with false conclusions and lies, or to reveal part of the truth while presenting it as the whole.

So, The World According To Scroe™ is...everything's pretty peachy? Maybe for him it is as a Wall St. and warmonger's acolyte, and his interest in this is to keep the status quo gravy train going past the election, which Clinton will suffice for.

But no mention of:

- the huge and growing income disparity in the U.S....the greatest gap since the robber baron days of The Gilded Age of late 1800's
- jobs gone and continuing to be offshored since NAFTA and Bill Clinton, or farmed out to H1-B visas
- militarized police killing at will with no accountability and racial profiling
- uncontrolled monitoring, unconstitutional/illegal warrantless spying on everything with various gov't and privatized secret programs, under the convenient catch-all of "national security"
- tax havens, loopholes, shell corporations, and corporate welfare run amok
- 95% of MSM owned by just 6 mega-corporations, bent on 24/7 lies and PR spin/damage control to benefit other corporations and a complicit gov't
- Endless U.S. military involvement in several countries, and attempts at regime change, while it has supported "enemies" such as ISIS and Al Queda, Nazi/fascist groups in Ukraine, and so on.

...much of which fit the definitions of corporatism, aka - fascism.

The list goes on. But according to DJ Spinmeister Scroe - don't look behind the curtain, Dorothy, because there's nothing to see. We don't have rocks in our heads! No sirree!!

Next up: Scroe channels Shrub with, "just go shopping!".

[Skroe]

All of that to reach this conclusion? As I said in the Sanders thread, your disinformation train seems to be running full steam ahead. I'll post a definition here though so readers can be made aware:

Details matter, but you're not a detail oriented person so I wouldn't expect you to understand.

- the huge and growing income disparity in the U.S....the greatest gap since the robber baron days of The Gilded Age of late 1800's

Middle class shrinks, upper class grows as a percentage of households.

We're a wealthier society as a whole.

There is nothing noble about the blue collar job when the upwardly mobile job you describe as not an "honest days work" is availible.

- jobs gone and continuing to be offshored since NAFTA and Bill Clinton, or farmed out to H1-B visas

Automation is a bitch, eh?

- militarized police killing at will with no accountability and racial profiling

My brother is a District Attorney and you won't believe the stories he's told me. You know little of what you talk about on this topic. Black Lives Matter is a load of garbage. Most of the anti-police stuff is a load of garbage.

- uncontrolled monitoring, unconstitutional/illegal warrantless spying on everything with various gov't and privatized secret programs, under the convenient catch-all of "national security"

I'm an enthusastic supporter of the NSA, and so are Americans, so don't project your anxieties onto the rest of us.



It's been over two years since Snowden. How's that worked out? Americans don't really care because although they have valid concerns, they generally agree with NSA tactics.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the NSA record is spotless or that there isn't room for reform. I'm saying if it were really important Americans wouldn't have their opinions polled in this manner and would get up off the bench and do something about it.

They aren't. The NSA is a non-issue in this election.

- tax havens, loopholes, shell corporations, and corporate welfare run amok

This is the very definition of "small potatoes". All problems? To be sure. A threat to the country in any way shape or form? Absolutely not. There is no "winning" this, just the never ending fight against it... AND IT SHOULD BE FOUGHT.

- 95% of MSM owned by just 6 mega-corporations, bent on 24/7 lies and PR spin/damage control to benefit other corporations and a complicit gov't

Let me guess... upset that Think Progress and CounterPunch aren't taken seriously?

Give me a break. Whining about the "MSM" is so passe. It's a non-intellectual argument that amounts to "I feel like I 'm not being heard". I think Sanders' campaign, which is getting more coverage than he is fairly due, is evidence of that not being the case.

- Endless U.S. military involvement in several countries, and attempts at regime change, while it has supported "enemies" such as ISIS and Al Queda, Nazi/fascist groups in Ukraine, and so on.

And yet, we've seen under Obama what happens when the US even minorly vacates it's global role. Sorry, this is the hand we're dealt. There is no putting the genie back in the bottle.

...much of which fit the definitions of corporatism, aka - fascism.

So we're a fascist country now. I think you're just a sore loser personally. The country is about to reject your political philosophy and you're lashing out. The end. You're a rather simple person.

The list goes on. But according to DJ Spinmeister Scroe - don't look behind the curtain, Dorothy, because there's nothing to see. We don't have rocks in our heads! No sirree!!

No I like data. Want some data?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/181160/am...n-upswing.aspx

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- After falling during the economic downturn, Americans' satisfaction with the way things are going in their personal lives has recovered to 85%. Meanwhile, Americans' satisfaction with the direction of the country surged nine percentage points since December to 32%, one of its best readings in the last eight years.



Large majorities of Americans have expressed satisfaction with their personal lives in each poll since Gallup began asking the question in 1979. The percentage of Americans satisfied with their personal lives reached a low of 73% in July 1979 amid the U.S. energy crisis, while it peaked at 88% in 2003. The latest 85% reading is significantly higher than the previous 78% to 80% figures recorded since President Barack Obama's 2008 election.

Consistent with their tendency to rate their own situations, or local conditions, more positively than national conditions, Americans are much less likely to be satisfied with the way things are going in the U.S. On average, satisfaction with personal life is 43 points higher than satisfaction with the country's direction. The difference between the two was as low as 14 points in the months after 9/11, and as high as 70 points after the 2008 election. Americans' satisfaction with U.S. conditions fell below 30% in March 2006, and has rarely been above that level since the spring of 2007, only surpassing it early in President Obama's first term, around the time of his 2012 re-election and in the current month.

What does this tell you? Americans concerns are largely abstract in nature.

Of course you probably consider Gallup a propaganda outlet because you're a political extremist crying like a child that he isn't getting his way. But that's fine. You're free to continue embarrassing yourself.

I'm truly waiting for you to debase yourself tomorrow. I like seeing extremists "feel the burn" of their failure. It's going to be Christmas in April. As soon as raid is wrapped up I'll scurry over to twist the knife.

[Acidbaron]

The problem i already spot is that you are looking at candidates, the personality, the character. While for "true political supporter" you should be looking at the ideology, policies and outweigh them against others to see what benefits you the most.

Said this before don't envy people stuck in a two party system, where there is very little room for you to identify yourself with your own political identity, not only that but it often seems candidates that do not first claim to be more left or right and move to the center. (Like people claiming obama to be a socialist which is simply facepalm worthy since he's at best centrum-right)

[zenkai]

Those who support Trump and consistently use things like Facebook, which has now been open on being against Trump... doesn't it just end up being bit ironic?

It's like when a celebrity actor ruins his/her reputation affecting his/her marketing in a film or as a role model. (IE Bill O Reilly refusing to watch anything from Sean Penn as Penn was helping out Castro.)

I'd also think these supporters would stop using facebook or any other type of source that has been opened about what they're against or promoting.

Most people don't give a shit.

[Caolela]

Details matter, but you're not a detail oriented person so I wouldn't expect you to understand.

Oh you mean your spun version of "details"? We've all seen how that's been going.

Middle class shrinks, upper class grows as a percentage of households.

We're a wealthier society as a whole.

There is nothing noble about the blue collar job when the upwardly mobile job you describe as not an "honest days work" is availible.

The middle class shrunk because the jobs left for the benefit of multi-national corps, not their former workers. What upward mobility? Here's a right-wing site you might enjoy, quoting Obama as saying, "the United States has “slipped” in the category upward mobility." Then your ridiculous view about blue-collar jobs, that many millions would probably lol you for, or slap you silly for denigrating to their faces.

"A wealthier society as a whole"...where the income has been distributed upward, not from better white-collar jobs but largely from the bank bailouts, QE, and continued financialization of the economy - which was the largest transfer of wealth in human history.

You are such a pathetic liar.

Automation is a bitch, eh?

Which was a small part of job losses. Most were simply wiped out after the '08 crash and haven't come back, or NAFTA'ed away. Again, Clinton, Bush, Obama - NeoCons & NeoLibs.

My brother is a District Attorney and you won't believe the stories he's told me. You know little of what you talk about on this topic. Black Lives Matter is a load of garbage. Most of the anti-police stuff is a load of garbage.

That's right, I wouldn't believe his stories, because most DA's job is to protect and cover-up for accused cops. We've seen it a million times. What, did you think that was gonna fly?

It's been over two years since Snowden. How's that worked out? Americans don't really care because although they have valid concerns, they generally agree with NSA tactics.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the NSA record is spotless or that there isn't room for reform. I'm saying if it were really important Americans wouldn't have their opinions polled in this manner and would get up off the bench and do something about it.

They aren't. The NSA is a non-issue in this election.

More spin from you again. It's not that most people don't care, it's that they think there is nothing much they can do about it, considering no one in gov't or corporate is held accountable, and there is little or no oversight. The rest is the usual "we're watching for terrorists!" line.

It really isn't "small potatoes" when your privacy is stolen by a gov't and now, private entities, the ramifications of which books have been written on. See, that's when your attempts to minimize issues doesn't work.

Let me guess... upset that Think Progress and CounterPunch aren't taken seriously?

By who - you and your cohorts? Of course they and other indies aren't, until/unless they agree with your Neo-liberal idiocy.

Give me a break. Whining about the "MSM" is so passe. It's a non-intellectual argument that amounts to "I feel like I 'm not being heard". I think Sanders' campaign, which is getting more coverage than he is fairly due, is evidence of that not being the case.

Yeah, it really isn't "passe", since the corporate MSM has a huge impact on perceptions, like the false perceptions you spin here constantly about the Wall St. warmonger Clinton. And another try at slipping "Bernie" shit in when I haven't mentioned his campaign here, and you're aware that I don't support him as a candidate.

Conflate much?

And yet, we've seen under Obama what happens when the US even minorly vacates it's global role. Sorry, this is the hand we're dealt. There is no putting the genie back in the bottle.

Uhh...woops again! Not "the hand we're dealt", but the hand Clinton & Obama dealt from their support of Neo-fascist regimes, terrorist groups, and very bad foreign policy in service of U.S. hegemony, corporatism, and imperialism.

And that was just a hand wave you dealt.

So we're a fascist country now.

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis

...and wrapped in the lies by omission, half-truths, and propaganda that people like you are working overtime to spew. If one defines fascism as corporatism, which it often is, yes it's clear we've been there for some time now.

I'm truly waiting for you to debase yourself tomorrow. I like seeing extremists "feel the burn" of their failure. ...

I'm truly waiting for you to stop conflating me with Sanders supporters. Since you already know better it's quite lame and disingenuous, like 99% of your posts are.



BTW, here's a book anyone should read who wants to know what Hillary Clinton is really about: Queen of Chaos: The Misadventures of Hillary Clinton.

...

Queen is not a gossipy bio, delineating Hillary’s shallow, belligerent, mendacious, psychopathic character, although such a tome, necessarily massive, would be welcome. These characteristics of Hillary’s necessarily emerge to some degree in Queen of Chaos. but personality portrayal is not the core of the book. Rather the book is historical. Johnstone sees Clinton as both a product of her times – privileged child of the U.S. Empire, white, Wellesley, Yale, a dishonest and ultimately fired operative on the Watergate committee right out of law school – as well as a ruthless actor in a global drama growing ever more deadly. The book is more history than Hillary. But by going this route Johnstone grasps the essential Clinton with crystal clarity. ...

Of course, our DJ Spinmeister Scroe here is well aware of much of this info already, but he's still running his hamster wheel ragged. He has a lot to potentially lose if the Clintons don't win, that much is certain.