LogFAQs > #955674031

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, Database 8 ( 02.18.2021-09-28-2021 ), DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear
Topic List
Page List: 1
TopicPolitics Containment Topic 375: Joe Bidin' his time
xp1337
07/02/21 1:34:00 PM
#279:


ChaosTonyV4 posted...
Edit: XPs post is exactly what I was referring to at 263, progressive politicians continually talking about how good a policy is for people has made those things WILDLY popular.

I know this sounds crazy, but when elected leaders tell people something is good, the people who elected that person often listen.
While this is true (that when political leaders support something people tend to follow; contrary to the conventional wisdom that politicians should wait for the people to get behind an idea) the reason I earlier stated I don't think it'd move the needle if Biden did it is because on a results level I don't think Manchin/Sinema/etc. are moved by it and honestly with how media bubbles have developed I feel like the effect is likely to become more diluted.

Ironically, it probably works better for the right because their media bubbles are basically fully formed propaganda outlets at this point. The left has no equivalent whatsoever. Saying CNN, MSNBC, NYT, WaPo are is first off fucking hilarious given how often they bend over backwards for the GOP but secondly that's not really a bubble like Fox it's a bunch of small little ones.

I feel like the Machiavellian play would be for some leftist multi-billionaire (let's ignore if that's inherently a contradiction) to intentionally create a Fox equivalent for the left and fully embrace the idea of basically disseminating progressive/leftist views, arguments, and talking points. I'm just... not sure if it'd work. Another in-built advantage the right has is how older people tend right and they tend to be radio and TV viewers at a higher rate and also tend to be less tech-savvy and thus far more susceptible to Facebook, etc. misinformation and having that hazy recollection of when news was actually news and therefore just automatically believing that if it's on a (self-proclaimed) news channel/site/outlet it must be true.

There's the argument that progressives are less likely to want a propaganda-ish outlet like this but I'm not so sure I don't cynically think confirmation and selection bias couldn't overcome that at the end of the day. And at this point we're so deep into the weeds of "ends justify the means" that the whole idea has become deeply uncomfortable many sentences ago.

---
xp1337: Don't you wish there was a spell-checker that told you when you a word out?
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1