Are all Republican's dumb?

Author: FLRW

Posts

Total: 15
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,148
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8

According to an excerpt from Bob Woodward‘s Fear, Gary Cohn, the Goldman Sachs president turned National Economic Council director came away from his very first meeting with Donald Trump “astounded” by just how dumb the guy was.

Yet Republicans elected him President.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 270
Posts: 7,793
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
He is street smart.
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,148
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Best.Korea

So you are comparing him to Hitler?
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,148
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Best.Korea
On Oct. 16, 1919, Adolf Hitler became a propagandist. It would be his chief occupation for the rest of his life. Without propaganda, he could never have become a public figure, let alone risen to power. It was as a propagandist that he made a second world war possible, and defined Jews as Germany’s foe. The form of his propaganda was inextricable from its content: the fictionalization of a globalized world into simple slogans, to be repeated until an enemy thus defined was exterminated.
Sound familiar?  Remember that Trump kept a copy of Mein Kampf on his nightstand.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 270
Posts: 7,793
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@FLRW
Trump is the master of Brandolini's law.

Brandolini's law, also known as the bullshit asymmetry principle:

The effort needed to debunk misinformation is much greater than the effort needed to create it.

So yes, Trump is a master of creating misinformation, even greater than Hitler, as Trump does it in times where there is more democracy and much more fact checking.
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,148
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Best.Korea

I always thought you were smart.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 270
Posts: 7,793
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@FLRW
"Donald Trump is probably unaware that he’s an avid practitioner of a debating method known among philosophers and rhetoricians as the Gish Gallop. Its aim is simple: to defeat one’s opponent by burying them in a torrent of incorrect, irrelevant, or idiotic arguments. Trump owes much of his political success to this tactic—and to the fact that so few people know how to beat it. Although his 2024 campaign has been fairly quiet so far, we can expect to hear a lot more Gish Galloping in the coming months."

Let’s take as an example the first televised presidential debate of the 2020 election campaign. The Fox News host Chris Wallace invited Trump to deliver a two-minute statement. And he was off:
So when I listen to Joe [Biden] talking about a transition, there has been no transition from when I won. I won that election. And if you look at crooked Hillary Clinton, if you look at all of the different people, there was no transition, because they came after me trying to do a coup. They came after me spying on my campaign … We’ve got it all on tape. We’ve caught ’em all. And by the way, you gave the idea for the Logan Act against General Flynn. You better take a look at that, because we caught you in a sense, and President Obama was sitting in the office. He knew about it, too. So don’t tell me about a free transition. As far as the ballots are concerned, it’s a disaster. A solicited ballot, okay, solicited, is okay. You’re soliciting. You’re asking. They send it back. You send it back. I did that. If you have an unsolicited—they’re sending millions of ballots all over the country. There’s fraud. They found ’em in creeks …
And so on, until the end of the second minute, when Wallace attempted to break in and end the monologue. He tried five times before regaining temporary control

Trump’s statement was the oratorical equivalent of the media-management approach famously summed up by Trump’s former strategist Steve Bannon—“flood the zone with shit.” This is exactly what the Gish Gallop is designed to do: drown you in a deluge of distortions, deflections, and distractions.

As one pithy tweet—now known as “Brandolini’s law”—put it, “The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.” The Gish Galloper’s entire strategy rests on exploiting this advantage. By the time you’ve begun preparing your rebuttal of the Galloper’s first lie, they’ve rattled off another dozen. They want to trick the audience into believing that the facts and the evidence are on their side. (They have so many examples!) The technique is based on delivery over depth. Some call it “proof by verbosity.”
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,040
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@FLRW
Are you trying to see if Republican('s) are smart enough to note your grammar errors?

Nice FBI style entrapment. I approve.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 270
Posts: 7,793
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,148
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Greyparrot
See, What each Republican's top donor hotbeds say about their campaigns

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,040
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
See, What each Republican's top donor hotbeds say about their campaigns

ooh more grammar errors. Those Repuglicans will never see it coming!
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,148
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Greyparrot

I know that you are too smart to be a Republican.
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,130
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
He is street smart.
Ya, Dumb street

IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,130
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@FLRW
I know that you are too smart to be a Republican.
He’s worse than a Republican, he’s a libertarian.

jamgiller
jamgiller's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 56
0
0
5
jamgiller's avatar
jamgiller
0
0
5
-->
@Greyparrot
Do you do anything except deflect from what others say with whataboutism, or claiming fake news, or pointing out trivial grammatical issues, etc.?