• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

bye sarah

What if...? said:
Wow.

That was the clearest indication that a point went right over someoens head I've ever seen.

My comment was about ACTIONS, not race or sex or height or eye color or any other element of an I dividual that they have no control over.

I condemn an industry and its practitioners.

An industry that is tearing this country apart.

For profit
Click to expand...
Oh, not to worry...

Your protestations to the side, we get your 'ilk" phrasings. You want to tear down the West originally endowed us through our white peoples. We get it, the bad bad capitalists of the West, the ones that brought the planet and its history the most freedoms, the greatest prosperities and improved health to a growing majority of the world's populations of whatever race, gender and creed.

Wink wink, we get you, not to worry, your secret is safe with us...:lamo:2wave:
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
Hmmmm, that disjointed pablum seems to display a rather racist misogyny. How does one account for such seeming bigotry, eh?
Click to expand...

Gaugingcatenate said:
Oh, not to worry...

Your protestations to the side, we get your 'ilk" phrasings. You want to tear down the West originally endowed us through our white peoples. We get it, the bad bad capitalists of the West, the ones that brought the planet and its history the most freedoms, the greatest prosperities and improved health to a growing majority of the world's populations of whatever race, gender and creed.

Wink wink, we get you, not to worry, your secret is safe with us...:lamo:2wave:
Click to expand...

what racism, bigotry, misogyny of that poster in thier comments are you talking about??

looks like your failed posts got caught lying and making stuff up again. but if im wrong prove otherwise and ill gladly admit it, thanks
 
PleasantValley said:
The LEFT will attack anyone they are told to by their handlers.
They are a mindless mob that prefer to REACT than think.
They have eaten their own when told to.
Click to expand...

Uhhh...the left is not the mindless mob, they are the most fragmented and disorganized group. If we were on the same page, the Republicans wouldn't win ANY elections.

There's a lot of irony in a member of the group that brought our nation genuine idiots like Trump, Palin and others calling the left "mindless". As for eating your own, we'll see who walks away full when Trump's fat ass is on the spit. There's going to be a LOT of people denying they voted for him when he gets locked up.
 
D_NATURED said:
Uhhh...the left is not the mindless mob, they are the most fragmented and disorganized group. If we were on the same page, the Republicans wouldn't win ANY elections.

There's a lot of irony in a member of the group that brought our nation genuine idiots like Trump, Palin and others calling the left "mindless". As for eating your own, we'll see who walks away full when Trump's fat ass is on the spit. There's going to be a LOT of people denying they voted for him when he gets locked up.
Click to expand...

Rather than handlers, the far right has lunatic attendants to cater for their needs.
 
Bucky said:
Boy Sarah Huckabee is a good person? That's news to me based on all the vicious attacks the left made against her family the past year.
Click to expand...

Good people don't lie with ease and fluency of Sarah Huckabee.
 
Xelor said:
Click to expand...


  • In all the time I've been here, and I came here in the first place over these issues, yours is the first real response. Pretty universally any mention is dismissed as nonsense. "Ooh Dere controlling our minds! Lol!" level responses.

    I also agree that education would he the best approach.

    But how do you get the media to teach people? Their advertisers would lose money.

    How do you get our leaders to do it? Their campaigns are designed by, their speeches written by practitioners.

    What they have gleaned and use on a daily basis is far more potent than people believe. The neurochemical addictions many techniques develop and exploit work below reason. So it's the old "You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into" conundrum.

    All of this has always puzzled me. I have aspergers, or whatever they call it now. I turned the focus I got with it onto the problem itself instead of hiding from it as most do. So I have learned to be socially adept, to see and properly respond to all of those cues I don't get instinctively. All before I knew there was such a thing as "aspergers".

    Also, I got the kind of mind that can visualize and manipulate complex objects and mechanisms. So much so that my thought processes are markedly more "holographic" than most. I have a hard time learning linearly. My mind wants to interconnect new things with old things. It checks new information against old information to verify and correct if necessary.

    So all my life I've encountered information with glaring "voids". Critical, obvious elements of great weight that somehow are not included. And I started to see a pattern pretty early on. That a lot of these elements must have been left out on purpose. Because had they been included, the consumer of that information would likely have come to a different conclusion than they did without it.

    The sheer profusion of information being presented to us that has been methodically molded to elicit the desired emotional response to subject matter at hand is mindboggling. It is ubiquitous. The more personal preference data collected by social media the more precise, more individualized it will become.

    And I think this is making our society sick. And individuals as well. This constant barrage of attempts to directly manipulate our emotions below the level of cognition. Which is the most insidious part. If I make you angry by using words and imagery i know will make you angry and then i talk about something else I want you to be angry at a predictable percentage of that anger will transfer to the new subject in a predictable percentage of the target audience and they will be primed to reject the new subject matter with further encouragement. No reasonable, rational argument is necessary.

    Think about the obvious fact that a significant percentage of this country has a different recent history than the rest of the country and the rest of the world does. How did that happen?

    Human beings do not like to think or talk about this kind of thing. Confidence in ourselves, in our groups, in our leaders is necessary for our social species to function. So we don't like to admit we have been fooled or manipulated. We far too often prefer a pretty lie to an ugly truth.

    Personally, I deeply love language and the ability to accurately express an idea or concept. I resent the use of language to deliberately deceive people into drawing the wrong conclusion. I think it is wrong.

    And as these tools were used to forge and maintain every modern tyranny. I think the Founders would agree with me. I doubt they would have worded the first amendment the way they did had they foreseen the advent of these technologies.

    But that's enough for now.

    You're probably the only one still reading.
 
Bucky said:
The Trump administration is like a new start-up tech company. Of course, there is going to be turnover.

Look at companies like Uber, Snap, Amazon, or Facebook - high level of turnover.
Click to expand...

Forbes:
"A shortage of qualified tech professionals and a surge in available, high-paying job vacancies has created a perfect storm resulting in the current candidate-driven marketplace today where candidates have more power than employers in job offer negotiations. It also means they don’t have to waste their time on job offers that don’t include competitive salaries, which are on the rise thanks to continued demand."
Click to expand...

See, if you're a low information person like Bucky, you have a tendency to just copy and paste headlines that sound like they support your agitprop.

"Look at companies like Uber, Snap, Amazon, or Facebook - high level of turnover."
Click to expand...

But that's because you're ignoring the REASON for the high turnover, which in reality is a net positive.
You're going to have a bit of trouble convincing rational people that the reason for high turnover at the Trump White House is because of all the positives, like high demand.
Quite the contrary! People who worked for the Trump White House are finding out that their resume is poisoned.

Google Search: "Trump White House Staffers Have Trouble Getting Jobs"

No one wants to hire Trump White House Staffers.
 
What if...? said:
You're probably the only one still reading.
Click to expand...

Nope, I am definitely reading everything you post and always have, and now, to find out that we are fellow travelers on the spectrum, it all makes sense. I was diagnosed as an Aspie at age forty-six, and suddenly my whole weird existence made sense.

PS: I thought we were already buddies on DP. I just sent you a Friend Req, hope you respond to it :)
 
AGENT J said:
what racism, bigotry, misogyny of that poster in thier comments are you talking about??
Click to expand...

When he's losing arguments, he tends to invent stuff.

looks like your failed posts got caught lying and making stuff up again. but if im wrong prove otherwise and ill gladly admit it, thanks
Click to expand...

Looks like he was losing yet again.
 
Xelor said:
  • I don't agree that the marketing/poli-sci industries are a problem. I think the imperfection of information among general public, along with its general predilection for naivete and unreason, is a problem. All that sophisticated theory and application "Bill" employs to develop emotional appeals are far less effective when folks are very well informed because the more well informed one is, the less emotional one is about "major" decisions.

    For instance, emotional marketing may move one to consume turkey for T-giving; however, knowing that the uric acids in turkey exacerbate one's gout will, in many people, overcome one's emotions and the emotional marketing messages. In whom won't that info be sufficient to overcome the emotional mover to having the turkey? Folks for whom the emotional value of eating turkey at T-giving satisfies them more so than does the pain of a gout flare dissatisfy them.
Click to expand...

Yup...entirely correct....take it from a charter member of what some would consider the "dark side". We from the marketing sides of business are political animals. Nothing in the entire post to disagree with....just had to cut the keystroke count down to size to meet the site standard.

The simple truth of it is that representing a product is a cleaner business because at the end of the day, your product can only speak for itself as it arrives at the customer's door. It doesn't have a mouth. it can't obfuscate. It can't hold one position this week and another position the next. Your company sends it out the door in its little box with its Limited Warranty and it has to stand on its own at that point. Even the degree to which you support your Warranty won't help that specific product as much as it will defend the reputation of your company. As such, your Marketing effort is always tempered with the understanding that you hold your company's credibility in your hands with every word of your ad copy.

While I also agree there is nothing inherently at fault with those on the political side of the Marketing equation, how they work is a direct reflection of who they work for, is a direct reflection of the degree to which their candidate is SLUDGE. If their candidate is pure sludge, utter sewage, all bets are off. Virtually anything is acceptable. Enter Donald Trump, pure Sludge, Utter Sewage, mainly handling his own political marketing (otherwise known as Campaigning) in the process which just about speaks for itself.
 
Last edited:
Bucky said:
The Trump administration is like a new start-up tech company. Of course, there is going to be turnover.

Look at companies like Uber, Snap, Amazon, or Facebook - high level of turnover.
Click to expand...

That's an apples to truck tires comparison. The high level of turnover is not comparable to the one being experienced in the White House because one is due to competition in a saturated work force while the other is due to unstable management.
 
I don't know why she's leaving. She won't be able to get another job. She might as well keep cashing those White House checks until the helicopter flies off.

Maybe she doesn't want to be around when it all collapses
 
SonOfDaedalus said:
Maybe she doesn't want to be around when it all collapses
Click to expand...

Interesting thought. Maybe daddy knows something? After all, he is very well connected with, and surely well informed by, the highest level Republicans

She's a rat fleeing a sinking ship, so to speak?
 
Last edited:
What if...? said:
[Part I of IV]

In all the time I've been here, and I came here in the first place over these issues, yours is the first real response. Pretty universally any mention is dismissed as nonsense. "Ooh Dere controlling our minds! Lol!" level responses.

I also agree that education would he the best approach.

But how do you get the media to teach people? Their advertisers would lose money.

How do you get our leaders to do it? Their campaigns are designed by, their speeches written by practitioners.

What they have gleaned and use on a daily basis is far more potent than people believe. The neurochemical addictions many techniques develop and exploit work below reason. So it's the old "You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into" conundrum.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I had to break your post into parts. I know doing so makes it harder to see the key themes running through your remarks, but this site doesn't allow one to put much "on the page," as it were.

Hopefully the breakpoints I've chosen minimize the discontinuity of splitting your post into smaller sections. I've inserted "part" headings into your posts to help attenuate the impact of the separations.

Red:
Thank you.

Blue:
As goes general-consumption/-audience media outlets (Fox, CNN, ABC, newspapers, magazines, etc.), it's not their role to deliver the kind of teaching it takes to enable individuals to overcome the challenges you and I are here discussing. The teaching is that of showing folks how to be keen analysts of information and stimuli. Well, all the teaching in the world isn't going to make one a keen analyst unless and until one analyzes things, receives feedback about the accuracy and effectiveness of one's analysis and then one repeats that process until one gets good at it.

You've likely heard the saying "everything you ever needed to know was taught in high school." Well, that's very true in terms of the skills and basic information anyone needs to be a keen analyst. It's, obviously not true with regard to discrete data points; that is information the media is tasked to provide.


Pink:
I doubt that end will come to fruition. I doubt it will because well developed emotional messaging messages have higher return rates than do rational appeals.
 
What if...? said:
[Part II of IV]

All of this has always puzzled me. I have aspergers, or whatever they call it now. I turned the focus I got with it onto the problem itself instead of hiding from it as most do. So I ... learned to ... see and properly respond to all of those cues I don't get instinctively. All before I knew there was such a thing as "aspergers".

Also, I got the kind of mind that can visualize and manipulate complex objects and mechanisms. So much so that my thought processes are markedly more "holographic" than most. I have a hard time learning linearly. My mind wants to interconnect new things with old things. It checks new information against old information to verify and correct if necessary.

So all my life I've encountered information with glaring "voids". Critical, obvious elements of great weight that somehow are not included. And I started to see a pattern pretty early on. That a lot of these elements must have been left out on purpose. Because had they been included, the consumer of that information would likely have come to a different conclusion than they did without it.
Click to expand...

What you've described above is the act of analysis and reasoning and the will the acknowledge your own strengths and weaknesses and comport yourself so as to maximize the returns of your strengths and use them also to abate the impact of your weaknesses. Does your malady mean you have to work harder to overcome or "get" certain things? Yes, it sure does. That is what it is...what is there to do about that? The Serenity Prayer, which is what we all are supposed to say about the respective personal challenges we face. Some of us do and some don't.

Purple: I think you meant "holistic?" That's what I interpreted it as. Shouldn't I have?

What if...? said:
[Part III of IV]

The sheer profusion of information being presented to us that has been methodically molded to elicit the desired emotional response to subject matter at hand is mind boggling. It is ubiquitous. The more personal preference data collected by social media the more precise, more individualized it will become.
Click to expand...

So people have been doing exactly that for ages. Even kids do it. To wit:
  • My kids know me well enough to know what my "hot buttons" are and they know that on most, if not all, important matters, emotional appeals don't work with me. As a consequence, they framed their appeals for my approbation of "this or that" that they wanted to do/receive based on some sort of case that didn't go near emotion.

    Parents and teachers use exactly the same tactics when appealing to their kids/charges. What parent hasn't used so-called reverse psychology, for instance, to get their kids to behave in a given way? One can't do that if one doesn't know what are the kid's "hot buttons." (Of course, parents and teachers have additional means that kids/students don't.)
In business learning a client's "hot buttons" is part of what relationship management is about -- one gathers the very same data, albeit not as digital data as is done on social media, and performs the very same analysis as do psychographics, but one does it one's head because doing so is instinctive and learned from childhood.

While you're correct that poli-sci can be precise to an individual level, as a practical matter, political strategists/scientists aren't ever going to drill the tactics to an individual level. They won't simply because it's uneconomic for them to do so. Marketers do drive to that level in selected selling situations; however, mass-appeal selling situations aren't the ones in which marketers drill to that level.
  • Economic individual level "drill" --> High return on a given "sale;" small target audience; "buyers" tends to present themselves to the "seller"
  • Uneconomic individual-level "drill" --> Low return on a given "sale;" large target audience; "buyers" rarely have the opportunity to present themselves to the "seller"
 
What if...? said:
[Part IV of IV]

And I think this is making our society sick. And individuals as well. This constant barrage of attempts to directly manipulate our emotions below the level of cognition. Which is the most insidious part. If I make you angry by using words and imagery i know will make you angry, and then i talk about something else I want you to be angry at, a predictable percentage of that anger will transfer to the new subject in a predictable percentage of the target audience, and they will be primed to reject the new subject matter with further encouragement. No reasonable, rational argument is necessary.

Think about the obvious fact that a significant percentage of this country has a different recent history than the rest of the country and the rest of the world does. How did that happen?

Human beings do not like to think or talk about this kind of thing. Confidence in ourselves, in our groups, in our leaders is necessary for our social species to function. So we don't like to admit we have been fooled or manipulated. We far too often prefer a pretty lie to an ugly truth.

Personally, I deeply love language and the ability to accurately express an idea or concept. I resent the use of language to deliberately deceive people into drawing the wrong conclusion. I think it is wrong.

And as these tools were used to forge and maintain every modern tyranny. I think the Founders would agree with me. I doubt they would have worded the first amendment the way they did had they foreseen the advent of these technologies.

But that's enough for now.

You're probably the only one still reading.
Click to expand...

Red:
There you're teetering on the line between psychographics and subliminal messaging. (See note one at the preceding link.)

I don't really have a problem with psychographics. When a total stranger presents me, by name, with information I know they shouldn't really have any way of knowing appeals to me, I know they've used psychographic (and related) techniques to find me and decide to deliver to me their message. That knowledge "turns off" my emotional "hot buttons" and moves me to think about whether I truly want to seriously consider and/or respond positively (regardless of whether my response itself is adverse to or aligned with the communicator's desire) to their message.


Blue:
I'm not sure I know what you're alluding to with your "blue" statement.


Pink:
Yeah, I don't really know why folks have a notion that they're supposed to be infallible.

The Italians having a Proverb, He that deceives me Once, it's his Fault; but Twice it is my fault.
-- Anthony Weldon, The Court and Character of King James
​


Tan:
Well, yes. Perpetrators of willful deception are rightly reviled.
 
jnug said:
Yup...entirely correct....take it from a charter member of what some would consider the "dark side". We from the marketing sides of business are political animals. Nothing in the entire post to disagree with....just had to cut the keystroke count down to size to meet the site standard.

The simple truth of it is that representing a product is a cleaner business because at the end of the day, your product can only speak for itself as it arrives at the customer's door. It doesn't have a mouth. it can't obfuscate. It can't hold one position this week and another position the next. Your company sends it out the door in its little box with its Limited Warranty and it has to stand on its own at that point. Even the degree to which you support your Warranty won't help that specific product as much as it will defend the reputation of your company. As such, your Marketing effort is always tempered with the understanding that you hold your company's credibility in your hands with every word of your ad copy.

While I also agree there is nothing inherently at fault with those on the political side of the Marketing equation, how they work is a direct reflection of who they work for, is a direct reflection of the degree to which their candidate is SLUDGE. If their candidate is pure sludge, utter sewage, all bets are off. Virtually anything is acceptable. Enter Donald Trump, pure Sludge, Utter Sewage, mainly handling his own political marketing (otherwise known as Campaigning) in the process which just about speaks for itself.
Click to expand...

Red:
That understanding is precisely why I am more interested in a political candidate's character and intellect, and character more than intellect, than I am about the specific policies s/he advocates. Intelligent folks of fine character will eventually come round, as it were, rather than persist in promoting "sludge," as you put it.

I can stand Dems or Reps or Indies holding formal political power, but I cannot forbear reprobates, no matter their party, in any such position.
 
jnug said:
Yup...entirely correct....take it from a charter member of what some would consider the "dark side". We from the marketing sides of business are political animals. Nothing in the entire post to disagree with....just had to cut the keystroke count down to size to meet the site standard.

The simple truth of it is that representing a product is a cleaner business because at the end of the day, your product can only speak for itself as it arrives at the customer's door. It doesn't have a mouth. it can't obfuscate. It can't hold one position this week and another position the next. Your company sends it out the door in its little box with its Limited Warranty and it has to stand on its own at that point. Even the degree to which you support your Warranty won't help that specific product as much as it will defend the reputation of your company. As such, your Marketing effort is always tempered with the understanding that you hold your company's credibility in your hands with every word of your ad copy.

While I also agree there is nothing inherently at fault with those on the political side of the Marketing equation, how they work is a direct reflection of who they work for, is a direct reflection of the degree to which their candidate is SLUDGE. If their candidate is pure sludge, utter sewage, all bets are off. Virtually anything is acceptable. Enter Donald Trump, pure Sludge, Utter Sewage, mainly handling his own political marketing (otherwise known as Campaigning) in the process which just about speaks for itself.
Click to expand...

Red:
It's also "cleaner" because the impact of one's choice is very limited and is comparatively easy to, if need be, undo, attenuate and/or recover from. When one buys a baseball bat, boat or building, very few folks will gain or lose as a result of one's thoughts and deeds that resulted in the purchase. Accordingly, that one makes the decision based, to a greater or lesser degree, on emotional influences.

When choosing the persons who will determine public policy, it's a wholly different matter. A vote has the potential to affect literally thousands, if not millions, of other people. Despite that being so, I doubt most folks put as much dispassionate thought into for whom they'll vote as they put into whether to buy "this" or "that" car.
 
PleasantValley said:
The LEFT will attack anyone they are told to by their handlers.
They are a mindless mob that prefer to REACT than think.
They have eaten their own when told to.
Click to expand...

Only if they're crooks and liars. But don't let pesky facts get in your way. Wouldn't be the first time.
 
JustHanging said:
Trump will be hard pressed to find someone else to lie as willingly as Sarah. I'm expecting him to pick another Evangelical Christian, they seem to excel at it.
Click to expand...

Perhaps she takes literally that God loves sinners, and wants to stand out in the crowd? Perhaps she and her dad can take a retreat and examine their souls, and climb out of the abyss that is Trumpland. IF this is a true story, I expect someone to come out of the Fox News propoganda corporation for the job.
 
SonOfDaedalus said:
I don't know why she's leaving. She won't be able to get another job. She might as well keep cashing those White House checks until the helicopter flies off.

Maybe she doesn't want to be around when it all collapses
Click to expand...

I think her little girl might have caught her on TV and asked "Why you tell lies Mommy?" It was a question Sarah just couldn't field.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom