Attorneys for Trump say Whitmer's directive "undermines the integrity of elections by increasing the opportunity for individuals to register to vote even though they are ineligible to do so."
The one thing I disagree with is the generalization of Republicans “believing” what they say. Numerous times, they’ve let the veil slip and showed they don’t believe the shit they’re saying: they have very specific goals and fill in the logic or “research” later.
It’s like the term “globalists.” Some very naive people repeat conspiracies thinking that there’s some secret cabal of globalists, but most people know that anyone talking about “globalists” means “Jews.”
“Election fraud” isn’t something they actually believe; they know the election wasn’t stolen. “Election fraud” is a hurdle or stumbling block meant to trap Democrats into trying to reason with someone who isn’t being reasonable. It’s an opportunity to troll people. But most importantly, it’s an empty set of words used as a shield behind which they can commit actual election fraud.
Sure some people actually believe the election was stolen, but they’re only going to listen to their select group of talking heads. We need to quit giving politicians and grifters the benefit of the doubt and call them out for lying, obfuscating, conspiring, and trying to instill fascism. There need to be repercussions for disenfranchising the people for power and profits under the guise of “No u.”
It’s like the term “globalists.” Some very naive people repeat conspiracies thinking that there’s some secret cabal of globalists, but most people know that anyone talking about “globalists” means “Jews.”
And just to be clear, there isn’t a secret cabal of those, either!
That’s one of the really insidious things about their tactics: their lies are like ogres, with layers. It makes it such a huge chore to debunk each and every aspect that some of them slip through the cracks and go unrefuted. Then they point to those in order to shore up the rest of the shit they’re spewing!
“Election fraud” isn’t something they actually believe; they know the election wasn’t stolen. “Election fraud” is a hurdle or stumbling block meant to trap Democrats into trying to reason with someone who isn’t being reasonable. It’s an opportunity to troll people. But most importantly, it’s an empty set of words used as a shield behind which they can commit actual election fraud.
This line of thinking makes me realize that a really good tool for dialogue with these fence-sitters, if we may call them that, would be to reasonably ask them “how has this belief worked out for you?”, in response to some usual garbage conspiracy theory projection.
The one thing I disagree with is the generalization of Republicans “believing” what they say. Numerous times, they’ve let the veil slip and showed they don’t believe the shit they’re saying: they have very specific goals and fill in the logic or “research” later.
It’s like the term “globalists.” Some very naive people repeat conspiracies thinking that there’s some secret cabal of globalists, but most people know that anyone talking about “globalists” means “Jews.”
“Election fraud” isn’t something they actually believe; they know the election wasn’t stolen. “Election fraud” is a hurdle or stumbling block meant to trap Democrats into trying to reason with someone who isn’t being reasonable. It’s an opportunity to troll people. But most importantly, it’s an empty set of words used as a shield behind which they can commit actual election fraud.
Sure some people actually believe the election was stolen, but they’re only going to listen to their select group of talking heads. We need to quit giving politicians and grifters the benefit of the doubt and call them out for lying, obfuscating, conspiring, and trying to instill fascism. There need to be repercussions for disenfranchising the people for power and profits under the guise of “No u.”
And just to be clear, there isn’t a secret cabal of those, either!
That’s one of the really insidious things about their tactics: their lies are like ogres, with layers. It makes it such a huge chore to debunk each and every aspect that some of them slip through the cracks and go unrefuted. Then they point to those in order to shore up the rest of the shit they’re spewing!
Oh geeze, I didn’t even get around to cleaning that up… I’m a bad globalist…
This line of thinking makes me realize that a really good tool for dialogue with these fence-sitters, if we may call them that, would be to reasonably ask them “how has this belief worked out for you?”, in response to some usual garbage conspiracy theory projection.