Re There goes the Real America DO READ

["Dave Farber" <dave () farber net>]

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Chuck McManis <chuck.mcmanis () gmail com>
Date: Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 8:29 PM
Subject: Re: [IP] There goes the Real America
To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Cc: <dewayne () warpspeed com>


[ Dave and Dewayne, feel free to forward to either of your excellent email
communities.]

This hypothesis certainly lines up anecdotally with what I experienced in
earnest starting with the Obama re-election in 2012. My parents who are
both in their 80's and their circle of friends online read and forward
dozens of emails, often written in very large colorful type, and sometimes
with pictures, that are, as a corpus, straight up racist propaganda. Often
I would get copies from them with a note of "what do you think of this?"
and I would patiently identify the factual errors, the narrative errors,
and the generally racist nature of the messaging. To which they would often
respond "oh I can see that *most* of that is made up" (emphasis mine) or
something similar. Both voted for, and continue to support, the current
President. The key word in their response is the word "most", every drip
adding to a general view of dislike for "the other" and folks who would
"destroy our way of life."

The goal of course is to equate "our way of life" with a "white christian
democracy with theocratic underpinnings." it seems.

The email propaganda campaigns targeted exactly four messages:

1) The process for electing representatives is broken and only an
"outsider" can fix it.

2) Hilary Clinton a corrupt example of that system, she breaks the law with
impunity and has fingers and schemes in all of the pots and part of a vast
Clinton/Liberal conspiracy to empower the "liberal elite" at the cost of
the rest of the country.

3) The Liberal Elite are bringing in Mexicans and Muslims illegally with
the promise of tax support and jobs, changing the rules so that they can
vote, and then using this giant indebted alien invasion to cement their
strangle hold on the country.

4) The "media" is controlled by the Liberal Elite, it doesn't want you to
know the "truth." (essential to keeping the pipeline open)

In this way, as Dr. Parker points out in the study, if you capture the
first three of these points (be an "outsider", be "not Clinton", and be
"anti-immigration") you captured the entire Trump base and all of these
people who had been primed by these propaganda campaigns to respond to
those messages. And witnessing the effect in my own parents gave me the
same creepy feeling that it does when you watch someone doing something
completely out of character at a hypnotist's magic show.

An example of that was a conversation with my mother who asked
(sarcastically) how she could get $190,000 from California referencing the
story of Pedro Figueroa-Zarceno
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/lawyer-san-francisco-to-pay-190k-for-sanctuary-violation/2017/06/29/1e6bd588-5d40-11e7-aa69-3964a7d55207_story.html>
who
was turned over to ICE in violation of San Francisco's Sanctuary ordinance.
None of the discussion of human rights violations, expectations of the
roles of law enforcement, or financial harm had any effect over "but he's
here illegally so he deserved everything he got."

The programming is almost cult like, a woman who has never been harmed (or
perhaps even insulted by) any undocumented immigrant considers the attempt
to seek a better life and find work in the US to be a crime as unforgivable
as pedophilia.  When Trump claimed that "Thousands of Illegal Aliens Kill
people
<http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/nov/03/donald-trump/trump-leaves-out-context-claim-about-immigrants-an/>"
(warning self playing audio/video). even though that statement was
demonstrably false, and quantitatively vague, it landed *exactly* on top of
the messaging my parents were getting from their "friends" about how
illegal immigrants were killing people left and right.

The most interesting point for me was how people responded to that comment.
In the press and in the various factual data archives, that number is
neither supported, nor supportable. And if you had not been seeing the
drip, drip, drip, stream of propaganda that I had, courtesy of my parents,
you could be forgiven for thinking it 'ridiculous', perhaps even dismissing
its impact.

That is where propaganda point four comes in. Anyone telling you that
points 1 through 3 are untrue, must be part of the liberal elite media and
there for compromised. And every time the President yells "Fake News" it
lands on one of the many stories that are passed along by this grapevine of
hate which purport to show a "real" version of the event and to compare it
to the "media's" version of that event. Even better when there is no media
coverage (as is the case for entirely made up events like the Kelly Anne
Conway "Bowling Green Terrorist Massacre") because in those cases they
assert that the media is hiding the truth from you, they cannot be trusted.
As a result, when the media reports on something the President says as
"untrue" they feed into point four which is telling these followers that
this is exactly what you would expect from a news media that was
compromised by liberal elite forces.

It has been a devastatingly effective attack on our country, our
institutions, and our cultural self image, courtesy of that technology many
of us reading this helped invent, the Internet.

I don't know how to immunize people against this attack yet. It will
require discrediting their 'friend' channels which are being exploited and
this is hard because they of the dissonance of thinking of their friends as
being used or exploited. What the President says, and the messaging in
these side channels is awfully coordinated. I've never seen anything like
it. If the CIA pulled it off on the Russians to get rid of Putin I would be
impressed as hell.

I also think it is important to figure out what the agenda is, someone has
played a very long game (at least 5 years so far) and I don't think it was
just to see if they could get a total buffoon into the office of President.

With respect,
--Chuck


On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Dave Farber <farber () gmail com> wrote:

> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne () warpspeed com>
> *Subject: **[Dewayne-Net] There goes the Real America*
> *Date: *July 3, 2017 at 6:42:37 PM EDT
> *To: *Multiple recipients of Dewayne-Net <dewayne-net () warpspeed com>
> *Reply-To: *dewayne-net () warpspeed com
>
> [Note:  This item comes from friend David Rosenthal.  DLH]
>
> There goes the Real America
> By Digby
> Jul 3 2017
> <http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/07/there-goes-real-america.html>
>
> Oh look, someone who got it right but nobody cares:
>
> <http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/uw-professor-got-it-right-on-trump-so-why-is-he-being-ignored/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=article_left_1.1>
>
> Ask Google the question “who predicted Trump winning the election?” and
> you get 19.3 million results.
>
> Most are about professors with oddball prediction systems, or the rare
> pollster who got it right, or the liberal filmmaker Michael Moore, who
> famously sent out a mass gut-level warning about Donald Trump’s appeal last
> summer.
>
> One name that doesn’t come up: Christopher Parker.
>
> “Nobody in the media has called me up and said ‘you were right,’ ” says
> Parker, a political-science professor at the University of Washington for
> the past 11 years.
>
> Parker has his suspicions about why he’s been overlooked, which we’ll get
> to in a minute. But first: He correctly foresaw in September 2015 that
> Trump would win the GOP nomination — eight months before Trump clinched it.
>
> Then, last September, Parker told anyone who would listen, which was not
> many, that Trump could well win the presidency. And now, most important,
> new research shows Parker was more than just prescient about the outcome.
> He was nearly alone in nailing why it would happen.
>
> “It’s what the data showed and what history would suggest, so I didn’t see
> it as some out-there guess,” Parker shrugs now. “It seemed like a
> no-brainer to me.”
>
> On Monday researchers released the most comprehensive survey data yet
> aimed at understanding what actually went down in Election 2016. The group
> includes academics but also right-leaning outlets such The Heritage
> Foundation and left-leaners like the Center for American Progress.
>
> What’s different about the Voter Study Group is that it tracks the
> attitudes and votes of the same 8,000 adults since before the 2012
> election, and then throughout the 2016 election. So it’s like the nation’s
> largest, longest political focus group.
>
> The story we’ve told ourselves — that working-class whites flocked to
> Trump due to job worries or free trade or economic populism — is basically
> wrong, the research papers released this week suggest.
>
> They did flock to Trump. But the reason they did so in enough numbers for
> Trump to win wasn’t anxiety about the economy. It was anxiety about
> Mexicans, Muslims and blacks.
>
> [snip]
>
>
> Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now>
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/27180182-3982b549> |
> Modify
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>
> Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now
> <https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20170703190524:15C115B8-6044-11E7-9481-CE3085AD114D>
> <http://www.listbox.com>



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/18849915-ae8fa580
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-aa268125
Unsubscribe Now: 
https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-32545cb4&post_id=20170703210441:BF6202B6-6054-11E7-AA80-A31A7F58750C
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com