Their self-imposed information bubble.
I have been saying for years that they are harming themselves by not paying attention to information sources they disagree with, or dismissing such information outright. The words "confirmation bias" ring a bell?
The steady stream of op-ed pieces and forwarded chain emails that get posted here as some sort of self-evident, begging-the-question truth seems to be all that Yonivore et al, do.
No few amount of outside observers have reached that same conclusion, and man was it evident election night.
Personally, I think the streak of evangelicals and religious nutters infect the right wing with an inability to accept new information and adapt to change. The very nature of conservatism resists change.
Yet change happens, however one might wish it not to.
The self-professed party of personal responsibility blames everybody else for their loss. The media ("the refs were biased" anyone?), lazy brown people, etc.
I really don't see Republicans saying the kinds of things that would indicate they understand their predicament. The world, and our country, have changed, are changing, and will continue to do so.
Maybe the Republican party isn't doomed to obsolescence, but right now it is really looking that way.
My 2 cents.
The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality."
I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism.
He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore."
He continued "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out.
We're history's actors ... and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Karl_Rove
The idea is obsolete. Some people like to live in the 40's. Times have changed. Weed will soon be legal. No matter how ing hard they try for it not to be.
Darriin unwittingly proves the OP right.
"No matter how ing hard they try for it not to be"
The racist "Christians" know damn well corrupt cops and prosecutors pad their careers busting blacks and browns for possession.
Those loveable, loving "Christians" are intent on enforcing their morality and racism everywhere, because God told them to.
The "Christians" and law enforcement industry, along with the wealth PIC, will attack, probably successfully any politicians who propose or support mj/hemp legalization.
iow, don't "hold your breath" about legalization. mj will remain Schedule I for many years to come.
BOTH parties have the same information-bubble tactic... how else could they possibly convince people to keep voting for them?
This.
I do agree, however, that Republicans are behind the curve on majority opinions on social issue. That said, if the Republicans were to simply change their views, moderate them to more progressive ones, the (it IS a large number) social conservatives would not have a home - anywhere to go.
I don't believe it serves to subs ute a party stuck in an echo chamber, with a nation stuck in one.
bull , typical right-winger false equivalence.
racist, xenophobe, safety-net Repugs are getting demographically marginalized, destroyed.
Even hardcore xenophobe bully Hannity is already a singing different song about the illegal immigrant problem.
The 1% Haves are fantastically out numbed by the 99% Have-Nots, esp blacks and browns. The brilliance of the Repugs, going back to Nixon/A er's Souther Racist Recruiting Strategy, has been to sucker bubba/Christian HaveNots with social/racist issues into voting for the Repugs, which is against the HaveNots own best interest.
He's evolving.
Gonna see a lot of that, IMO.
Exactly the verbiage he used...
Yesterday someone I went to school with for my undergrad, a person I refer to as "Super Republican" because not only does she hold the party dear, but she puts her time where her mouth is and volunteers for campaigns, is part of a republican club, etc threw a post on FB about changing the way we elect the president to 50 states=50 electoral votes, 1 vote per state. I dismantled it first (would you want 1 hawaiian to = 18.5 texans? I am not ready to abandon 1 person, 1 vote), then told her that this was the type of thinking that would fade the republicans out. They need to change their message, etc. Eventually she ended up agreeing with me and admitted that she was still upset and doesnt want to change a thing about the process (after which I informed her that romney would have lost under her suggested plan too), but I think even the most staunch of them are at least considering that their platform, not their communicating ability is to blame. We shall see.
"50 states=50 electoral votes, 1 vote per state."
hard-core Repugs are truly soft-brained.
the Senate and Electoral College already non proportional representation, and need to be fixed. Why should two Senators from ME have as much vote as 2 Senators from NY, TX, CA, IL?
... and thanks demonstrating your inability to seek information outside your narrative.
Even when you are led to water, you can't drink.
(shrugs)
That fatal flaw will be your party's undoing, and even when this fatal flaw is pointed out to you directly, the nature of that flaw does not allow you to recognize it.
Carry on, man, carry on. Nothing to see here.
smh
Repug party is full of assholes like this one
Peter Morrison, Texas GOP Official, Calls For 'Amicable Divorce' From 'Maggots' Who Voted For Obama
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...p_ref=politics
More lazy "they are both the same" cynicism.
It isn't a tactic, and both parties are not equal when it comes to rejecting new information.
The Democrats do not have the evangelical stratum that so badly limits right-wing thinking about new information and change. Sorry.
When you get a stage of candidates with men who deny evolution, you have a good indication that new information is not being processed.
This includes Ron Paul:
Last edited by RandomGuy; 11-09-2012 at 12:49 PM.
It does seem that this time around, Republicans were especially housed within a bubble that eliminated exposure to any information that did not support their views. I have read several accounts about just how shocked and stunned Romney and Ryan were on election night. They believed Karl Rove and Morris with their choir of a Romney landslide. On the other hand, the McCain campaign had a more realistic view of what was going on.
I think the part that bothers me the most is the energy spent having to try to convince them of facts. Facts do not have 2 sides. They are facts. But you can not even begin to have a discussion with someone who will not accept basic truths as a starting point. A man who truly believes that women do not get pregnant from rape or from incest or that the mother's life or health are never in jeopardy can not begin to discuss rationally how to approach the issue of abortion. People who refuse to believe anything about climate change and who laugh at the notion of rising ocean levels can not even engage in a discussion about energy or environmental policy.
Critical thinking certainly is not his strong suit.
It's not lazy and for the most part it's accurate. Both parties have their corporate overlords but the GOP also has the dogmatic christians of the evangelical right and they are the ones that bring in a heavy does the irrational.
And it's not a 'fatal' flaw. The notion of faith is you believe in stupid even if you are given no empirical reason to do so. Christians brag to each ohter about not being overcome when their 'faith is tested' and how they did not suc b. To them this type of blashpemy is the devil and they are all teaching their children at the million or so sunday school sessions every weekend.
And this thread is like a poorly hidden
FATAL FLAW!
ATTACK WATCH!
By the way, Romney won the over 30 crowd. Maybe Millienials are just smarter than everyone else.
They lost.
you mean the over 40 crowd.
If only people over 30 voted, Romney would've won.
If that's the case, why do Democrats still insist on the same old '60s-era quasi-socialist schtick? If there wasn't a total information bubble for the Democrats, they'd realize that government coercion is almost always immoral, wrong, and spawns unintended consequences, tbh...
Unlike neocons, Ron wouldn't use the law to force his religious views on the American populace... imho, I don't care what a candidate's religious views are unless it biases their governance...This includes Ron Paul:
"same old '60s-era quasi-socialist schtick"
which is?
Why do you not play the unedited version, RG?
I had never seen that before from Paul - but I recognize cutting when I hear it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
