Originally posted by Joel
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
AOC and Dark Politics
Collapse
X
-
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostAnd IIRC Trump spent about half of what Hillary did.Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by Joel View PostAlso I think people exaggerate the ability of big money to dictate what people think. Carpe said a big spender could "swing the tide of elections to their desires." During the last Republican primary, I recall that the big campaign spending was for Jeb Bush. And all that money wasn't able to make people like Jeb, let alone to defeat Trump.
In general, the person with the biggest microphone gets their message across to a bigger audience. But there are exceptions. In the world of viral events, even a small voice can potentially be heard. But even there - a person with enough money to get lots of people hammering at social networking has a bigger chance of being heard than the lone voice sitting in their parent's basement.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostBut, Rooskies!!!!!11!1!1!!!1!!1!!
1. Several years ago then Newsweek editor Evan Thomas nonchalantly admitted to liberal bias on the now defunct Inside Washington show on PBS was worth up to 15 points For John Kerry in his bid to be president in 2004:
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostI believe I said "can," not "always does."
In general, the person with the biggest microphone gets their message across to a bigger audience. But there are exceptions. In the world of viral events, even a small voice can potentially be heard. But even there - a person with enough money to get lots of people hammering at social networking has a bigger chance of being heard than the lone voice sitting in their parent's basement.
The truth is there is a certain minimum amount of cash required to get a message out and get some sort of campaign going. That minimum is normally way beyond the reach of normal, middle-class americans. But, the content of the message has a lot to do with how quickly and how energetically those that are attracted to the message will work to amplify that initial 'call' as it were. And all things are not equal. A message with limited appeal BUT which significantly energizes the small group of people that are attracted to it can require less money total to be heard 'by all' than a message with general appeal but a weaker response.
So:
1) If you have enough money, you can get ANY message out to all the people.
2) If you have a message with massive appeal that people are VERY motivated to propagate, a much smaller amount of money is required to get that message out to all the people.
3) Messages that are heard never have to compete with messages that are never heard.
4) Legislation that gives latitude to the very rich, or to large corporations, will tend to allow the messages that service those interests to get, on average, a much greater audience than those that do not services those interests.
5) likewise, that same legislation will allow attacks on less well funded but contrary messages that do not have sufficient funds to respond.
The bottom line is that more money almost always means a larger audience until you reach the point of what it costs to broadcast the message to the nation without any outside help. Beyond that more money doesn't necessarily mean more audience.
Once you have an audience, where it goes from there depends as much on the content as the packaging ... and once again money plays into it. Glitzy packaging is expensive. Again, more money translates to a disproportionately positive response.
I think that overall those that are pushing back against Carpe's concerns are just completely being dishonest. And your push backs are mostly cherry picking. More money means more people will hear your message. More money means you can package your message in the slickest, most appealing package available - to the point even total crap can be made to look tasty. More money means you can launch counter attacks against messages contrary to your own. This means that in general, more money gives the entity with the money an advantage. That simply can't be denied.
JimLast edited by oxmixmudd; 03-11-2019, 08:07 AM.My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostI think that overall those that are pushing back against Carpe's concerns are just completely being dishonest...The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostWhy do you find it necessary to go there? Why can't people have differences of opinion without you accusing them of being dishonest, and with such a broad brush?
Case in point If you guys can't admit that more money most of the time means more capability to get the message out - I mean that is so completely obvious. If I can produce ads and buy the spots on tv to air them, I have a big advantage. If I can respond to and trash every contrary voice, effectively using all that 'madison avenue' has to offer in packaging, I am way ahead of the curve. If something doesn't control that and ensure that money is not the primary determiner of what ideas are heard vs what ideas are not heard, then the reality is that speech is no longer free. Analogously, if I can stand on a street corner and say my message, but you have a massive investment in bigger louder speakers down the street that make my voice impossible to hear beyond the first row and the people that want to hear me can't, or are discouraged and walk away, then you have effectively eliminated my free speech. And that is what happens when huge amounts of money are allowed to flood the market pushing only one idea and effectively silencing competing ideas.
JimMy brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Postbecause that is what I see CP. In this forum there is no balance, not objectivity, no real intellectual honesty about most of the ideas discussed. It is almost all of it partisan rhetoric where the merit of an idea is almost completely determined by its source, not its content.
Case in point If you guys can't admit that more money most of the time means more capability to get the message out - I mean that is so completely obvious. If I can produce ads and buy the spots on tv to air them, I have a big advantage. If I can respond to and trash every contrary voice, effectively using all that 'madison avenue' has to offer in packaging, I am way ahead of the curve. If something doesn't control that and ensure that money is not the primary determiner of what ideas are heard vs what ideas are not heard, then the reality is that speech is no longer free. Analogously, if I can stand on a street corner and say my message, but you have a massive investment in bigger louder speakers down the street that make my voice impossible to hear beyond the first row and the people that want to hear me can't, or are discouraged and walk away, then you have effectively eliminated my free speech. And that is what happens when huge amounts of money are allowed to flood the market pushing only one idea and effectively silencing competing ideas.
JimThat's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostI believe I said "can," not "always does."
In general, the person with the biggest microphone gets their message across to a bigger audience. But there are exceptions. In the world of viral events, even a small voice can potentially be heard. But even there - a person with enough money to get lots of people hammering at social networking has a bigger chance of being heard than the lone voice sitting in their parent's basement.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View PostUm, Jim... free speech rights are not eliminated because others can't hear you. You still are free to distribute your message through whatever means you have available. Others are not required to listen.
We don't allow the government to silence free speech. But what about the government promoting just one kind of speech to the point any other kind of speech can't be heard? It's similar to the anti-monopoly laws. If one player has so much control of the market no other players can compete, the free market is gone. This sort of thing can create the equivalent in terms of free speech.
JimLast edited by oxmixmudd; 03-11-2019, 01:19 PM.My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostThey are if the reason they can't hear me is that you are purposefully drowning me out. The difference between my analogy and real life, (and the issue with the money) is that in my analogy the crowd would know you are trying to drown me out, and would respond accordingly. With the money thing, it wouldn't be that clear what was happening.
We don't allow the government to silence free speech. But what about the government promoting just one kind of speech to the point any other kind of speech can't be heard? It's similar to the anti-monopoly laws. If one player has so much control of the market no other players can compete, the free market is gone. This sort of thing can create the equivalent in terms of free speech.
On the larger point, I do agree that the amount of money you have (or rather, the amount of money you and whatever PACs that are backing you have) is a big factor in your ability to get elected, it is still only one of several important factors. Ocasio-Cortez famously won a decisive victory (57% to 43%) against someone who outspent her 18-to-1. And furthermore, it's worth remembering that frequently, it's not a matter of money leading you to being elected but people giving you money because they think you have a chance at getting elected.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Terraceth View PostThe government is not "promoting" this kind of speech, however. Private actors are the ones doing that.
On the larger point, I do agree that the amount of money you have (or rather, the amount of money you and whatever PACs that are backing you have) is a big factor in your ability to get elected, it is still only one of several important factors. Ocasio-Cortez famously won a decisive victory (57% to 43%) against someone who outspent her 18-to-1. And furthermore, it's worth remembering that frequently, it's not a matter of money leading you to being elected but people giving you money because they think you have a chance at getting elected.
We as a country have a long history of hiding bias behind laws that do not say they do what they actually do*. And we have been routinely forced to change our laws as a result.
Jim
*you'd think we would learn. But we never do. Every time someone takes advantage of a loophole in a law to accomplish something unconstitutional, or to hurt someone, our laws often must become less effective or more draconian to prevent the unintended work around. Keep that in mind the next time your favorite actor in the political arena tries to play a dirty trick with a law that is good but which leaves - for good reason - some leeway for good judgement.Last edited by oxmixmudd; 03-12-2019, 09:36 AM.My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by Joel View PostWhat do you think of the theory that the "biggest microphone" is usually determined by the choices of mass media? In the last presidential primaries and general, the media chose to focus mostly on Trump. And when the media chooses to ignore/exclude a candidate, then the candidate's chances seem to be zero, regardless how much they spend.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 01:19 PM
|
9 responses
50 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Yesterday, 11:58 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Yesterday, 12:23 PM
|
6 responses
36 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 03:23 AM | ||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 11:46 AM
|
16 responses
100 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Stoic
Yesterday, 04:44 PM
|
||
Started by seer, Yesterday, 04:37 AM
|
23 responses
106 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Yesterday, 02:49 PM
|
||
Started by seanD, 05-02-2024, 04:10 AM
|
27 responses
155 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Yesterday, 01:37 PM
|
Comment