General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Gish Gallop of the HRC bashers
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by TexasTowelie (a host of the General Discussion forum).
Last edited Fri May 8, 2015, 08:59 PM - Edit history (1)
For those not familiar with the Gish Gallop: "The Gish Gallop is the debating technique of drowning the opponent in such a torrent of small arguments that their opponent cannot possibly answer or address each one in real time. More often than not, these myriad arguments are full of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments the only condition is that there be many of them, not that they be particularly compelling on their own. They may be escape hatches or "gotcha" arguments that are specifically designed to be brief, but take a long time to unravel. Thus, galloping is frequently used in timed debates (especially by creationists) to overwhelm one's opponent."
It's a technique primarily used by the right, for lack of an actual argument. But I have seen the dreaded technique being used by the Anti-HRC'ers as well. Obviously the hope is that no one will actually wade through all of the links they produce, so the reader, by default, will just assume the links are valid arguments. That's the Gish Gallopers hope, anyway.
Let's unpack one of these posts (copied and pasted, with my very brief comment under each).
Edited to add: Here is the link to the original wall of blue links Gish Gallop that I am responding to:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002&pid=6640114
http://www.alternet.org/drugs/clinton-dynasty-horrific-legacy-more-drug-war-more-prisons
This article is about Bill Clinton, and has nothing to do with HRC.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101667554
HRC did not "draft" the TPP, and the linked article says nothing of the kind. It talks about her role in opening foreign markets to American businesses. That is one of the roles of the SoS, whoever it happens to be at the time.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023661805
It's not "Hillary's TPP." Again, her involvement is one of the roles of the SoS, whoever it happens to be at the time. Why try to pretend otherwise?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6405669
HB1 Visas are for allowing workers to come HERE and work. Not to outsource jobs overseas. But hey, thanks for the right wing, Lou Dobbs take on it. Gotta love when liberals adopt right wing talking points.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016101761
She has spoken out against free trade agreements many times since entering politics as a candidate. And her voting record on trade is identical to Sanders.
Believe it or not, that whole screed linked in that article contains a single quote from HRC: Maybe theres a way of getting a representative group of actors at the table to discuss how the federal government could help the Biotech industry with insurance against risk, she said.
Apparently she is not a great "cheerleader."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017209519
Dead link in the DU post. I'm thinking people should check that before including it in a gish gallop. You never know when someone will check it. I'm going to guess this is the same link that is repeated at least 3 times in this list. The Gish Gallop needs a volume of posts, even if you have to repeat them to get the volume.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025205645
This is an op-ed that wonders if the neo-cons will try to ally with HRC. Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024876898
This is an op-ed in the Chi Tribune by a guy who also writes for the right wing nut job site, Townhall. More republican talking points.
http://m.thenation.com/blog/180572-grassroots-labor-uprising-your-bank
HRC doesn't own the State Department. There is not a single solitary word about HRC in the linked article.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251376647
"Under her leadership, the State Department worked closely with energy companies to spread fracking around the globepart of a broader push to fight climate change, boost global energy supply, and undercut the power of adversaries such as Russia that use their energy resources as a cudgel."
Wow, how nefarious of her.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101695441
This one is true. Wow, 1 out of 12 ain't bad?
http://m.thenation.com/article/180564-nsa-hillary-clinton-either-fool-or-liar
The op-ed offers no support of the accusation that HRC is either "a fool or a liar" - it is basically the same as the above. Pissed off because she supports the NSA over Snowden. I disagree with her on that just like the gish galloper, apparently. 2 out of 13!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025601610#post29
From the linked article - In the subsequent days [after the coup] I spoke with my counterparts around the hemisphere, including Secretary [Patricia] Espinosa in Mexico, Clinton writes. We strategized on a plan to restore order in Honduras and ensure that free and fair elections could be held quickly and legitimately, which would render the question of Zelaya moot. Again, how nefarious of her! Not sure how the Corporate Warfare link comes in. But throwing in stuff like that is what gish gallopers do.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025189257
So apparently the gish galloper wants Democrats to simply roll over and die instead of try to match the republican presidential Koch brothers money machine?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014829628
Again, not Hillarys plan and the linked article does not even mention her.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014867136
From our right wing friends at Yahoo corporate news. In any case, this was about a conflict initiated by Hamas. I personally think both Hamas and BiBi are terrorists. In other instances she has said critical things about Israel too. So this is a slanted distortion of her overall views, which almost exactly mirror those of Sanders. (The Gish Galloper is a strong Sanders supporter).
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024379279
This one actually links to her voting record and statements on the issue of SS. Good! Nothing damming there, but then it devolves into Bills thoughts on the issue, as if HRC is incapable of having her own thoughts and opinions on issues.
This one seems to take issue with the fact that the Clinton Foundation used a donated auditorium space owned by Goldman for a meeting. Classic Gish Gallop bullshit.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017209285
This is a video by someone you never heard of that agrees with the Gish Galloper. The basic premise is someone who used to work for HRC got a job with some company in Canada that supports the Keystone Pipeline. And thats all you got here.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017181611
This one is a video of someone you never heard of and their own Gish Gallop screed. The takeaway I got is the this guy isnt any more familiar with her actual statements and voting record than most of the HRC bashers.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025809071
Ah, Politico another excellent right wing media source. The article is actually about liberal donors meeting with Warren and Biden. Here is what the organizer said about the canard Politico was pushing: He dismissed any effort to read into the appearances by Warren and Biden but not Clinton. None of this has to do with presidential politics, and none of the people you asked about are declared presidential candidates, he said Wednesday. Once we have an actual contest, if we do have one, the DA will have to thread carefully through it, since we are scrupulously neutral, and people like you are always looking for signs.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016106575
Ah, Politico again. Another OP-ed piece. The author quotes Clinton saying: Dont let anyone tell you that its corporations and businesses that create jobs, Clinton said, erroneously echoing a meme Warren made famous during an August 2011 speech at a home in Andover, Massachusetts. You know that old theory, trickle-down economics? That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly.
And then spends the rest of the piece trying to convince us she didnt mean it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101684986
Another OP-Ed. No quotes by Hillary, just lots of opinion and innuendo most featuring the word apparently which translates to I have nothing to back this up, but I am going to say it anyway. Also wrong about various Iraq war funding votes HRC took as a senator. At this point, I have to ask . Why do gish gallopers think OP-Eds prove anything? They arent facts they are opinions.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025824981#post9
OMG I never would have thought someone who has worked in the highest level of government for DECADES would know powerful people. Seriously? This may be the most ridiculous link in the list.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026219783
Okay, we will put the Gish Galloper down for being in favor of the genocide that was occurring in Yugoslavia. Apparently we should not have stopped that. Also, Bill was president then, not Hillary.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014867136
This is a repeat. See above. I guess it reappears for effect.
Ah, Politico again. Same story as above - repeated 3 times in this list (so far). But remember, Gish Gallop is about VOLUME!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024707589
This one comes from the right wing WSJ. Cant read the story because I do not have a subscription. I dont subscribe to right wing news sites. Apparently Gish gallopers do.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017209519
This is another video by someone you never heard of (same guy you never heard of above) going on his own gish gallop screed. Its not actually about the Atlantic Interview as suggested above, unless you mean someone you never heard of videoing himself as he comments on the interview and lots of other stuff.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025205645
This is a repeat of the OP Ed above wondering if the neocons are getting ready to ally with Clinton. Again, the gish gallop is about the sheer number of things you can throw into the kitchen sink. And there is no real expectation anyone will actually read it, or click through on the links. So repeating them even in the same post is a tried and true gish gallop technique
Another dupe from above. This is the guy who writes for the right wing nutjob site, Townhall.com (as noted above)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026394878
Shes talking about how she got $20 billion in funding from Bush to address the 9/11 disaster in NYC. How horrible, huh?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025601610#post29
Another exact dupe from above. This person is an expert Gish Galloper!
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/hillary-clintons-iraq-war-vote-still-matters-9737
An OP-Ed about how HRCs Iraq war vote matters. Yes, of course it does. She has addressed it many times over the past 7-8 years.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026157088
Fox News video. LOL! More right wing talking points.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025364869
Another article about the Hamas rocket attacks in 2014 and HRC condemning them. I am losing count on how many times this EXACT same issue has been added to this list.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251375376
This one links to an Op-Ed at a vanity blog about Paul Wolfowitz and then devolves into a screed about Syria, and then BENGHAZI!!!! Its quite the rant. Doesnt make much sense, but its an amazing rant.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016102317
This pertains to a book review on Kissingers book that HRC did for the Washington Post. The gist seems to be we are facing the same or similar problems in the world today as Kissinger writes about. I dont know what the Hand in Hand comment means in the Gish Gallopers description. She points out that the Obama administration and Nixon administrations did have policy differences. Here is a representative sample of the book review text: In his new book, World Order, Henry Kissinger explains the historic scope of this challenge. His analysis, despite some differences over specific policies, largely fits with the broad strategy behind the Obama administrations effort over the past six years to build a global architecture of security and cooperation for the 21st century.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025504036
As above. Different Op-Ed but same story as above her book review of the Kissinger book. Which can be read here, by the way: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-reviews-henry-kissingers-world-order/2014/09/04/b280c654-31ea-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025493748
As above. Third article on the nerve of HRC to write a book review on Kissingers book. Gotta wear that one out, apparently.
And that, my friends, is today's lesson on the "Gish Gallop" and why you should not fall for it. Happy Friday!
misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)I have nothing more to add.
Thank you.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)are doing.
First of all calling people that do not support HRC, Hillary Haters is pathetic and should be embarrassing for a so-called "politically liberal" poster. It's really a bully technique to demonize one's opponent.
If you want to go head to head between HRC's stands on issues with Sen Sanders, then bring it on. But you discredit yourself by name calling.
H. Clinton betrayed the Democratic Party when she sided with George Bush and Richard "Little Dick" Cheney and promulgated the WMD lies. Now there is some thing you can address without your "Gish Gallop" excuse.
I will be glad to go issue by issue, one at a time so not to overwhelm you (Gish Gallop).
Shall we go with fracking? How does your candidate stand on the environmentally dangerous, but profitable, practice of fracking?
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)peacebird
(14,195 posts)Thus driving the wages DOWN in my field for those of us born here. There is NO shortage of qualified, skilled US IT workers. But companies want to be able to pay less, and H1B workers want a chance to come here, so they take very low wages. now HR can have a reduction in force, get rid of workers who are more experienced and cost more. Then when we get another job we are expected to take a huge pay cut because "the average wage" is now lower for our positions.
Thanks to H1B.
It drives the wages into the toilet for American workers.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)peacebird
(14,195 posts)And they have driven wages down dramatically in my sector....
PatrickforO
(15,071 posts)Since I'm an economist, I got the raw data set so that I could perform analysis on the relative economic impact of bringing in an H1B worker versus hiring an American worker. What I found was that in IT and engineering occupations, the H1B people were paid an average wage that fell between the 25th percentile and median wage. So, the wages they are paid are not extremely low.
However, and it is a BIG however, H1B workers simply aren't as good for the local economy as American workers. The reason? Remittance. The average H1B worker sends 10% of their income back to their family in their home country. This money, in effect, leaves our community and is exported. What this means roughly is that, all else being equal, 100 H1B people will produce the same demand for local goods and services as approximately 90 American workers.
Now, the capitalist overlords don't care much about local jobs. At all. But the have to pay ICE between $2,500 and $5,000 per H1B visa to bring a worker over. This is on top of whatever foreign staffing company they use for outreach. This is why it is important for communities to have strong leadership that ensures there are plenty of high skilled people in the training pipeline so companies won't HAVE to recruit H1B people.
All that said, one does wonder why many companies (who shall remain nameless in this post) make it a point to fill some positions with H1B people even though there are American workers in their local area with those skills. It ain't supposed to happen that way. I guess they call that corruption or corporate welfare
Now I know this doesn't have much to do with Secretary Clinton, but I replied to your post to clarify that the wages paid aren't all that low, particularly positions requiring a highly skilled and degreed person.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)Moreover, these workers are supposed to have skills not present in the local market--therefore such positions should logically be expected to offer higher than average pay due to the supposed scarcity of the skillsets involved.
None of this tells us how much more local workers could demand if their bargaining power wasn't undercut by foreign labor, nor how many local workers would be trained to fill these positions if companies weren't permitted to use guest workers.
So your observation about wages isn't very telling.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)many will read through it due to its length.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)I've seen Newsmax, Townhall, Breitbart, etc used here to attack Hillary. Ridiculous. And don't even get me started on the horrific picture memes on the "progressive" populist group. One had her bald dressed as a cyborg.
boston bean
(36,420 posts)think
(11,641 posts)Not sure what YOU read but it's right there in the article:
Shes also taken a leading part in drafting the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the free-trade pact that would give U.S. companies a leg up on their Chinese competitors.
http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-01-10/hillary-clintons-business-legacy-at-the-state-department#p2
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)You missed it.
think
(11,641 posts)No she just played a leading role in drafting it. Care to split any more hairs?
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)Do yourself a favor and read the beginning of the OP.
think
(11,641 posts)ten billion more questionable pro-Hillary arguments to go. Good luck!
think
(11,641 posts)article from Bloomberg which states that HRC played a leading part in drafting the TPP.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Unless you mean tried to use State Dept diplomacy to US advantage, which was her job as SoS.
boston bean
(36,420 posts)Good work!!
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)OH and as far as your "this article is about Bill Clinton it has nothing to do with Hillary" comment well:
from the alternet article:
"While its true that it was Bill who, as president, was ultimately responsible for these decision, Hillary was nonetheless a famously involved First Lady on political matters a reputation shes shown willingness to capitalize on in her new campaign. According to a 2013 Wall Street Journal report, Hillary has signaled she would use the 1990s as a selling point if she jumps in the race, making the case that, as first lady, she was part of an era that found solutions to the same sorts of political difficulties that bedevil present-day Washington. That legacy includes Bill Clintons War on Drugs, whether you like it or not."
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Of the war on drugs and mandatory minimum sentences other than being married to Bill Clinton? Absolutely nothing would be the answer.
Now if you want to be pissed at a Dem that is still in office over that, look to Uncle Joe. He was the prime Democrat that pushed mandatory minimum sentencing.
You guys need to brush up on your political history.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)issues. Some people believe she is a very strong person and may have had some influence on her husband. If she didn't and disagrees with some of what he did, she needs to explain.
She seems to be very quiet about a lot of important issues. Where does she stand on fracking? I am against it, Sen Sanders is against it, I hope you are against destroying our water supplies for profits. I am sure her Goldman-Sachs advisers love fracking. It's profitable.
At some point you need to decide if you support the corporatists or the people.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)And issues that occurred 20 years ago?
Here is her voting record, and lots of links to policy statements. http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/55463/hillary-clinton#.VU1akcstGUk
Maybe you can try addressing the actual issues and votes instead of Bill.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)nikto
(3,284 posts)Either bashing threads of Pres O and/or HRC, HRC right now has more (sorta) to at least 5 and over positive threads for Bernie S (hereinafter referred to as BS), with total respect.
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)and your shining, tedious example of it (i.e. the rest of your post)
Oh, the irony, it burns, it burns....
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Enrique
(27,461 posts)that was ProSense's tactic. I have a feeling we will be seeing more of these kinds of posts in Hillary's defense, with the links copied and pasted over and over with no expectation anyone will read any of them.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)They come from a Hillary basher that I assume was hoping no one would click through on. I'm just debunking them.
I agree it's the same tactic prosense uses. But the tactic comes from a Sander's supporter, not me.
LOL! You should try reading an OP before commenting on it.
Enrique
(27,461 posts)i had responses to the first two, but I realized it was just a game, which we will be playing over and over for the next two years.
think
(11,641 posts)the last post I've seen from Pro was very complimentary of Bernie.
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)and a perfect example of the corporate propaganda machine's utter contempt for the intelligence of voters. The OP's entire response rests on the assumption that no one will actually visit the links, and the even more brazen assumption that Hillary's positions on these issues are not well-established by her own record.
This is the level of brazen manipulation and denial of reality itself we are fed by corporate politicians and their mouthpieces as a matter of routine now. Orwell was prescient. Political messaging in our corrupt oligarchy truly has devolved to the level of "2+2=5" and "War is Peace." We don't just live in a surveillance state now. We live in a vile, magnificently funded propaganda state, where we are lied to with impunity and bullied to accept a corporate narrative of denial, a shared national delusion about what is and isn't being done to us.
And we will see the same group of familiar, full-time corporate posters as always, swarming to rec this attempt to deny what we have observed from Hillary herself, witnessed with our own eyes.
It's Twilight Zone level propaganda, beyond insulting to anyone who follows the issues and understands the duty of a candidate to appeal to voters with a record. Hillary has been clear on all the issues detailed in my links, and she has chosen AGAINST the 99 percent on all of them. More importantly, these aren't minor issues. These are serious, serious issues at the heart of the corporate coup of democracy being perpetrated on this nation.
[font color=red]Reject Third Way propaganda. Reject denial and rewriting of history.[/font color]
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5767160
Hekate
(94,207 posts)....and they didn't seem to have been taken out of context by the OP, but certainly had been taken out of context by the DUer(s) who had posted them to bash a Democratic candidate.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Each of those threads is one argument being presented. They are not compiled by one person making one argument.
well, except for you, which ought to make you think for a moment...
At any rate, it's not a "gish gallop" if lots of different people are making lots of different arguments in lots of different instances.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)I just copied and pasted the posted links to debunk them.
Here is the original I used:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002&pid=6640114
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)You're both simply compiling a number of arguments by a number of people. The only difference is that you try to rebut them with one-line zingers.
Also I notice that rather than responding to the poster you have a problem with, you make a new OP to complain about him, without actually saying so.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)I didn't "compile" the (fake) arguments by other people. That was done by the Sander's supporter. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002&pid=6640114
It appears to bum you out that I called out the BS, but I guess you'll just have to live with it.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)lovemydog
(11,833 posts)something from the Kentucky Derby. Hi my friend. Hope you're enjoying a good weekend.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)It's a bit rainy but that's better n snow! I hope your weekend is good too.
I tried to read the whole op but I got exhausted.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)Going to see some friends tonight. I've been a hermit all week. Yeah, I didn't read it all either. At least I learned a new phrase. If anyone acts too weird I'll suggest they gish gallop on out the door.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)The whole point of someone that throws out a gish gallop is to exhaust you.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002&pid=6640114
If you think it was exhausting reading it, you should believe me that it was exhausting responding to it.
F4lconF16
(3,747 posts)On the issues. 'Nuff said.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Using it as an example for class.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Less actual facts.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)But typical from the HRC bashers. If any of you could make an actual argument I'm sure you would.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Just saying.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)I feel rather sorry for HRC.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)No need to.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)A smell of desperation wafts about as Ag strives to make some sort of pithy reply.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)You do the leg work for me.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Ok you have my sympathies.
I understand the problem 3rd wayers aren't really programmed for higher level functions like sarcasm, independent thought.
Sort of like a dem version of Dennis Miller.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Real class act.
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)libodem
(19,288 posts)The definition was worth reading just to see that it supercedes: "emo progressive".
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)DURHAM D
(32,825 posts)Do you think they are over-represented on DU or should I be worried about my neighbors?
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Pres O have to contend with the insane right as well as with the "Puritopians". Both groups are extremely angry. Takes a strong person to endure such hatred. I think HRC can manage it as well, but I know it takes on toll on their minds.
Hekate
(94,207 posts)Thanks
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)against Hillary.
The right has no shame but there's no excuse for the left using teabag lies against a fellow democrat!
libodem
(19,288 posts)Vince Foster
nikto
(3,284 posts)I mean, clearly, it was Chelsea who did the deed.
OilemFirchen
(7,153 posts)was an active participant in the chorus which constantly hectored another poster for her "wall of blue links". Said other poster, BTW, is ironically mentioned above... in a subthread about irony.
I'm howling ovah heah.
DURHAM D
(32,825 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,153 posts)It made sense when I wrote it.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Here is the original post I am riffing on: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002&pid=6640114
Is that the poster you are referring to?
And I wasn't posting here when Prosense would do the wall of blue links thing (although I have seen it). I never commented on it.
OilemFirchen
(7,153 posts)I was commenting about the poster to whom you were referring.
I suffer from paucity of words. Sorry.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)mcar
(43,348 posts)I noted that the first time I saw that "wall of blue links" that apparently was good only for ridicule when used to support Pres. Obama but is A -OK to trash Sec. Clinton.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)The irony is strong in this one.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Not the act of responding to it. Do I have that right?
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Damning enough to elicit this elaborate but transparently dishonest attempt at rebuttal.
Hillary's corporate positions on all of these issues are well-established, not just by the links themselves, but by the totality of her record and our own experience watching her over the years.
Yes, the irony in the OP's attempt to complain about "Gish Gallop" is delicious, but you've got to consider that the corporate talking points machine faces an impossible situation here:
(1)They can embrace and try to defend their candidate's overall predatory, corporate, warmongering, antidemocratic policy agenda. But if they do that, they alienate the 99 percent, who are sick of looting, murderous, predatory corporate exploitation.
OR
(2)They can LIE about and deny their candidate's true agenda, and pretend to be populists. But if they do that, they alienate the 99 percent, who are sick of obvious manipulative lies from corrupt, corporate politicians.
OR
(3)They can focus on trying to slime the opposition, in which case they alienate the 99 percent, who are sick of dirty, diversionary, dishonest politics.
The monied interests that control our political process now depend on propaganda, diversion, and blatant misrepresentation of their candidate's record. They can't win on the actual issues, because they are corrupt. And now that we have a genuinely honest candidate in the race, their corruption is magnified by contrast. I think posts like the OP are actually useful, because they expose so clearly the level of dishonesty and utter contempt for voters that we face from our corporate-controlled political messaging machines today.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025767160
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Can I ask why you use so many right wing sources?
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)I've seen it done to President Obama. And to Hillary Clinton. And to Bernie Sanders. When it's extreme and repeated I sometimes question the poster's credibility or sincerity.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Do you have a link? I would love to check it out. Gish Gallop is a cowardly debating technique in my opinion.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)I've seen him called a gun nut, a gun-humper, suggesting he's a racist, that he has no chance of winning the nomination, that he's only running to be a spoiler, that he's too white or too old or his hair ain't right, that he's not a democrat, that he likes Swedish people too much, that he has not a snowball's chance in hell of winning the presidency, that his supporters are assholes, tons of stuff. I'm paraphrasing of course. But you get the idea.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)And thank YOU for a link to another example of me calling out the purists for quoting right wingers.
Andy823
(11,521 posts)How love quoting right wingers, they have done it with president Obama, Hillary, and anyone in the party they "think" are not "real" liberals, progressives, democrats like they are. Of course now days I guess it's those who are not "populist". It really doesn't matter to them where they get their sources as long as they can use the information to bash those they dislike. They simply live to stir things up and do their best to divide those on the board instead of trying to unite them against the right. It's the weekend so they will be out in force with their loyal followers who love to "alert" on those who might disagree with their group.
Thanks for the OP. By the looks of some of the posts here, you seems to have them out in force trying to defend their method of "attacking". As long as their loyal followers except all they post as "facts" without ever really checking them out, they will continue to play by their rules. Thanks again for pointing out their tactics.
Hekate
(94,207 posts)Currently I am experimenting with Trash Thread, but I can't keep up. After awhile I may just experiment with going away....
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)They were all collected and posted by the Gish Galloper in a single post. Here is the link:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002&pid=6640114
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Thanks!
still_one
(95,780 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)But I had some time and I really, really hate the gish gallop thing. And I figured I could save it for use later as well. I'm sure we will see more wall of blue links gish gallop stuff over the next 12 months or so.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Responding to a Gish Gallop is rare. That's the whole point of the Gish Galloper. Flood the zone with enough bullshit to create a false narrative and hope no one checks into the BS, or simply cannot address all the straw men packed into the gish gallop.
It is very effective in timed, verbal debates, as the definition I posted states. Not so effective if someone actually responds to the mountain of bullshit when time is not an issue.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop
See example here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002&pid=6640114
(That's the one I used for the OP). Great example, no?
Are you saying we should just leave Gish Gallop posts alone, no matter how much BS they contain?
Romulox
(25,960 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Thanks for clarifying.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Responding to a Gish Gallop is not a gish gallop.
Here is the definition so you can refresh yourself:
"The Gish Gallop is the debating technique of drowning the opponent in such a torrent of small arguments that their opponent cannot possibly answer or address each one in real time. More often than not, these myriad arguments are full of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments the only condition is that there be many of them, not that they be particularly compelling on their own. They may be escape hatches or "gotcha" arguments that are specifically designed to be brief, but take a long time to unravel. Thus, galloping is frequently used in timed debates (especially by creationists) to overwhelm one's opponent."
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)LOL! Okay then.
Evergreen Emerald
(13,092 posts)Thanks
ucrdem
(15,700 posts)I'd read about three words and start laughing. But the Moonies were so polite and sad looking I always took a flyer to be nice and waited until they were out of sight before tossing them.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)But yeah, there is some crazy stuff in the Gish Gallop post too.
ucrdem
(15,700 posts)Wonder what became of them anyway . . .
daleanime
(17,796 posts)changes my choice to support Bernie how?
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)I'm just pointing out the BS posted by the HRC bashers.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)And would NEVER go on the attack. But just today you are attacking a long-time DUer with your highly questionable OPINIONS as well as another Hill booster who called Omaha Steve demented. Take a bow, you've done good work for the day.
I think by your nasty behavior you are doing far more harm to your cause than good. If you wanted to refute the arguments you should have done it in the original post. But you don't want to play that way, you just want applause and snark.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Shouldn't be called out? Sorry, i didn't sign up for that. Odd you should expect it to go unchallenged.
I have a great idea. People should avoid posting BS about Democrats here on DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)For instance, you are obviously astonishingly clueless about H1B visas. That's no surprise as I have encountered others on this board who are as well. Your other commentary is equally as vapid. You achieved what you wanted, the tiny minority of Hill supporters clapped you on the back. But what you failed to do is present an argument. And in the process, you attacked a longtime DUer and snarked off his replies. If you think you are helping your cause in any way, that is just as delusional as this post.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)The link pertaining to HB1 Visas was Hillary stating she supported them for STEM jobs for Silicon valley and other tech companies.
I live in the Seattle area. My wife worked for a long time in Silicon Valley and then for Microsoft as a manager. There is a real problem with finding STEM qualified applicants in this area. MS has used the HB1 visa program to fill a good number of vacant jobs here. They are paid well. In addition, we have a booming job market here. Low unemployment, easy to sell a house, and great schools. So much for your sky is falling claims.
Secondly, in the exact same video she touts support for funding to improve the number of STEM qualified American graduates, and emphasizes the importance of the US generating it's own workers through government support for this type of education.
And she is exactly fucking right.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)And all the people in my industry, the entertainment industry, most especially digital effects and editing, that was absolutely DECIMATED by H1B workers. You're making it sound like tech workers love H1B visas and all is right with the world. So fucking out of touch.
Showing again that you don't give a fuck about people, just that your candidate wins.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)She was advocating it for Silicon Valley and other tech companies. That is THE video a HRC basher posted.
You realize that the overall HB1 visa grants have seen a sharp decrease during the Obama administration, right? They have been extremely back-logged.
The people you don't think I give a fuck about are my neighbors and friends. But you just keep on ranting. Don't let the facts stop you.
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)She's priced herself out of the Democratic Party. We can't afford her.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)They have.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)I just thought it was all BS.
You proved it! And a right-wing tactic, to boot! It smelled fishy.
Glad you are one of the 'good guys'!
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Well done!
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)1. Nothing that happened while Clinton was SoS had anything to do with her
2. The fact that he has spent 25 years cozying up to the hyper-rich, including the Bush family, will have no bearing whatsoever on how she governs. Also, anyone who mentions her hyper-richness is a sexist.
3. We should all love fracking
4. We should all love adventures like Nicaragua, Granada, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Chile, El Salvador, and on and on because they're only waged against baaaaaaaad people.
5. Anyone who favors slashing the militry budget, staying out of foreign affairs, governing for little people instead of big people, and end to drilling and fracking, and fair taxes are not really dems. Oh, and liberals suck.
Hillarians Jump Shark - film constantly at DU.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...
Egnever
(21,506 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)for people who are against HRC herein at the DU. Same for BS. O'Malley soon to come (which I find interesting).
But alas, some positives will survive.
MADem
(135,425 posts)When they've got nothing, they fling shit.
Those who do this sort of thing, while pretending to support a dark horse (stalking horse?) candidate, are clearly pot-stirring.
The debate about where the party is going? A great thing! Bring it on!!!
The discussions about the best way to get there? Yee haw--hash it out!!!!!
But cutting down a Democrat who was the first one to try to get every American Universal Health Care, using lies and bullshit? That's just not on, and it's not something the only other declared candidate on the left would find appropriate.
Senator Sanders took HILLPAC money. It helped him win his senate seat. He just doesn't hate her as much as some of his (?) "supporters" (?) would like to pretend. He calls her "his friend of 25 years." I think he'd be appalled at the way some of them "support" him by flinging shit at her.
There's nothing wrong with two candidates hashing out the issues...but I think they'd prefer to talk about ACTUAL issues, and not innuendos and accusations.
Some of the trash talking has not been very """"progressive"""" (since that's the Word of the Year, apparently--even though a lot of people professing it have no idea what it means) at all!
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Hekate
(94,207 posts)nikto
(3,284 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Should I have posted 22 different posts to respond to the Gish Gallop instead?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Did my post hurt your feelings? LOL!
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)someone needs to take a stand for the poster you're smearing.
betsuni
(27,254 posts)Alerter called it "insulting, rude, personal attack, name calling, belittling ... disruptive and childish. Making DU suck." Someone tried awfully hard to fake an injury. Ridiculous.
nikto
(3,284 posts)Any questions?
Didn't think so.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)LOL! I guess a couple of pics is the best you can do.
G_j
(40,429 posts)over, and over, and over again, while ignoring the answer?
nikto
(3,284 posts)I strongly favor Bernie.
If Bernie is nominated, I'll happily vote for him.
BUT BUT BUT ---- If Hillary gets it, I'll reluctantly vote for her. But fear not ---- I WILL vote Democratic.
Voting GOP is not an alternative, IMO.
Do all the Hillary-supporters agree to vote for Bernie if he is able to get nominated?
That's all I could ask.
If so, then I refuse to argue at this point.
I mean, is there actually ANY Hillary-supporter anywhere who would vote GOP instead of Bernie,
in the Presidential election?
I'll bet there isn't even ONE.
Not one. Am I right?
Unless there is, there's no real need to argue.
I just don't see the need to tear down others in our party in te process.
pnwmom
(109,445 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Nicely done.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)pnwmom
(109,445 posts)betsuni
(27,254 posts)KMOD
(7,906 posts)K&R
U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)SMC22307
(8,090 posts)THAT is some serious bullshit.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Friendship.
Kennebunkport, July 30, 1983: Bill Clinton, George Bush & George Wallace
Wallace and his third wife, the former Lisa Taylor, meet with Vice President George Bush and Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton at a lobster bake at Bush's residence at Kennebunkport, Maine, July 30, 1983. The third Mrs. Wallace, whom the governor married in 1981, was 30 years his junior and half of a country-western singing duo, Mona and Lisa, who had performed during his campaign in 1968.
CREDIT: AP/Birmingham Post
SOURCE: http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/george-wallace/13/
TexasTowelie
(116,257 posts)Discuss politics, issues, and current events. Posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports are restricted in this forum. Conspiracy theories and disruptive meta-discussion are forbidden. For more information, click here.
The consensus of forum hosts believe that this thread constitutes disruptive meta-discussion with a call-out of another member on a different thread.