Quote:
Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall
Here is the new reality: While we once understood that the great uninformed mass of idiots who make up so much of this country would not vote for an uninformed idiot to represent them, those idiots have come to realize that candidates with actual knowledge didn't vote like the idiots they represent (mostly on social issues, but now it's become every issue the uniformed are told they care about). So today, it makes almost no difference whatsoever whether you are an idiot candidate who says incredibly stupid things. All that matters is that uninformed idiot voters recognize that their uninformed idiot candidates are "like" them or will vote down the line based entirely on religion or conservative views on social issues. Therefore, and here's the rub, any media exposure--no matter how harmful it would seem to anyone with half a brain--is beneficial.
O'Donnell would never ever have gained traction 10-20 years ago. She would have been ignored by the media as an idiotic kook and the uninformed would not have cared. Now, she can say "I pray every day about why the elite want to separate church and state" and that message will be carried to her base of uninformed idiots. She cares not whether people understand that she's a moron on this or any other issue because the people who actually understand the substance of any given issue wouldn't vote for her in the first place. She just wants to be a household name, like Palin, which ensures an increasing number of votes the longer she remains so (no matter what she says).
|
“Our great democracies still tend to think that a stupid man is more likely to be honest than a clever man, and our politicians take advantage of this prejudice by pretending to be even more stupid than nature has made them.”
- Bertrand Russell
This is not offered in support of an argument that O'Donnell isn't stupid, but it does explain a lot about W and Palin's rhetoric. Making them out to be stupid merely endears them to their base.
Threaded Mode