Can this really be true or are we being fooled?
They drafted a 26-page protest guide for activists, full of pointers
“Even the safest [Republican] will be deeply alarmed by signs of organized opposition,” says the manual, “because these actions create the impression that they’re not connected to their district and not listening to their constituents.”
Protesters are encouraged to film Republican candidates in hopes they can be portrayed in a negative light. “Unfavorable exchanges caught on video can be devastating” for GOP members when “shared through social media and picked up by local and national media.”
Where do you think CAF posters get their talking points from?
When Kavanaugh was being announced there was a poster who didn’t even wait until he got off the podium before he started with the ‘Trump is picking someone to let him off the hook’ mantra. I was think to myself ‘Wow did you just and paste straight from the playbook?’
I remember that day Kavanaugh was announced and what was posted so
I don’t understand how Obama could be that much of a disappointment to George
Soros when he was in the White House for
2 yesrs. Did he not work hard enough to get Hillary elected in 2016?
Does this mean that Soros wasn’t controlling Obama.
Oops, there goes another conspiracy (sung to the tune of High Hopes)
That is what I am asking…this was said in an interview with The New York Times.
Does George really feel this way or is he planting false information and if so, for
Ideologically, they’re still on the same page. From the article:
“Despite their frosty relationship, organizations supported by the two men are working together to oppose President Donald Trump’s agenda. Organizing for Action, an off-shoot of Barack Obama’s first presidential campaign, partnered with the Soros-backed Indivisible Project for “online trainings” on how to build protest movements in the Trump-era.”
But I can see how Soros could be disappointed in Obama. Soros is an activist and wants to bring down the west immediately. Obama himself said his own worst fault is laziness. Probably Soros expected Obama to be a much more active revolutionary than he turned out to be.
If I start quoting Breitbart as if it were a serious and objective source of news, please shoot me.
No not necessarily. Like 7_sorrows was saying is this release could be part of a disinformation campaign.
Not expecting you to provide references to someone saying this (since that tactic is used to claim victory in cyber-debates and is silly), but I don’t recall anyone claiming Soros controlled Obama. I know claims have been made that he funds and promotes a lot of horrendous, evil causes, and I generally find him to be a loathsome human being, but that has nothing to do with him paying Obama to do his bidding.
Obama had plenty of horrendous ideas on his own without needing Soros puppet strings, IMO. In defense of the former President, while his ideas were generally terrible, I don’t believe their had the ill intent that Soros does.
This article is a synopsis of a NYT article.
From what I have seen, CAF posters get their talking points from Fox News and right wing radio hosts like Hannity, with a little Alex Jones mixed in.
Probably not, if a study about which I read is correct. Apparently, to the extent people watch or listen to politically-oriented shows at all (and most don’t) they go almost exclusively to those with whose point of view they already agree.
I find that fairly persuasive. I have always believed organizations like Fox News came into being because the Murdochs saw there was a viewer need that wasn’t filled, and devised a network to fill it. Probably they simply observed that there weren’t nearly as many people watching the existing networks as there “should” have been. They didn’t create the constituency, they reacted to one that already existed and probably wasn’t listening to anybody.
But I think they probably got the idea from Limbaugh to start with. If I’m not mistaken, he predated Fox News. He got a very large following in a very short period of time.
if you bothered to read the article you would see it is referencing an interview in the New York Times.
Shouldn’t we take him at his word?
I thought Obama was very special to George Soros. I am shocked to hear him call Barack Obama his greatest disappointment.
He’s probably disappointed because he wasn’t impressive enough as a president that his electorate would vote HC into office as well.She would have picked up the torch and run with it where Obama left off.
I didn’t know Fox News, Hannity and Alex Jones mailed out 26 page guides.
Maybe in the old days, but now, I think that when Trump does something, you get a several hour window before conservatives comment on it while they essentially wait for instructions from Fox News.
I didn’t either, but you asked where the posters get the ideas for their posts from and I answered you.
Isn’t this a little like Machiavelli calling Rasputin his “Greatest Disappointment”?
People also took Ted Bundy at his word.