Simply put, the attack is shorter and easier to understand than the nuanced defense.
Politicians can put “you’re against education!” in a 15 second attack ad on the radio/TV/a poster. It takes a short media appearance to explain the nuance. Which isn’t worth the time or money typically, since so few people will see it.
Especially since a huge section of our population gets 100% of its news from Fox, Newsmax, and other right wing media. That interview will never air there. In fact, those sources will repeat the party line of “you’re against education!”
No no no. Nuance can only be used to pave a high road to hell. Get out of here with using it to fire back more intelligently yet equally dirty. We can only do one thing at a time, so it’s high road all the way to the grave.
I mean, what’s next in your suggestions? Using the free and available plethora of Republican politician child sex scandals as non-slanderous, factual, and real ammo fodder?
Simply put, the attack is shorter and easier to understand than the nuanced defense.
Politicians can put “you’re against education!” in a 15 second attack ad on the radio/TV/a poster. It takes a short media appearance to explain the nuance. Which isn’t worth the time or money typically, since so few people will see it.
Especially since a huge section of our population gets 100% of its news from Fox, Newsmax, and other right wing media. That interview will never air there. In fact, those sources will repeat the party line of “you’re against education!”
“Why do Republicans think about porn every time they discuss children?”
Thats how you frame it back at em.
No no no. Nuance can only be used to pave a high road to hell. Get out of here with using it to fire back more intelligently yet equally dirty. We can only do one thing at a time, so it’s high road all the way to the grave.
I mean, what’s next in your suggestions? Using the free and available plethora of Republican politician child sex scandals as non-slanderous, factual, and real ammo fodder?