4 ms·

Yes both sides have their conspiracy theories. The issue is is that the scale of conspiracies imagined by the left just doesn't compare to what is imagined on t

Yes both sides have their conspiracy theories. The issue is is that the scale of conspiracies imagined by the left just doesn't compare to what is imagined on the right. Imagining that "a group largely ruled by the same people we have been playing spy-games with for a century might be playing spy-games with us" is distinctly different from, "A large part of the US ruling class is part of a satanic cult with food based code to cover up massive child abuse." These differences include both the scope of the claims, and the number of imagined conspirators required to keep the claims a secret.

jessaustin 10y ago
That certainly could be an issue, if that's what seems important to somebody. The main issue to me is that the one group of conspiratorial goofballs is invisible to me (silly Pizzagate dude was arrested before I even heard of "Pizzagate"), while the other group of conspiratorial goofballs is everywhere: on the TV, on NPR, in Congress, on social media. I can't escape them. I voted for neither of the Status Quo Party candidates, because they both make me sick. Yet even as I wiped the vomit from my chin, I couldn't help but notice that the primary complaint about the election results was that the voters knew more about one of the candidates and her organization than she wanted them to know. Did we ever care about objectivity? If a losing R candidate made the same complaint, all of these pundits would laugh at that candidate: "Oh, someone leaked your email? In which you discussed the dirty deeds you did your poor little primary opponent? And the way they got that email was by phishing you? Well, boooo-hooooo! Next time use two-factor, sweetheart."
- geofft 10y ago
  > the primary complaint about the election results was that the voters knew more about one of the candidates and her organization than she wanted them to know. But that's not the complaint! The complaint was that, based on the leaks of private emails, it was possible to construct innuendo that was untrue. Take the entire Spirit Cooking thing, for instance. It would be one thing if Podesta had participated in a Satanist ritual and didn't want people to know. But he didn't actually participate in one. People just insinuated he did, based on a vaguely-plausible interpretation of a private email between family members. I don't think anyone really found the way the Hillary campaign treated the Bernie campaign to be "dirty deeds", just politics, and I certainly don't think that's what swung the election. (Maybe I'm wrong.)
  - jessaustin 10y ago
    OK well I never heard of "Spirit Cooking" until now, and now that I've googled it I'm not sure why anyone would care that John Podesta does it. It's certainly not why I voted Green. If you polled voters in my 80% Trump county, I doubt you'd find a single person who had heard of this thing. Innuendo isn't some magic spell that requires eye of newt and leak of email. There was lots of innuendo about other candidates too. I especially loved how they piled on poor Johnson for forgetting the name of some benighted hellhole he had no plans to invade, ever. If the Russians' plan was a Xanatos Gambit of let's phish Podesta, then we'll publish his dinner invitations, ...., then Hillary will lose? And that worked? In that case they're smart enough to own us no matter what we do.
linkregister 10y ago
The vast majority of "the right" do not believe in the plausibility of Pizzagate.

jessaustin 10y ago

That certainly could be an issue, if that's what seems important to somebody. The main issue to me is that the one group of conspiratorial goofballs is invisible to me (silly Pizzagate dude was arrested before I even heard of "Pizzagate"), while the other group of conspiratorial goofballs is everywhere: on the TV, on NPR, in Congress, on social media. I can't escape them. I voted for neither of the Status Quo Party candidates, because they both make me sick. Yet even as I wiped the vomit from my chin, I couldn't help but notice that the primary complaint about the election results was that the voters knew more about one of the candidates and her organization than she wanted them to know. Did we ever care about objectivity? If a losing R candidate made the same complaint, all of these pundits would laugh at that candidate: "Oh, someone leaked your email? In which you discussed the dirty deeds you did your poor little primary opponent? And the way they got that email was by phishing you? Well, boooo-hooooo! Next time use two-factor, sweetheart."

geofft 10y ago
> the primary complaint about the election results was that the voters knew more about one of the candidates and her organization than she wanted them to know. But that's not the complaint! The complaint was that, based on the leaks of private emails, it was possible to construct innuendo that was untrue. Take the entire Spirit Cooking thing, for instance. It would be one thing if Podesta had participated in a Satanist ritual and didn't want people to know. But he didn't actually participate in one. People just insinuated he did, based on a vaguely-plausible interpretation of a private email between family members. I don't think anyone really found the way the Hillary campaign treated the Bernie campaign to be "dirty deeds", just politics, and I certainly don't think that's what swung the election. (Maybe I'm wrong.)
- jessaustin 10y ago
  OK well I never heard of "Spirit Cooking" until now, and now that I've googled it I'm not sure why anyone would care that John Podesta does it. It's certainly not why I voted Green. If you polled voters in my 80% Trump county, I doubt you'd find a single person who had heard of this thing. Innuendo isn't some magic spell that requires eye of newt and leak of email. There was lots of innuendo about other candidates too. I especially loved how they piled on poor Johnson for forgetting the name of some benighted hellhole he had no plans to invade, ever. If the Russians' plan was a Xanatos Gambit of let's phish Podesta, then we'll publish his dinner invitations, ...., then Hillary will lose? And that worked? In that case they're smart enough to own us no matter what we do.

linkregister 10y ago

The vast majority of "the right" do not believe in the plausibility of Pizzagate.