5 ms·

>But all I remember from that TV debate is that his main argument tactic on TV was effectively interrupting all the time by saying "wtf", "people will die becau

>But all I remember from that TV debate is that his main argument tactic on TV was effectively interrupting all the time by saying "wtf", "people will die because of you" Which was an apporpriate tactic given that the United Kingdom was one of the hardest hit countries in Europe and the entire world. Visible anger in the face of complete and abject failure of an expert class and in the face of a rapidly worsening pandemic was an entirely reasonable reaction and the situation was indeed obvious to anyone who didn't have his head up his own ass. You might remember all of this happened against the backdrop of a government that was willing to 'let the bodies pile up' to 'keep the economy going'. The absolute veneration of "civility" as if being civil actually is worth anything in the face of tens of thousands dying as a result of hesistancy is mad. Any sane person should have been ragiung.

mandmandam 5y ago
No, that is not an appropriate tactic; not in real life and 10x more not on TV. It may come as a shock to you, but people do not like having their viewpoint challenged by such tactics. It's not very persuasive; if anything it entrenches opposition. I haven't seen the debate you are referring to so I won't say much more, but there is a l a r g e space between being civil and "interrupting all the time by saying "wtf", "people will die because of you". Disclaimer: I don't think this guy is legit, based on his cherry-picking of numbers and facts, and his over the top fear-mongering style.
paulddraper 5y ago
> government that was willing to 'let the bodies pile up' to 'keep the economy going' First, the UK mortality rate was only somewhat higher in 2020. In fact, it was lower than it had been in any year before 2009. Second, even if that were true, you vastly overestimate the efficacy of such tactics in persuading people.

mandmandam 5y ago

No, that is not an appropriate tactic; not in real life and 10x more not on TV. It may come as a shock to you, but people do not like having their viewpoint challenged by such tactics. It's not very persuasive; if anything it entrenches opposition. I haven't seen the debate you are referring to so I won't say much more, but there is a l a r g e space between being civil and "interrupting all the time by saying "wtf", "people will die because of you". Disclaimer: I don't think this guy is legit, based on his cherry-picking of numbers and facts, and his over the top fear-mongering style.

paulddraper 5y ago

> government that was willing to 'let the bodies pile up' to 'keep the economy going' First, the UK mortality rate was only somewhat higher in 2020. In fact, it was lower than it had been in any year before 2009. Second, even if that were true, you vastly overestimate the efficacy of such tactics in persuading people.