What it takes to be a Republican: Incompetent Thinking

[Tennessee Gal]

No matter the issue Republicans are incompetent thinkers.

Just one example: They are convinced that tax cuts for the wealthy will stimulate the economy and create jobs. But that is based on party indoctrination, not evidence.

And when the evidence tells them they are wrong they will rationalize or lie because of their party indoctrination. Presenting totally irrational thinking to the public does not bother them at all. In fact, they have been trained to "frame" issues in such a way as to convince the public that their positions have merit. These thoughts and actions come from devotion to party positions without a basis in fact. Their devotion is so great that even the hardest of evidence proving them wrong can be ignored or somehow rationalized.

They haven't arrived at their beliefs overnight. They have come to them over a period of time with gradually escalated commitments until they seem to have reached a fever pitch. Their current commitment has escalated to the point of irrationality and it is endangering the future stability of this country.

Republicans fall into these two categories:

People who know what they are doing is wrong and don't care.

People who know what they are doing is wrong, but they have such contempt for the rest of us that it doesn't make them the slightest bit uncomfortable attempting to con us.

[CBHagman]

1. Incompetence in practice, too.

I'm always astonished that the media more often than not accepts the claim that Republicans are strong on defense, foreign policy, and fiscal matters. Yeah, maybe that's why they leave deficits and debt in their wake, and never-ending wars, etc.

[Tennessee Gal]

2. Most of the media is complicit.

Their lack of informed questioning and reporting is a very big part of the problem.

[Scootaloo]

3. Why report when you can just fake a debate?

Saves you the trouble of doing the work, throws the issues out there anyway, and provides airtime for your advertisers just the same. Especially when there are like seven 24/7 news channels that need all that padding.

Of course in order to have "debate," you need two things; controversy and equality on each side. So the media fakes both. First the controversy; if one dude out of a million disagrees, then that's all you need to claim there is "controversy" (See; Climate change.) And then you have for create this narrative that this one dude who's screaming into the camera with a colander on his head is in some way equal to the "expert" from the "otherside" that you have on.

You see the same basic principle in the media's need for neck-and-neck horserace elections.

[Tennessee Gal]

4. Yes, they think it is the only way they have of maintaining viewership.

That gives them a motive to promote the fallacies as fact.

However, I can't help but think that they could maintain or even grow their ratings by calling out the lies by presenting facts.

On the other hand, they have financial reasons for not doing that. Republicans give them what they want in allowing them to skirt rules. Or Republicans will just change the rules to suit their needs.

[JHB]

5. I think there's also another category: With Kaleidescope Eyes

WKEs operate under the influence of the other two, having become addicted to an instant beverage mix spiked with some either really, really good or really really bad shit.

[dkf]

6. You can't say it would never work, but it seems ineffective in our current circumstances.

The problem is that politicians are so set on their priorities that they make them the solution to all things when sometimes its not. This happens on both sides.

We will never let the solutions fit the problems because that would require someone who is less ideological. That person would piss off his base.