subgenius wrote:honorentheos wrote:Hey dumb ____, you asked Kevin Graham in your SECOND post in this thread if it might influence voting behavior in November.
which is not a statement on the truthfulness of the image....or are you telling me that truthfulness is all that matters in November?
Let's use the closest analogy I can think of to your postmodern idea that truth is less important than allegiance: sports. To the diehard fan, they will be a fan no matter how good or bad they are doing. They'll feel schadenfreude when their closest and bitterest rival suffers defeat or a catastrophic injury to a star player. They'll grumble about bad head coaches or players who want more than they are worth, aren't performing, and they may find they have other priorities on game day when the team is doing really poorly. But otherwise they'll be in the stands, at the sports bar, or in front of the TV most of the time, regardless.
Those are the people who largely don't let the facts of performance or ranking get in their way because they serve a higher truth - the truth of their fandom.
But they aren't where the action is when it comes to Neilson ratings and ad space. Band wagon fans who bounce around to follow the better teams, casual viewers who get enthusiastic when a team they have some reason to relate to is doing well, people who don't care about the sport but watch when the post season gets here because it's just what one does...these people all see truth as being less about team loyalty and more about rather grounded issues. Is the team likely to win? Are they performing well? Is the style of play exciting to watch? If they miss a game will they seem like a chump at the water cooler on Monday?
These people care about the intersection of fandom and reality. Truth has fuzzy contours but it still has a very solid center. And while they may get caught up in the emotional intent of a meme like yours, the facts can still serve as a cold shower that cools their initial reactions because at the end of the day they don't have an investment in the team so much as ending up on the right side of the final outcome.
Lastly, you have the lovers of the game. These are the people to whom the sport itself is the higher truth. They could be former players, analysts, sports writers and reporters, the fantasy league fan, the odds maker, or just a person who fell in love with seeing the game played well. Teams and players are measured against their performance not their jersey color.
For these people, truth is solid all the way through, and the fuzziness of team loyalty is something to be kept separated or seen as potentially risky if one lets it get in the way if one is financially involved in predicting sports outcomes.
You behave like the election will be decided by conservative superfans, people like yourself who care more about seeing liberals lose than seeing any kind of actual national agenda moved forward. And it's only in this worldview you occupy where the truth behind the meme doesn't matter so long as it serves the higher truth of some political loyalty.
subbie wrote:honorentheos wrote: Your initial post is just sharing a meme that you comment on as a good counterpunch to...hmmm...
because it is a good counterpunch, your ignorance notwithstanding.
If you mean it's a good example of the original meaning of fake news, and the gullibility that fed it, then sure.