• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Leftists caught framing Republicans with Tiki Torch Stunt

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
20,229
Location
Minnesota
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
That you call their political affiliations "irrelevancy" is telling.

Two Democrats joined a Republican demonstration. For some reason, you think that is some big deal.

The fact you felt the need to conflate "Democrat" with "Leftist" is revealing. The fact you think their political affiliation is relevant is also revealing.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
20,229
Location
Minnesota
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
That you think that "The fact you think their political affiliation is relevant is also revealing." is revealing.
Of course you would think so.

Why do you think it is a big deal that two Democrats joined a Republican demonstration intended to embarrass a Republican candidate?
 

Swammerdami

Squadron Leader
Staff member
Joined
Dec 16, 2017
Messages
2,220
Location
Land of Smiles
Basic Beliefs
pseudo-deism
Two of the people involved are indeed Democrats, even if the Lincoln Project organized this. They have been identified by name, something I declined to do in this thread.

Do you want me to name them so that you can be satisfied that Democrats are doing this?

TWO Democrats! Not just ONE, but TWO! Think of the Horror!
Donald Trump committed treason, and one TeaParty Senator voted not to convict. Imagine what the headlines would have been if TWO GOP Senators had supported the treasonous sociopath?
Roger Stone has been a GOP trickster most of my life, as has Karl Rove. Their shenanigans were far worse than this incident. Think about the headlines if those TWO had ever worked together!!

...
McAuliffe is endorsed by Biden, so it does not surprise me that his supporters wave tiki torches.

No Biden, no KKK, no Fascist USA

The word "know" has one silent k.
The word "knuckle" has two silent k's.
The word "Democrat" has three silent k's.
Trump, the Tea Party, and the whole QAnon-GOP axis are manifestly the racists in today's Amerika. Yet you post this message and this signature! What gives? These are not babblings one might expect from a competent observer.

My working hypothesis — and the solution to this puzzle that appears most generous to Mr. Harvestdancer — is that this version of Jason comes from some "alternate universe" where DJT campaigned for the Democratic nomination in 2016, but was primaried out by President Joe Arpaio, running for re-election as a Democrat.
 

Trausti

Contributor
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,113
Location
Northwest
Basic Beliefs
Atheist Norse
To the Democrat brain trust in Virginia who thought attacking concerned parents was a winning election strategy: Thank you.
 

Shadowy Man

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2002
Messages
3,273
Location
West Coast
Basic Beliefs
Rational Pragmatism
Of course, with all the rampant voter fraud out there we can’t possibly trust these election results. So there’s a chance Youngkin didn’t win fairly. Maybe there should be some audits.
 

Shadowy Man

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2002
Messages
3,273
Location
West Coast
Basic Beliefs
Rational Pragmatism

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
28,059
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
That you call their political affiliations "irrelevancy" is telling.
Perhaps you could explain the relevency of two Democrats joining a Republican led demonstration where their interests are alligned.

I'm sure Steve Schmidt would get a chuckle at being called a leftist.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
28,059
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
To the Democrat brain trust in Virginia who thought attacking concerned parents was a winning election strategy: Thank you.
Are you a Youngkin fan or just like to “own the libs”?

A parent.
And Youngkin will be a better governor for parents? How will he govern that will be to the benefit of parents?
He'll send their jobs overseas as he has done for most of his working carreer.
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,420
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
Youngkin won. Some things of note... The Democrat was winning until recently in polls. This propagandized issue helped the Republican to win. It is very related to the whole Critical Race Theory propaganda and Republicans framing Democrats as "racially divisive" while Republicans are accepting the "both sides argument" as peaceful and happy crappy. Meanwhile, they are screaming about CRT and white children feeling guilty, much of it made up from emotional paranoia about factual history being taught. Rumors are flying rampant not only that teachers are forcing white children to feel guilty but also that teachers are going to inject the children with the vaccine even when parents don't want it. It's the Mark of the Beast, they say. And wearing masks is setting up kids for pedophilia because masks are sex toys. Also, masks are killing kids. It's another Holocaust!1111!one1! And this is why EDUCATION is the number 2 issue in electoral polling.
 

Trausti

Contributor
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,113
Location
Northwest
Basic Beliefs
Atheist Norse
To the Democrat brain trust in Virginia who thought attacking concerned parents was a winning election strategy: Thank you.
Are you a Youngkin fan or just like to “own the libs”?

A parent.
And Youngkin will be a better governor for parents? How will he govern that will be to the benefit of parents?
The other guy said that parents should have no say in their children's education. Fuck that guy.

FC40LxpWYAEmHA_
 

Trausti

Contributor
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,113
Location
Northwest
Basic Beliefs
Atheist Norse
Youngkin won. Some things of note... The Democrat was winning until recently in polls. This propagandized issue helped the Republican to win. It is very related to the whole Critical Race Theory propaganda and Republicans framing Democrats as "racially divisive" while Republicans are accepting the "both sides argument" as peaceful and happy crappy. Meanwhile, they are screaming about CRT and white children feeling guilty, much of it made up from emotional paranoia about factual history being taught. Rumors are flying rampant not only that teachers are forcing white children to feel guilty but also that teachers are going to inject the children with the vaccine even when parents don't want it. It's the Mark of the Beast, they say. And wearing masks is setting up kids for pedophilia because masks are sex toys. Also, masks are killing kids. It's another Holocaust!1111!one1! And this is why EDUCATION is the number 2 issue in electoral polling.
Because of Covid, parents got to listen in on what teachers where saying to their children. They didn't like it.

FDEiZ1gWQAAEqWm

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/31/us/politics/virginia-governors-race-youngkin-mcauliffe.html
 

TomC

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
3,078
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
To the Democrat brain trust in Virginia who thought attacking concerned parents was a winning election strategy: Thank you.
Are you a Youngkin fan or just like to “own the libs”?

A parent.
And Youngkin will be a better governor for parents? How will he govern that will be to the benefit of parents?
The other guy said that parents should have no say in their children's education. Fuck that guy.

FC40LxpWYAEmHA_
Could you share some evidence that McAuliffe said "parents should have no say in their children's education"?

I sincerely doubt that it's true.

Tom
 

Trausti

Contributor
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,113
Location
Northwest
Basic Beliefs
Atheist Norse
To the Democrat brain trust in Virginia who thought attacking concerned parents was a winning election strategy: Thank you.
Are you a Youngkin fan or just like to “own the libs”?

A parent.
And Youngkin will be a better governor for parents? How will he govern that will be to the benefit of parents?
The other guy said that parents should have no say in their children's education. Fuck that guy.

FC40LxpWYAEmHA_
Could you share some evidence that McAuliffe said "parents should have no say in their children's education"?

I sincerely doubt that it's true.

Tom

This is the exact moment the election turned in Youngkin's favor.

 

TomC

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
3,078
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
To the Democrat brain trust in Virginia who thought attacking concerned parents was a winning election strategy: Thank you.
Are you a Youngkin fan or just like to “own the libs”?

A parent.
And Youngkin will be a better governor for parents? How will he govern that will be to the benefit of parents?
The other guy said that parents should have no say in their children's education. Fuck that guy.

FC40LxpWYAEmHA_
Could you share some evidence that McAuliffe said "parents should have no say in their children's education"?

I sincerely doubt that it's true.

Tom

This is the exact moment the election turned in Youngkin's favor.


OK. The answer to my question is "No". McAuliffe didn't say "parents should have no say". The problem is your lack of nuance.

Add "individual or small groups of" before "parents" in his statement and I'm totally with him. That's not the same as "parents".
Tom
 

Trausti

Contributor
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,113
Location
Northwest
Basic Beliefs
Atheist Norse
To the Democrat brain trust in Virginia who thought attacking concerned parents was a winning election strategy: Thank you.
Are you a Youngkin fan or just like to “own the libs”?

A parent.
And Youngkin will be a better governor for parents? How will he govern that will be to the benefit of parents?
The other guy said that parents should have no say in their children's education. Fuck that guy.

FC40LxpWYAEmHA_
Could you share some evidence that McAuliffe said "parents should have no say in their children's education"?

I sincerely doubt that it's true.

Tom

This is the exact moment the election turned in Youngkin's favor.


OK. The answer to my question is "No". McAuliffe didn't say "parents should have no say". The problem is your lack of nuance.

Add "individual or small groups of" before "parents" in his statement and I'm totally with him. That's not the same as "parents".
Tom

Before this gaffe, McAuliffe had been leading with parents; who can be defined as individuals or small groups.
 

TomC

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
3,078
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
To the Democrat brain trust in Virginia who thought attacking concerned parents was a winning election strategy: Thank you.
Are you a Youngkin fan or just like to “own the libs”?

A parent.
And Youngkin will be a better governor for parents? How will he govern that will be to the benefit of parents?
The other guy said that parents should have no say in their children's education. Fuck that guy.

FC40LxpWYAEmHA_
Could you share some evidence that McAuliffe said "parents should have no say in their children's education"?

I sincerely doubt that it's true.

Tom

This is the exact moment the election turned in Youngkin's favor.


OK. The answer to my question is "No". McAuliffe didn't say "parents should have no say". The problem is your lack of nuance.

Add "individual or small groups of" before "parents" in his statement and I'm totally with him. That's not the same as "parents".
Tom

Before this gaffe, McAuliffe had been leading with parents; who can be defined as individuals or small groups.

Do you think that YEC parents should be in charge of the science curriculum? Or white racist parents choosing the history taught?

What makes you think that the category "parents" is individuals or small groups? There's a ton of parents out there. That's a big category. Parents aren't defined as individuals or small groups by any stretch of the imagination.
Tom
 

Shadowy Man

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2002
Messages
3,273
Location
West Coast
Basic Beliefs
Rational Pragmatism
To the Democrat brain trust in Virginia who thought attacking concerned parents was a winning election strategy: Thank you.
Are you a Youngkin fan or just like to “own the libs”?

A parent.
And Youngkin will be a better governor for parents? How will he govern that will be to the benefit of parents?
The other guy said that parents should have no say in their children's education. Fuck that guy.

FC40LxpWYAEmHA_
Ok. So you’re not pro-Youngkin you are anti-McAuliffe. Gotcha.

Also, did he say “no say”? Would he ban school board meetings? Prevent parents from public comments ? What was the context for his comment about whether parents should tell schools what to teach? Is there any nuance there at all?

I tend to find the conservatives argue their points without nuance.
 

Trausti

Contributor
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,113
Location
Northwest
Basic Beliefs
Atheist Norse
To the Democrat brain trust in Virginia who thought attacking concerned parents was a winning election strategy: Thank you.
Are you a Youngkin fan or just like to “own the libs”?

A parent.
And Youngkin will be a better governor for parents? How will he govern that will be to the benefit of parents?
The other guy said that parents should have no say in their children's education. Fuck that guy.

FC40LxpWYAEmHA_
Could you share some evidence that McAuliffe said "parents should have no say in their children's education"?

I sincerely doubt that it's true.

Tom

This is the exact moment the election turned in Youngkin's favor.


OK. The answer to my question is "No". McAuliffe didn't say "parents should have no say". The problem is your lack of nuance.

Add "individual or small groups of" before "parents" in his statement and I'm totally with him. That's not the same as "parents".
Tom

Before this gaffe, McAuliffe had been leading with parents; who can be defined as individuals or small groups.

Do you think that YEC parents should be in charge of the science curriculum? Or white racist parents choosing the history taught?

What makes you think that the category "parents" is individuals or small groups? There's a ton of parents out there. That's a big category. Parents aren't defined as individuals or small groups by any stretch of the imagination.
Tom

You explanation for the huge shift of parents favoring Youngkin would be what?
 

Trausti

Contributor
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,113
Location
Northwest
Basic Beliefs
Atheist Norse
To the Democrat brain trust in Virginia who thought attacking concerned parents was a winning election strategy: Thank you.
Are you a Youngkin fan or just like to “own the libs”?

A parent.
And Youngkin will be a better governor for parents? How will he govern that will be to the benefit of parents?
The other guy said that parents should have no say in their children's education. Fuck that guy.

FC40LxpWYAEmHA_
Ok. So you’re not pro-Youngkin you are anti-McAuliffe. Gotcha.

Also, did he say “no say”? Would he ban school board meetings? Prevent parents from public comments ? What was the context for his comment about whether parents should tell schools what to teach? Is there any nuance there at all?

I tend to find the conservatives argue their points without nuance.
He said that parents shouldn't be informed about sexually explicit books in the school library. That killed him.
 

Shadowy Man

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2002
Messages
3,273
Location
West Coast
Basic Beliefs
Rational Pragmatism
He said that parents shouldn't be informed about sexually explicit books in the school library. That killed him.
So I looked up the law he vetoed and honestly it seemed pretty reasonable. The only controversial part of it would be that the Board of Education gets to define what “sexually explicit” means. Opponents of the bill thought that good works could be banned due to minor instances of explicit scenes. Or that it could be abused to ban certain authors or classes of authors. Those on the left were arguing that banning Toni Morrison was wrong given her credentials or her race. There’s a discussion to be had here for sure, but I agree that mcauliife took a rhetorical approach almost designed to turn off parents and that will sink you.
 

TomC

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
3,078
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
There's quite a bad faith effort to paint this as something other than a bad faith effort. It seems to have backfired.

The right is trying to portray it as bad faith because they don't like what it's saying.
It's not the right exactly. It's the TeaParty, led by Trump and his supporters, trying to describe everyone who disagrees or despises them, claiming that anyone else is a leftist. They've actually claimed that Liz Cheney is a leftist. How absurd can anybody get?

But that is how @Jason Harvestdancer described the people in the pic. Leftists.

Tom
 

Patooka

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
4,277
Location
Sydney
Basic Beliefs
aaa
Meh, the election was rigged. Voter fraud, the results have to be audited yada yada yada.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
13,426
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
To the Democrat brain trust in Virginia who thought attacking concerned parents was a winning election strategy: Thank you.
Are you a Youngkin fan or just like to “own the libs”?

A parent.
And Youngkin will be a better governor for parents? How will he govern that will be to the benefit of parents?
The other guy said that parents should have no say in their children's education. Fuck that guy.

FC40LxpWYAEmHA_
Could you share some evidence that McAuliffe said "parents should have no say in their children's education"?

I sincerely doubt that it's true.

Tom

This is the exact moment the election turned in Youngkin's favor.


OK. The answer to my question is "No". McAuliffe didn't say "parents should have no say". The problem is your lack of nuance.

Add "individual or small groups of" before "parents" in his statement and I'm totally with him. That's not the same as "parents".
Tom

Before this gaffe, McAuliffe had been leading with parents; who can be defined as individuals or small groups.

Do you think that YEC parents should be in charge of the science curriculum? Or white racist parents choosing the history taught?

What makes you think that the category "parents" is individuals or small groups? There's a ton of parents out there. That's a big category. Parents aren't defined as individuals or small groups by any stretch of the imagination.
Tom

A bunch of years ago, my community got upset because the counseling office dared to put up posters in the senior high school that suggested that should your friend come out to you as gay, maybe you should be supportive and not beat him up (heavily paraphrased by me). HUGE outcry. HUGE. School board meetings were very sparsely attended, often just me and the press and two or three other community members in the audience. This one, though, had to be moved to the auditorium at the high school, and even then, it was overflow capacity. For comparison: they didn't get that many people at the annual high school musical--and this town loves its high school musicals. I was listening to the 'parents' surrounding me and it became very apparent that most of them could not identify a single school board member, despite their photos having recently made the front page of the local newspapers and despite frequently being quoted and photographed for local media. Nope. They just were there to make sure that they didn't allow 'the gays' to take over. Because lord knows, if you fail to beat them all into shutting up and going back into their closets, that's exactly what will happen. Quite a number were parents of kids attending the local parochial schools which would never allow such things although it was very obvious to anyone who set foot on the catholic university campus that there were a lot of gay faculty, administrators and other personnel among the priests who ran the place, not to mention the student body. Never mind: I digress.

In the end, the school board voted to remove the posters because they were printed by a Lutheran group. Not that there was anything against Lutherans: pretty much anybody who isn't Catholic in this town is Lutheran. Nope: it was because a religious denomination was responsible for publishing the posters and there must be separation between church and state.
This did not happen until one or two of the most outspokenly conservative board members, took full advantage of the overflowing audience to grandstand about the evils of a government run school, including one who was essentially a libertarian but who was too darn cheap to actually pay dues. Particularly hypocritical as that particular board member was a faculty member (and still is) at the local public university---and had spent his entire career sucking at the teat of the government.

So, to re-cap: parents are not always well informed. Hell, school board members aren't always well informed and are not always on the school board because they are truly interested in helping ensure the community's children have the best possible access to the best possible education in the best, most conducive and most supportive environment possible. Nope. A whole bunch of school board members simply have an axe to grind and are thrilled with the chance at a public platform.

That said, I do think it is very important that parents are informed about what is happening in schools, about curriculum, about health and safety measures. There was also a huge outcry when the district wanted to dispense with AP courses at the high school 'to save money' which was a lie as those classes were always filled and those kids needed to be in some class. They weren't going to dispense with those teachers because otherwise the other classes would be even more overflowing than they were. Even though there were not as many parents filling the chambers of those meetings, and none of the board members saw enough of an opportunity to grandstand, there was enough pressure from parents to keep those classes in place.
 

Jason Harvestdancer

Contributor
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
7,110
Location
Lots of planets have a North
Basic Beliefs
Wiccan
That you think that "The fact you think their political affiliation is relevant is also revealing." is revealing.
Of course you would think so.

Why do you think it is a big deal that two Democrats joined a Republican demonstration intended to embarrass a Republican candidate?

No matter how many times you say "but muh Lincoln project" you can't escape the fact that the protesters were Democrats. One of them was the treasurer for the Young Democrats of Virginia.

That you are trying to evade that fact is revealing.
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,420
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
That you think that "The fact you think their political affiliation is relevant is also revealing." is revealing.
Of course you would think so.

Why do you think it is a big deal that two Democrats joined a Republican demonstration intended to embarrass a Republican candidate?

No matter how many times you say "but muh Lincoln project" you can't escape the fact that the protesters were Democrats. One of them was the treasurer for the Young Democrats of Virginia.

That you are trying to evade that fact is revealing.
It isn't merely that 1 Democrat doesn't make them all LEFTISTS, it's that the Lincoln Project wasn't _FRAMING_ Republicans. But you already know that no one was FRAMING anyone.
 

Jason Harvestdancer

Contributor
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
7,110
Location
Lots of planets have a North
Basic Beliefs
Wiccan
It wasn't just 1 Democrat. These people FRAMING the Republicans were Democrats on this Lincoln Project stunt.

Tell me this, why would the Lincoln Project use Democrats in their stunt? Don't they have any Republicans they could have called on?
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,420
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
It wasn't just 1 Democrat. These people FRAMING the Republicans were Democrats on this Lincoln Project stunt.

Tell me this, why would the Lincoln Project use Democrats in their stunt? Don't they have any Republicans they could have called on?

There were Republicans and Democrats there and the Lincoln Project has both, but the CONSERVATIVE Lincoln Project wasn't FRAMING anyone. No one was being FRAMED. I originally gave you the benefit of doubt that you were duped by Reich-wing propaganda, but at this point your claim has been debunkedx10 and so when you keep it up, it's just not in good faith and a waste of everyone's time.
 

blastula

Contributor
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
7,598
Gender
Late for dinner
Basic Beliefs
Gnostic atheist
It wasn't just 1 Democrat. These people FRAMING the Republicans were Democrats on this Lincoln Project stunt.

No, you're wrong about too, there was no hoax or framing attempted in the demonstration. Your thread is a total fail.

The only thing wrong with the action was that it was just a lame stunt.
 

Jason Harvestdancer

Contributor
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
7,110
Location
Lots of planets have a North
Basic Beliefs
Wiccan
Before the bad faith actors had their identities discovered, all parties, including the Lincoln Project, were saying "see this is the kind of people that support Youngkin." They were absolutely saying "see, white supremacists support Youngkin." THEN the identities of the actors were discovered, and suddenly it went from a frame up to a lame stunt.

You're wrong about how there was no hoax or attempted framing. Those involved in this stunt are all saying "yeah, that's the ticket, they'll believe it when we say there's nothing wrong with the gas lights." And you're swallowing it whole.
 

Patooka

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
4,277
Location
Sydney
Basic Beliefs
aaa
Before the bad faith actors had their identities discovered, all parties, including the Lincoln Project, were saying "see this is the kind of people that support Youngkin." They were absolutely saying "see, white supremacists support Youngkin." THEN the identities of the actors were discovered, and suddenly it went from a frame up to a lame stunt.

You're wrong about how there was no hoax or attempted framing. Those involved in this stunt are all saying "yeah, that's the ticket, they'll believe it when we say there's nothing wrong with the gas lights." And you're swallowing it whole.
This argument does have merit. "But I was only joking", is a shitty cop-out no matter who uses it. If that's your intent say it from the start, not when you get caught.

What's confusing the fuck out of me is when the Lincoln Project became a left wing group, as you claim in the title of this thread.
 

Jason Harvestdancer

Contributor
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
7,110
Location
Lots of planets have a North
Basic Beliefs
Wiccan
I am saying that the Lincoln Project was saying "But I was only joking". I'm not the one saying that, I'm saying the Lincoln Project is saying that.

The reason I say it is from the left is because the people involved, the actual boots on the ground activist people, the ones in the photograph, those people who have had their identities discovered by internet sleuths, the ones holding the tiki torches, are Democrats. I do find it curious that the Lincoln Project couldn't find any Republicans to get involved in their stunt. Whatever the involvement of the Lincoln Project (maybe they simply said "we have an idea does anyone volunteer for it") the actual people involved, the flesh and blood people, they are activists within the Democratic Party of Virginia.

Those people.

The ones in the photograph.

Not those not in the photograph.

The ones in the photograph.

Those people.

They're the ones I'm talking about.

The ones in the photograph.
 

braces_for_impact

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2002
Messages
3,392
Location
Clearwater, FL.
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Anti–Trump Group's Tiki Stunt Against Glenn Youngkin May Hurt Terry McAuliffe in Virginia

So a group of people showed up dressed as if they were at the United the Right rally, complete with tiki torches, to say they supported Glenn Youngkin. This made the news rounds for several days, until it turned out they were from an anti-Trump pro-Democrat group.

One of the "supporters" has been identified as FirstName "vote for Dems on Nov 2" LastName on Twitter, with many pictures at Democrat events. The woman at that staged event has also been identified as a Democratic Party operative. They have since made their twitter and instagram private.

Well, if they are Democrats the torches do make sense, but using them to frame the Republican as allegedly having their support is an act of desperation.
Oh, OK. Well, then this obviously absolves the entire GOP of any racism or bigotry. It was those dastardly democrats the whole time!
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
20,229
Location
Minnesota
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
That you think that "The fact you think their political affiliation is relevant is also revealing." is revealing.
Of course you would think so.

Why do you think it is a big deal that two Democrats joined a Republican demonstration intended to embarrass a Republican candidate?

No matter how many times you say "but muh Lincoln project" you can't escape the fact that the protesters were Democrats. One of them was the treasurer for the Young Democrats of Virginia.

That you are trying to evade that fact is revealing.
Flinging bullshit is an evasion.

Why are you afraid to answer the simple question
Why do you think it is a big deal that two Democrats joined a Republican demonstration intended to embarrass a Republican candidate?
 

Patooka

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
4,277
Location
Sydney
Basic Beliefs
aaa
Whatever the involvement of the Lincoln Project (maybe they simply said "we have an idea does anyone volunteer for it") the actual people involved, the flesh and blood people, they are activists within the Democratic Party of Virginia.

From the article linked in the OP:

The Lincoln Project has been condemned for a stunt targeting the Republican gubernatorial candidate for Virginia, Glenn Youngkin, in which it sent people mimicking white nationalists to stand outside his campaign bus.

Were there leftists involved? Yeah probably. Implying that leftists and only leftists were involved (which is exactly what you did) is like saying Taco Bell sells meat products. You can argue that is true, whilst it not being entirely accurate.

You might find it curious that Democrats were involved; I find it pretty telling how much you are willing to perform mental gymnastics trying to downplay the group that orchestrated the stunt in the first place.
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,420
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
Here is what actually happened.

This is necessary reading for anyone wanting to know what really happened.
 

TomC

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
3,078
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
Before the bad faith actors had their identities discovered, all parties, including the Lincoln Project, were saying "see this is the kind of people that support Youngkin." They were absolutely saying "see, white supremacists support Youngkin." THEN the identities of the actors were discovered, and suddenly it went from a frame up to a lame stunt.

You're wrong about how there was no hoax or attempted framing. Those involved in this stunt are all saying "yeah, that's the ticket, they'll believe it when we say there's nothing wrong with the gas lights." And you're swallowing it whole.
Do those kind of people support Youngkin?

It seems quite plausible to me that they do. Pointing that out with a political stunt is not framing him nor a joke, nor was it done by leftists.

It's your OP that's the fraud. It's you who are framing conservatives.
Tom
 

TomC

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
3,078
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
@Jason Harvestdancer

There are lots of people who despise Trump and the TeaParty. Including Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney, and G. W. Bush.

Do you consider them leftists? I dont.

Tom
 

TomC

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
3,078
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
The reason I say it is from the left is because the people involved, the actual boots on the ground activist people, the ones in the photograph, those people who have had their identities discovered by internet sleuths, the ones holding the tiki torches, are Democrats. I do find it curious that the Lincoln Project couldn't find any Republicans to get involved in their stunt.
Why do keep repeating this nonsense?

2 of the 5 are Democrats. That leaves the majority(3), who are not Democrats. Then, there's the organization that did it. The Lincoln Project is hardly leftists.

You just keep repeating this demonstrably fake news. It's like you're trying to convince yourself of something.

Tom
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
13,426
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
That you think that "The fact you think their political affiliation is relevant is also revealing." is revealing.
Of course you would think so.

Why do you think it is a big deal that two Democrats joined a Republican demonstration intended to embarrass a Republican candidate?

No matter how many times you say "but muh Lincoln project" you can't escape the fact that the protesters were Democrats. One of them was the treasurer for the Young Democrats of Virginia.

That you are trying to evade that fact is revealing.
*Some* of the protesters were Democrats. Nice to see that you have left off calling them leftists, though.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
13,426
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Whatever the involvement of the Lincoln Project (maybe they simply said "we have an idea does anyone volunteer for it") the actual people involved, the flesh and blood people, they are activists within the Democratic Party of Virginia.

From the article linked in the OP:

The Lincoln Project has been condemned for a stunt targeting the Republican gubernatorial candidate for Virginia, Glenn Youngkin, in which it sent people mimicking white nationalists to stand outside his campaign bus.

Were there leftists involved? Yeah probably. Implying that leftists and only leftists were involved (which is exactly what you did) is like saying Taco Bell sells meat products. You can argue that is true, whilst it not being entirely accurate.

You might find it curious that Democrats were involved; I find it pretty telling how much you are willing to perform mental gymnastics trying to downplay the group that orchestrated the stunt in the first place.
Obviously the stunt went wrong because it vastly overrated the intelligence and self awareness of the Youngkin supporters and most current GOP while simultaneously underestimating the willingness of right wing GOP operatives and their lapdog media to misrepresent the facts.
 

lpetrich

Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2000
Messages
18,123
Location
Eugene, OR
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I was thinking of posting on the election in Virginia and New Jersey Governor Races 2021 | Internet Infidels Discussion Board but this thread seems to have taken over.

About that tiki-torch stunt, I thought that it was awful, even if it was fun to turn the tables on the Republicans.

2021 Virginia Election Results - The New York Times
  • Winner Glenn Youngkin Republican 1,660,362 50.8%
  • Terry McAuliffe Democrat 1,587,833 48.5
  • Princess Blanding Liberation 22,851 0.7
Princess Blanding for Virginia Governor - that's her real name. Her platform does not seem far off from what Bernie Sanders or AOC might push for.
 

lpetrich

Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2000
Messages
18,123
Location
Eugene, OR
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
AOC says McAuliffe lost because he didn't energize a 'progressive base' | WSET
Second-term Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., took to social media this week to tell Virginia Democrats their gubernatorial candidate, Terry McAuliffe, lost because his campaign was too moderate.

Conversely, Democratic political strategist James Carville, who has been in politics for roughly 40 years, rebuked that notion, blaming “stupid wokeness” on Democrats' failures in Virginia.

I know that Virginia was a huge bummer,” Ocasio-Cortez said in a video on Instagram. “And honestly, if anything, I think that the results show the limits of trying to run a fully 100% super moderated campaign that does not excite speak to or energize a progressive base and frankly, we weren’t even really invited to contribute on that race.”

Ocasio-Cortez then accused “moderate Dems” of enabling Republican “race-baiting.” She argued it “demoralizes the base you’re supposed to protect and turn out while also ceding white swing voters to the right w/ inadequate responses or silence.”

On the other hand, longtime veteran political strategist James Carville told PBS NewsHour “what went wrong” was “just stupid wokeness.”

“Don't just look at Virginia and New Jersey. Look at Long Island, look at Buffalo, look at Minneapolis, even look at Seattle, Wash. I mean, this 'defund the police' lunacy, this take Abraham Lincoln's name off of schools. I mean that — people see that," Carville said.
ABC 13 News - WSET on Twitter: ".@AOC says @TerryMcAuliffe lost because he wasn't 'woke' enough, Carville says the opposite (link)" / Twitter

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "How can news outlets even attribute words to me I didn’t say? ..." / Twitter
How can news outlets even attribute words to me I didn’t say?

I said there are limits to trying to mobilize a campaign with a 100% moderate strategy without mobilizing the base. Said nothing abt “wokeness” which is a term almost exclusively used by older people these days btw

Like the average audience for people seriously using the word “woke” in a 2021 political discussion are James Carville and Fox News pundits so that should tell you all you need to know

And before people disingenuously complain “woke” is denigrating to older people, it’s actually pundits like Carville using terms like “woke” to insult voters under 45 that’s denigrating.

Don’t wonder why youth turnout falls when Dems talk about them like this. We need everyone.
I recall Donna Imam discussing this election and IIRC she said that turnout from young voters and black voters was down. As if Terry McAuliffe didn't do much to make them want to vote for him.

AOC also noted that TMA ran a very centrist campaign, and that he didn't invite progressives to campaign for him. So he wasn't some flaming left-winger.
 
Top Bottom