I’m calling you out for your laughing emogi response to my assertion that the GOP/ Fuentes civil war is fake and a product of internet bots. There is no evidence of any Fuentes influence while the fact of foreign internet farms fomenting political bullshit is a fact.
LOL! Go ahead. Tell it to Luny Laura Loomer and other MAGAs who aren't happy with the Fuentes faction. There's a thread about it. As I said before, it's not my civil war, it's yours. I hope MAGA destroys itself completely and a sane GOP reemerges.I’m calling you out for your laughing emogi response to my assertion that the GOP/ Fuentes civil war is fake and a product of internet bots. There is no evidence of any Fuentes influence while the fact of foreign internet farms fomenting political bullshit is a fact.
Uh huh. Tell that to MTG too. There is one and I’m just observing.It’s nobody’s civil war. There isn’t one.
Why you respond to Glowie propaganda is a mystery to me.
It is exactly the same as the other sock posters your article describes in Pakistan, etc., originating in the US Fed...
Glowie propaganda?
Note to @aloha-hoosier, @bradstevens and anybody else who thinks Fuentes is a GOP Or MAGA thing. The following about Fuentes was obvious to me before I ever saw this report this morning. The more interesting question is why did certain interests begin the Fuentes deception? It was effective, as this thread shows. What was to be gained and who benefitted?
Executive Summary and BLUF
Nick Fuentes’s surge into national visibility did not originate from a broad or sudden shift in
American political sentiment. It emerged from a pattern of online amplification that was
unusually fast, unusually concentrated, and unusually foreign in origin. This report examines the
structure of that amplification, the signals it produced inside the information environment, and
the ways mainstream, legacy institutions interpreted those signals as indicators of emerging
relevance. The goal is not to explain Fuentes’s ideology or his existing audience, but to assess
how synthetic engagement, real-world events, and media incentives converged to elevate a
fringe figure into a central subject of national attention.
Fuentes is on the Radical Right, as my post title indicates and as the original article discusses. It is a fact that Fuentes is trying to gain more influence on the right, and would love to capture parts of MAGA or influence them and the Republican politicians. I wouldn't call Fuentes a GOPer and Kirk was fighting hard to make sure MAGA didn't accept him. Why would Kirk do that if he didn't think of him as a threat?Glowie propaganda?
Note to @aloha-hoosier, @bradstevens and anybody else who thinks Fuentes is a GOP Or MAGA thing. The following about Fuentes was obvious to me before I ever saw this report this morning. The more interesting question is why did certain interests begin the Fuentes deception? It was effective, as this thread shows. What was to be gained and who benefitted?
Executive Summary and BLUF
Nick Fuentes’s surge into national visibility did not originate from a broad or sudden shift in
American political sentiment. It emerged from a pattern of online amplification that was
unusually fast, unusually concentrated, and unusually foreign in origin. This report examines the
structure of that amplification, the signals it produced inside the information environment, and
the ways mainstream, legacy institutions interpreted those signals as indicators of emerging
relevance. The goal is not to explain Fuentes’s ideology or his existing audience, but to assess
how synthetic engagement, real-world events, and media incentives converged to elevate a
fringe figure into a central subject of national attention.
I think it's completely fair to wonder how much influence Fuentes really has. In the past, I agreed with right-wing people who mocked lefties for suggesting the KKK or white supremecist groups (as traditionally defined) were really something to spend a lot of time worrying about. Fuentes might just be the modern version of that, or he might have a larger following than you're willing to admit.
Have you stated an opinion on Fuentes? Do you think he's bad news for MAGA or would you like to see them embrace him and bring him into the fold?
to assess
how synthetic engagement, real-world events, and media incentives converged to elevate a
fringe figure into a central subject of national attention.
Young people who read Fuentes shit aren't going to be concerned with how he got where he is. And the fact that he is where he is--a central subject of national attention--means his ideas are being spread more. That means the original article--put out by a less than woke outfit, to be mild--was spot on.
I think Fuentes is a nut job and not worth a word of commentary. The fact that he gets any attention shows me how easily and thoroughly internet manipulation happens. Much about Fuentes can readily be explained by manipulating confirmation bias of anti-MAGA types. But not all of it. We have a problem that can be summed up by failing to distinguish reality from bullshit. This problem has many causes, but I think the association of more bullshit is related to our decreasing effectiveness of k-12 education. We aren’t even keeping up with education as it used to be, let alone upping the game which we must do.
more about this here.
https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/the-manufactured-rise-of-nick-fuentes
Young people who read Fuentes shit aren't going to be concerned with how he got where he is.
I agree, people who read Fuentes shit need to know he is all BS. A better education would help. A better understanding of our founding history would help, and that understanding would not include Jefferson’s sex life.
Young people who read Fuentes shit aren't going to be concerned with how he got where he is.
I agree, people who read Fuentes shit need to know he is all BS. A better education would help. A better understanding of our founding history would help, and that understanding would not include Jefferson’s sex life.
I've read exactly nothing of Fuentes shit. What I know about him comes from regular news sources and what I hear about him from MAGA friends (real ones I know personally) on social media, where he has been popular one way or the other. Yes, a better education among the MAGA faction would be very helpful.
Fuentes is a real guy with real repugnant antisemitic views taken seriously within MAGA, not by people like me. He visited with Trump at Mar-a-Lago. He was interviewed by Tucker Carlson - softball questions. The Heritage Foundation defended the interview. All this upset Laura Loomer who referred to all that and other incidents and proclaimed MAGA had a Nazi problem. Majorie Taylor Greene, who Trump now calls Marjory Traitor Greene, joined in with Loomer on this. This is all internal MAGA stuff. There’s a thread about it where you wouldn’t believe what you could see and hear yourself.
Look up Glowie. Then add the fact that MAS/QParker is a Russian tool who regularly spreads Russian propaganda and disinformation, is antisemitic himself believing in antisemitic conspiracy theories and calls the NYT the JYT (the J is for Jew). You’re taking that guy seriously?
Latest Post: IU +3.5 vs UCLA Our newest member: David Dierking Recent Posts Unread Posts
