Mothra said:
Redbrickbear said:
Osodecentx said:
Redbrickbear said:
Mothra said:
Redbrickbear said:
Mothra said:
Osodecentx said:
Realitybites said:
Mothra said:
Realitybites said:
Tucker is a facilitator, not a gatekeeper.
You'll understand what he does better if you start there.
And then the last of the groypers and Tucker apologists makes an appearance.
Batting 1.000 on this thread.
Tucker only seems to ask the difficult questions of his "fellow" conservatives. If you're a racist or despot, you apparently get a pass.
But he's just a "facilitator" and all...
I am a Tucker apologist. He has done more to turn the political right into a movement and inform people than almost any other media figure. He's certainly done more than clowns like Hannity, Shapiro, Levin, and the two successors to Rush Limbaugh. Yeah he gets a pass.
I oppose this: Foreign Lobby Watch
I oppose Israel using AIPAC to circumvent FARA.
I oppose giving foreign nations aid when we have a debt to GDP ratio of 130%.
And yes, I believe that the Church is the Israel of God and the Mosaic covenant is done (Hebrews 8:13).
Apparently this makes me an anti-Semitic Hitler figure or something.
I am not a groyper. And while I disagree with some - possibly even much - of what Fuentes says, the two of us have this in common...after living our adult lives under the political orthodoxy enforced by the political establishment we are both well past caring what those who represent it care about what we think.
Ben Shapiro in WSJ"
The American right is at a crossroads.'''
Mr. Carlson's most common tactic is ideological laundering: He hosts guests with ugly ideologies, soft-pedals their views and launders them into mainstream respectability. He claims he's "just asking questions," and that's precisely what he did last week:
The Republican Party, like the Democratic Party before it, is at risk of being eaten alive by fringe actors. To allow it is both morally unjustifiable and politically obtuse. Americans reject this garbage.
I don't listen to Shapiro, but it's hard to argue with any of the above.
1. The American Right is not at a "crossroads"....most normal people are not even aware of these internet fights.
2. This is the same language that liberals use to silence conservatives all the time...."dangerous", "soft-pedals and launder views"
He is essentially arguing for the same kind of liberal and leftist tactics used against free speech on college campuses and the Media that he claims to have been fighting against.
3. The Republican party is in no danger of being "eaten alive" by anti-Israel and anti-jewish views.
That is a hysteric statement....and not close to reality.
Most normal Republicans and certainly the majority of Congress are not in any danger of moving on their very pro-Israel positions.
[A Gallup survey from earlier this year found that 83% of Republican voters have a positive view of Israel, compared to just 33% of Democrats. That 50-point gap..]
Massive supermajority support inside the party.
He would be better served and more accurate to say there is a danger of YOUNG republicans or conservatives losing support for Israel. Something that would take decades to play out.
There is zero chance for any change in the foresable future on the issue of Israel among the GOP
I disagree with you completely that this is some fringe issue that may not affect future elections. We have very conservative friends here in our community that feel the same way as the groypers, and have advised they will not vote for future Republican candidates based on same.
I think you underestimate how big the faction is. When Tucker, given his influence and audience, starts preaching it, it's time to take notice. Ignoring the issue only makes it worse.
And you will always have people who don't fit the mainstream on this or that issue. Or are just straight up on on the fringe.
But still....look at the real data
[A Gallup survey from earlier this year found that 83% of Republican voters have a positive view of Israel, compared to just 33% of Democrats. That 50-point gap is easily the largest since Gallup began tracking the data, and three times as large as the 18-point difference between Democratic and Republican voters that existed between 2001 and 2023.]
The GOP is as much of a pro-Israel party as can be.
Now there is a debate about the young conservatives and their views on Israel....but again that would take decades to play out.
25 year olds don't hold power in the party (or anywhere else)
And if there is a debate to be had....then make the arguments for why being pro-Israel is needed. That is what Shapiro has to do.
He can't win the argument by falling back on the old authoritarian tactics of the American Liberal-Left.....trying to silence people that he does not like, shut down debate, intimidate people, de-platform, drive them off the college campus, calling them defamatory names "racist:, ect.
That does not even work anymore as a tactic.....Jon Stewart was chastised this past week by some New York Times bootlicker about talking to the "wrong kind of people" or "platforming people"....Joe Rogan specifically... and Stewart made the accurate assessment that if you don't talk to people you can't find out what they really think and that EVERYONE has a platform now with the internet and you can't shut it down anyway....you just look like a censor in trying.
"There is not a person in this world right now who is not platformed" -Jon Stewart
From National Review
Robert Rector a welfare scholar who said he has been with Heritage for 47 years, compared Carlson and Fuentes to members of the John Birch Society and argued that they need to be sidelined in the same way that National Review founder William F. Buckley sidelined the Birchers in the 1960's.
"Tucker's show is like stepping into a lunatic asylum," Rector said in remarks first reported by the Beacon, arguing that Carlson failed to confront Fuentes over his bigoted views and also gave a pass to the revisionist amateur historian Darryl Cooper, who argued during an appearance on Carlson's show that Winston Churchill was the real villain of World War II.
A basic argument for censorship…a very old line.
You don't have to out of your way to support John Birch nuttiness.
And you should absolutely speak out against the ideas they bring up you think are wrong, or inaccurate, or just plan crazy.
But as Jon Stewart pointed out this week you can't actually de-platform anyone in the internet age.
EVERYONE has a platform.
This is not 1980
You have to do the work to get out there and debate the ideas and win the battle of arguments.
Not just expect the legacy corporate media or political think tanks to do it for you.
I think you're confusing de-platform with giving a much bigger platform to heinous ideas. These are two very distinct scenarios.
Nobody said let's de-platform Tucker or even Fuentes. What they're saying is Tucker shouldn't give his platform to racist and hateful ideas. And there's absolutely nothing unamerican about that.
The people attacking Tucker or Fuentes were not platforming them before this…in the case of Fuentes I'm sure they did not even know he existed (heck I'm a online millennial and I barely am aware of him…he is Gen Z coded content of a very troll-ish or Howard stern in the 90s kind of shock jock schtick)
But these groups attacking them have been successful in one way…that is turning the Right into an inside slap fight clown match about some mostly meaningless podcasters with 1/50th the audience of Joe Rogan on the eve of a big election fight….a fight the GOP just lost big by the way. Maybe setting up to lose the House and watch the Left impeach Trump again for the 3rd time.
And while the attacks on Tucker and Fuentes are fine by me in a general way….they are using standard coded liberal-leftist language…."muh racism", "dangerous viewpoints", "mainstreaming hate"
Instead of arguing with the actual statements, making a convincing counter argument, and winning the battle of ideas.
Go out and make the case to 20 year old conservatives online why we need to give Israel billions. If you have the arguments then make them. Explain to the terminal online kids how it helps them and the USA.
Go out and explain why Churchill was not wrong in WWII to stand up to Hitler and advocate for never trusting him…and how Churchill was not a "villain". But also be willing to grapple with the young folks in the USA and Europe sick to death of WWII being used at a modern weaponized argument for pushing endless Leftist ideas like anti-nationalism and mass 3rd world migration.
Just drop the tactics we have seen used against milk toast conservatives by the far left on college campuses for 50 years.
Young people are sick of that ****
