you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]AnarchySpeach 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

That spooky moment of seeing someone else doing the same thing for the opposite side must've been an eye opener.

If any of this is even real. Could be. Sounds authentic enough.

[–]beermeem 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Whether this user specifically is telling the "truth" or not, we all know this goes on.

[–]AnarchySpeach 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

It's unnerving how the post was phrased.

They give us a script. If commenter mentions A, we mention B. If a commenter mentions “random negative thing x,” we respond with a vague counterpoint, like calling our candidate “authentic” or saying “look at his record” without specifying.

There’s even a script for when the other commenter is winning the argument. We’re told specifically to derail the discussion, throw mud, and in the end, accuse the commenter of being a conspiracy theorist/tinfoil hat wearer. That way, anyone reading the discussion will see those negative points as being associated with weird people.

Like they've got it down to a science.

[–]beermeem 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yep. Exactly.