Seems to be a thing that’s starting up where people are calling their congresscritters and then being dismissed as ‘paid protesters’ and or ‘violent leftists.’
Not only am I angry that congresscritters who tend to be bought and paid for by lobbiests decide that anyone that isn’t willing to think they are the best thing since sliced bread and or Betty White are somehow not valid voters, but seem to have done away with even pretending to be polite about the matter.
Discuss please. Actual accounts of this, possible ways of counter-acting this before election time. Making sure people realize what’s going on and why those in power disregarding whole population segments is very VERY dangerous… preferrably without resorting to Nazi comparisons please.
At the townhall events, probably the best way to counter this BS is to loudly state “you’re my representative” before saying anything else.
The logic of the “paid protester” thing is very lacking. Who, exactly, is it imagined has the scratch to pay all the angry citizens who are speaking out?
That sees to be the thing. Republicans appear to be shouting that every protest is paid for, corporate led, false, ingenuine, and staffed by the idiotic to bolster numbers.
Basically trying to deflect attention away from the fact the teabag party was most DEFINATELY an astroturf group that, well, shut the government down TWICE to get their way not via proceedure but by throwing a hissy fit.
The elected Republicans can try to shout “Democrat” back at people in these meetings, but it will backfire quickly. It doesn’t matter what a voter’s affiliation is after the election, whomever the representative is, that person represents the entire district, and all voters within. It’s not just Democrats who are pissed at these representatives, either. A few people standing up to say “I voted you into office, and next year, I’m voting your goldbricking ass out” should start getting the message across that everybody is pissed at these less than useless shitegobs pretending at elected official.
You could point out that the Women’s Marches several weeks ago had an estimated attendance of 4 million people, so if each protester had been paid an average of $100 to attend then the event still would have cost considerably more than the production budget for Star Wars: The Force Awakens. Not to mention being the biggest conspiracy of all time. Like the old saying goes: “Four million people can keep a secret, so long as 3,999,999 of them are dead.”
Of course anyone who buys the “paid protester” nonsense probably didn’t get to that conclusion through reasoned evidence in the first place, so reasoned evidence isn’t likely to dissuade them anyway.
[quote=“singletona082, post:1, topic:95932”]
How do we counter being called Paid Protesters?[/quote]
Stand up and say “if I were being paid, I wouldn’t be on food stamps!”
Give them some ultimatum, that they need to meet with their constituents, or they will be dealt with as an insurgent. They can’t well be the representative anymore if/when the people cut them off from the rest of government, and/or their bank accounts. Also, when representatives know that they can be easily replaced, there is less incentive for lobbyists to pay them.
If they want fair treatment and to be left to do their job, then transparency to the public is a requirement - not an option.
The problem is it ins’t ‘everyone’ that’s sick of it. There are enough people that support this line of thinking that they have people they can dredge out to look like they’re populest.
Don’t forget, Nancy Pelosi and a lot of other Democrats believed that the upswell of the Tea Party was bought and paid for by the Koch brothers back in 2008. And they may or may not have learned a lesson in the midterms.
Anyone who thinks there are any paid protesters has obviously never had to get extras for a crowd scene. Even when you pay and feed them only half show up and of the ones that do show up half of them are actively doing the opposite of what you have asked them to do.
With so many people protesting so many things, we’re in the neighborhood of a nations GDP being shelled out to protesters in the US. The whole notion is a serious math fail.
It’s a blatant ad hominem meant to avoid addressing the actual issue. The only way to defeat it is to not play their game. They’re inventing a non-issue to deflect from criticism of themselves. Keep the heat on.
I have not heard of anyone being individually dismissed by a member of congress as a ‘paid protestor’ or ‘violent leftist’.
In a discussion the burden of proof falls on the one making the claim. Ordinary claim, ordinary evidence. Extraordiary claim, extraordinary evidence.
Don’t lower your burden of proof is a good idea on this one. Don’t allow argument by assertion. Simply call bullshit on it. And leave it there, steaming.
I agree but as the protests develop and gather momentum, we must all realise that they are not suddenly going to start behaving ethically. Once they are backed into a corner by their complete inability to address the public, isn’t it likely that they will up the ante in the most psychopathic fashion possible?
Responding to their deflections really only slightly slows the crashing descent of the administration, allowing them to apply a tiny braking force, marginally delaying the inevitable brinkmanship they must realise is needed to maintain their position.
The narrative of Tramp supporters being pushed right now is that opposition hurts their feelings so much that they are forced into being evil against their better judgement.
We are being prepared, set up, the way is being paved for horror.
Perhaps forcing them into their end game before they are ready is the only way to get inside their decision loop and minimise the harm they do.
