August 25, 2016

Why Hillary's alt-right fear-mongering fails: Boogeyman is unfamiliar

In a desperate attempt to scare away suburban women from keeping an open mind about Trump, Team Hillary decided to set up a guilt by association between Trump voters and mean racist trolls on the internet, whom she calls the alt-right.

Every suburban woman's natural reaction is -- "The alt-who?"

So, her writers had to explain who they were, both the names of people and websites, along with the ideas they hold.

This fails as fear-mongering because it's supposed to elicit a gut reflex response of disgust, anxiety, shame, etc. But people cannot have a gut-level intuition about something that is entirely unfamiliar to them, and that needs to be explained and taught to the audience. Intuitions only form after extensive experience.

We all know who the televangelist type is, so the Democrats could fear-monger about that type against Ted Cruz. But the alt-right? It's too new, under-the-radar, and unfamiliar for normies to have any gut-level impression of -- positive, negative, or otherwise.

Trying to didactically explain who the alt-right boogeyman is, engages contradictory lobes of the brain -- the conscious, rational, and analytical (learning who this group is), and the unconscious, intuitive, and emotional (fear of boogeymen reflex).

Not to mention the fact that suburban women don't like learning new stuff in general, especially when it's unsolicited lecturing rather than something they're curiously exploring, and delivered in that scolding schoolmarm tone of voice that reminds them of every bitch of a teacher they've ever had.

I think the whole stunt was just the vindictive butthurt homos who staff Hillary's campaign looking for a public way to lash out at their online tormentors, and whether it affected her polling at all was more of an afterthought.

If this non-event is any guide, we won't have to be playing much defense for the remainder of the race.


  1. Random Dude on the Internet8/26/16, 7:27 AM

    In an era where social media and alternative media outlets are plentiful, Democrats and the mainstream media are going to find it tougher and tougher these days to manufacture controversy successfully out of whole cloth.

  2. Trump's honest response was perfect, he's shown that if you ignore the hysterical guilt by association attacks, they have no power. The only people who thought it was compelling at all are gays like Shepard Smith and hipsters who were going to vote for her anyway. How pathetic that she had to wait an hour to deliver this and still looked ready to pass out

  3. "I think the whole stunt was just the vindictive butthurt homos who staff Hillary's campaign looking for a public way to lash out at their online tormentors, and whether it affected her polling at all was more of an afterthought."

    This speech is one of the funniest things to ever happen to politics.

    From my understanding, the first guy she "exposed" was... Alex Jones. Then she calls Putin, what was it, the Godfather? And then there was the hilarious reading of Milo headlines. You know more about what she said, but from what I heard, it was strikingly, shockingly, bereft of any knowledge of the Alt-Right. I cannot imagine that the people who crafted this or had any input in anyway have been victims on twitter.

    Alex Jones... still can't get over that one, and straight out of the box. My husband's face when I told him was priceless like, "whaaaaat???" Conspiracy guy famous for clowning it up and selling pills, but not racism or misogyny.

    I got the impression from journos on twitter that they were disappointed that Hillary and co. had obviously not read their pieces, and more importantly, had 0 idea of the worst of the Alt-Right. Instead of Roosh, who's been featured on my local news getting kicked out of town (and others I take it), we got her reading hilarious headlines from a gay guy, like Feminism is Worse than Cancer and Birth Control Makes You Ugly. Yeah, Hillary was shaming 'em with the absolute worst examples of misogyny!

    And during this a guy yelling "" and "Pepe"

    What a dud. Oh my God, I laughed so hard!!!

    Seriously, the speech looked more like a platform to mostly hit back with regards to her most vulnerable points with attacks of "anti-liberalism" woven throughout.

    Trump, her opponent- his personal dealings, Alex Jones, and Breitbart. Jones, because Trump has personally appeared on his show. Then Breitbart, because of Bannon, laughably, couldn't offer much, but she took what she could... She should have given it back, lol!

    Farage- he's helping Trump and an anti-globalist.

    Putin- She believes he's helping Trump. It's complicated.

    1. Roosh is harmless. Its just SJWs being vermin again.

  4. RapedByGayDad8/26/16, 3:43 PM

    I am a member of the media, how do people such as myself get ahold of you for private discourse?

  5. All press inquiries may be directed toward my 16 year-old male intern at the PHALANX organization.

  6. RapedByGayDad8/26/16, 4:23 PM

    how do I get in touch with said intern (serious q)

  7. How serious? Not giving out my email, and throwaways all require a gay phone # (not giving out either).

  8. If I don't need to respond, you can just leave a comment in the mod queue, and I won't publish it.

  9. One of the most famous and powerful people in the world seeing fit to directly recognize the alternative internet is possibly its greatest triumph to date.
    She's looking for short term leverage in one political election but giving out such huge publicity is a huge mistake for her. This will just legitimize the factions she tried to dismiss as "dark" denizens of the far fringes.
    In the big picture, aided by modern communications, decentralized amorphous organizations continue to gain ground on traditional centralized bureaucracies whether in warfare or politics.

  10. It would make a great chance to revive the "There you go again" line at the debates.

    "There she goes again, calling half of all Americans racists..."

  11. We'll see if Trump is the alt-right Reagan or the alt-right Goldwater. I've noticed that the left dangerously underestimates Trump's ability in a debate, complacently assuming that Hillary will crush him in a setting less friendly to "clown car" republicanism and heavier on policy.
    I was stunned though when I watched Trump's speech at a New Hampshire rally the day after Hillary's alt-right speech. He was citing specific clauses from trade treaties to bolster his arguments. If that's the game he brings to a debate along with his usual force and charisma, they write him off at their peril. Let's face it: Trump is behind. The debates will probably decide whether he can close the gap. Hillary might even be wiser to avoid them altogether since the incumbent/leader always has more to lose.


You MUST enter a nickname with the "Name/URL" option if you're not signed in. We can't follow who is saying what if everyone is "Anonymous."