100% spot-on.
Division and polarisation is a lucrative industry and a vote winner (if you play your cards right).
I think the term is divide and conquer - and then the Democrats/left can ride in and benefit from it.
It's kinda like an approved contractor who botches the job on purpose knowing he's got the contract to do the repairs and fix it. The perfect storm.
Problem is, it's the right who benefit from it the most.
A black dude gets elected, number of gun sales go up massively..... I mean....
“I mean...” what? What are you implying?
I'm implying the right use fear as a tool to get them support.
Don't be an idiot. Nobody's trying to scare anyone for ****'s sake. The reason gun sales go up is because gun owners and wannabe gun owners are afraid Democrats will try to take them away or curb their ownership options even more than they already have.
Jesus.
I'm implying "it's the right who benefit the most" from friction in society.
The right "benefits" from friction in society? How, exactly?
Hilarious.
Of course they're trying to put fear into people. Look at McCarthy in the 1950s, the fear of Communism.
How is this any different from the left's cancel culture of today? People like you are so goddamn paranoid about racism you vilified a teenager for smiling at someone.
en.wikipedia.org
Take a look if you want to see.
I don't want to see because it's irrelevant.
Then we have the post 9/11 fear mongering. Pretty obvious that certain people were trying to make Islam the enemy because most OPEC countries were Muslim.
The reality is that the anti-Communist agenda came from the right. They celebrated the demise of the USSR in 1990/1991 and then lost the election. Clinton for 8 years. Once they got it back with Dubya, they went on the offensive, made a new enemy.
Considering that the Democrat party is guilty of its own fearmongering, this is also irrelevant.
Yes, people are scared Democrats will take their guns away. Why is that?
Because they
do want to take our guns away. Any person with any sense knows that if the Democrat party could outlaw firearms they would do so in a New York minute. As it is, they know they can't (at least not yet) so they whittle away what they can a piece at a time such as "assault" weapons bans, clip size restrictions, etc.
Trump came out and said that guns should be taken off people. Not Obama. So why is it that Republicans fear their guns will be taken away by Democrats? Because they've been told this will happen.
By who?
How does the right benefit from friction?
Tell people you're "tough on crime", you need lots of crime. Otherwise people aren't going to vote for those who are "tough on crime".
"...you need lots of crime."? That's like saying that in order to sell aspirin, you need lots of headaches. This is the most bass ackwards reasoning I think I've ever seen.
We don't need lots of crime to be tough on crime, we need to be tough on crime because there's lots of crime.
If you have a bogeyman outside, you can say you're going to increase defense spending to keep everyone safe. You're the ones who care about the military.
Every nation on this ******* planet cares about their military and defending their country. How is it that this is a singularly American Republican concern?
People are stupid because people are emotional. Throw emotion at them and they will vote for you. Because they want to believe.
Are you so naive as to think Democrats don't do the exact same thing?
Obama's "hope not hate", Trump's "Make America Great Again". Promises of hope for the future. Promises that will never been fulfilled, they don't need to be, they're there as emotionally charged nonsense to get stupid people to vote for them.
Unless you're suggesting that every person who votes for a candidate in any election is stupid, I fail to see your point.
It's probably not much different to the left's cancel culture.
The reality is on both sides they're trying to control the narrative. Though "both sides" is often more than just two simple black and white sides, like BLM which is made up of different views.
People like me huh? You say that as if you know me. I doubt that very much.
Maybe the Democrats do want to see guns taken away. But what have they done about it? Under Obama did they take guns away? No. The last big federal gun control bill seems to have been in 2005.
Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act 2005 and it was designed to stop gun manufacturers being sued.
The last gun control law was the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban. Even with Democrats in the Presidency and control the Senate and the House they didn't ban most guns, just one type.
Yet listening to Republicans it's just around the corner.
Then came Trump.
President Trump's record on gun control reform: A timeline. ABC News looked at statements and promises Trump has made on gun control reform.
abcnews.go.com
"Feb, 28, 2018: In a meeting with lawmakers, Trump said, “I like taking the guns early, like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida. He had a lot of firearms. They saw everything. To go to court would have taken a long time. So you could do exactly what you’re saying, but take the guns first, go through due process second.”"
But it's all about the Democrats.
Look, when it comes to winning elections you have to be able to connect with voters.
There are two ways of connecting with voters.
1) Find out what voters want, and then acting on this.
2) Tell voters what they want, and then act of this.
In the two party system of the USA, the first is too difficult. You need to get 50% of people to agree on something. That'll never happen. Look at countries with Proportional Representation, those with a proper system in place won't have any party with 50% of the votes.
Germany has 32% for the ruling party in 2017, 41.5% in 2013, 33.8% in 2009, 35.2% in 2005, 38.5% in 2002, 40.9% in 1998.
So, in order to get lots of people on board, what do you do? Stick to emotive issues, guns, abortion, freedom... even crime. Things you can tell people "Doing it this way is the best way", when really it's not been proven.
Being tough on crime only works as a political tool, if people fear crime. You can say "look, we reduced crime" but people will be like "there's little crime, why would we vote to reduce crime?"
