Ocasio-Cortez Takes a Page from Trump’s Playbook

[nota bene]

Jonah Goldberg addresses the curious phenomenon of the "_____Derangement Syndrome," crediting the late Dr. Krauthammer for the coinage, and says that while there are some who immediately leap to the worst/most outrageous of interpretations about someone they despise, sometimes the ones making the accusation are themselves the ones who refuse to see the facts, "taking comfort in the fallacy that the motives, real or imagined, of a critic automatically disqualify the criticism."

Because we live, he says, in a moment of extreme negative partisanship in which millions of people are motivated more by dislike of the other party than a fondness for their own, "being hated by the right people is the best way to get not just a big following but an intensely loyal one." Ocasio-Cortez is taking advantage of this and is playing for suckers both those who leap to criticize and those who reflexively rush to defend her:

Ocasio-Cortez, wittingly or not, has appropriated a technique mastered by President Trump.

Trump prefers positive attention, but he’ll take negative attention over no attention every time, in part because he knows his supporters will intensify their dedication to him in response to allegedly unfair attacks. AOC is doing the same thing. By forcing partisans to take sides, she generates controversy. Controversy attracts media attention. Media attention generates even more controversy. And so on.

As with Trump, sometimes she clearly knows what she’s doing, and other times she simply displays her ignorance. But at this stage, it doesn’t matter. The more right-wing partisans attack her, the more left-wing partisans rally to her. The more left-wingers rally to her, the more justified the Right feels in paying attention to her. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/12/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-controversy-playbook-right-left/

 

[ecofarm]

Why are we comparing the President of the United States to a first term Representative.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Jonah Goldberg addresses the curious phenomenon of the "_____Derangement Syndrome," crediting the late Dr. Krauthammer for the coinage, and says that while there are some who immediately leap to the worst/most outrageous of interpretations about someone they despise, sometimes the ones making the accusation are themselves the ones who refuse to see the facts, "taking comfort in the fallacy that the motives, real or imagined, of a critic automatically disqualify the criticism."

Because we live, he says, in a moment of extreme negative partisanship in which millions of people are motivated more by dislike of the other party than a fondness for their own, "being hated by the right people is the best way to get not just a big following but an intensely loyal one." Ocasio-Cortez is taking advantage of this and is playing for suckers both those who leap to criticize and those who reflexively rush to defend her:

Ocasio-Cortez, wittingly or not, has appropriated a technique mastered by President Trump.

Trump prefers positive attention, but he’ll take negative attention over no attention every time, in part because he knows his supporters will intensify their dedication to him in response to allegedly unfair attacks. AOC is doing the same thing. By forcing partisans to take sides, she generates controversy. Controversy attracts media attention. Media attention generates even more controversy. And so on.

As with Trump, sometimes she clearly knows what she’s doing, and other times she simply displays her ignorance. But at this stage, it doesn’t matter. The more right-wing partisans attack her, the more left-wing partisans rally to her. The more left-wingers rally to her, the more justified the Right feels in paying attention to her. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/12/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-controversy-playbook-right-left/

That a freshman representative can garner as much attention as she has indicates that she is pretty good at the Trump strategy.

 

[Crovax]

Why are we comparing the President of the United States to a first term Representative.

Because they have the same amount of political experience

 

[Slyfox696]

Jonah Goldberg addresses the curious phenomenon of the "_____Derangement Syndrome," crediting the late Dr. Krauthammer for the coinage, and says that while there are some who immediately leap to the worst/most outrageous of interpretations about someone they despise, sometimes the ones making the accusation are themselves the ones who refuse to see the facts, "taking comfort in the fallacy that the motives, real or imagined, of a critic automatically disqualify the criticism."

Because we live, he says, in a moment of extreme negative partisanship in which millions of people are motivated more by dislike of the other party than a fondness for their own, "being hated by the right people is the best way to get not just a big following but an intensely loyal one." Ocasio-Cortez is taking advantage of this and is playing for suckers both those who leap to criticize and those who reflexively rush to defend her:

Ocasio-Cortez, wittingly or not, has appropriated a technique mastered by President Trump.

Trump prefers positive attention, but he’ll take negative attention over no attention every time, in part because he knows his supporters will intensify their dedication to him in response to allegedly unfair attacks. AOC is doing the same thing. By forcing partisans to take sides, she generates controversy. Controversy attracts media attention. Media attention generates even more controversy. And so on.

As with Trump, sometimes she clearly knows what she’s doing, and other times she simply displays her ignorance. But at this stage, it doesn’t matter. The more right-wing partisans attack her, the more left-wing partisans rally to her. The more left-wingers rally to her, the more justified the Right feels in paying attention to her. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/12/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-controversy-playbook-right-left/

Uhh...what has she done to warrant all the media attention she gets? Unlike Trump, she hasn't made racist statements. Unlike Trump, she hasn't flagrantly violated the law. Unlike Trump, she hasn't shoved her wealth in people's faces.

The more accurate way to paint what is happening is that the right wing media is focusing obsessively on her, for reasons I still haven't understood.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

Jonah Goldberg addresses the curious phenomenon of the "_____Derangement Syndrome," crediting the late Dr. Krauthammer for the coinage, and says that while there are some who immediately leap to the worst/most outrageous of interpretations about someone they despise, sometimes the ones making the accusation are themselves the ones who refuse to see the facts, "taking comfort in the fallacy that the motives, real or imagined, of a critic automatically disqualify the criticism."

Because we live, he says, in a moment of extreme negative partisanship in which millions of people are motivated more by dislike of the other party than a fondness for their own, "being hated by the right people is the best way to get not just a big following but an intensely loyal one." Ocasio-Cortez is taking advantage of this and is playing for suckers both those who leap to criticize and those who reflexively rush to defend her:

Ocasio-Cortez, wittingly or not, has appropriated a technique mastered by President Trump.

Trump prefers positive attention, but he’ll take negative attention over no attention every time, in part because he knows his supporters will intensify their dedication to him in response to allegedly unfair attacks. AOC is doing the same thing. By forcing partisans to take sides, she generates controversy. Controversy attracts media attention. Media attention generates even more controversy. And so on.

As with Trump, sometimes she clearly knows what she’s doing, and other times she simply displays her ignorance. But at this stage, it doesn’t matter. The more right-wing partisans attack her, the more left-wing partisans rally to her. The more left-wingers rally to her, the more justified the Right feels in paying attention to her. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/12/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-controversy-playbook-right-left/

On paper she should not be getting the kind of attention she is getting, so maybe there is something to that.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

Why are we comparing the President of the United States to a first term Representative.

That is kind of the point. We shouldn’t. So what is different about her that we are?

 

[ecofarm]

That is kind of the point. We shouldn’t. So what is different about her that we are?

You're sure it's her?

 

[Skeptic Bob]

You're sure it's her?

No, I’m not.

 

[nota bene]

That a freshman representative can garner as much attention as she has indicates that she is pretty good at the Trump strategy.

The article notes that Ocasio-Cortez has more Twitter followers than all the other freshmen Dem reps combined, so she is. Sad commentary on our times that Twitter is a measure of success, but it is. Identity Quotient is everything.

 

[nota bene]

Uhh...what has she done to warrant all the media attention she gets? Unlike Trump, she hasn't made racist statements. Unlike Trump, she hasn't flagrantly violated the law. Unlike Trump, she hasn't shoved her wealth in people's faces.

The more accurate way to paint what is happening is that the right wing media is focusing obsessively on her, for reasons I still haven't understood.

I can tell that you didn't bother to read the article.

 

[Kobie]

That is kind of the point. We shouldn’t. So what is different about her that we are?

Who’s “we”? She’s getting a lot more attention from right-wing media than left-wing or neutral media.

 

[nota bene]

That is kind of the point. We shouldn’t. So what is different about her that we are?

I think it's the outsized attention she's paid by both fans and detractors. We live in an insta-age, and she is a created insta-star.

 

[Slyfox696]

I can tell that you didn't bother to read the article.

No, I read your summary of the article. Are you telling me you started a thread and chose to omit the important parts? If so, how come? If not, then try answering my post honestly. It'd be a refreshing change.

You can't "take a page" unwittingly. That's stupid. Also, Trump DELIBERATELY gins up media drama by doing the things I mentioned. Ocasio-Cortez has not, as I mentioned.

Seriously, did you even read my post or did you just skip to the part where you make an asinine comment because you have no legitimate response? I'm genuinely curious if you even bothered to take the time to comprehend what I wrote.

 

[Keridan]

Two sides of the same broken coin. Turns out loud and obnoxious gets attention no matter what side of the aisle it falls on. Drop little things like logic and fact checking and get really loud on twitter and you, too, can be a freshman in congress or maybe even POTUS.

 

[uptower]

On paper she should not be getting the kind of attention she is getting, so maybe there is something to that.

Moreover the National Review article is just an exercise in projection. The sidebar shows several articles on 'Trump derangement syndrome' and other such imaginary constructs comfortable among the right. Step into their world a moment:

The author simply attributes this so-called derangement syndrome to both sides as if they both stem from an irrational hatred. Yet, Trump has done plenty to earn his hate - not least by spreading as much of it around as he can. He's been a public figure for decades but only roundly disliked since he embraced birtherism a few years ago and ran with it. It has gotten worse at it since he has failed spectacularly in most presidential duties and shown ignorance, obstinacy and unwillingness to learn from his mistakes, while ramping up the racial and social divides he played on to gain power and feuding spectacularly and publicly with anyone who disagrees. he is an individual consumed by vanity hate and demonstrable misanthropy.

There is nothing 'deranged' irrational about a dislike for Trump. The man has more than earned it.

Ocasio-Cortez on the other hand has got her facts wrong a couple of times.

Yawn. They started to leap on her the moment they heard her name. They didn't like her face, the Hispanic name, her youth, looks and millenial aspect. They don't like her platform much either but as a junior congressman there's not much she can do with it, and believe it, it was the last thing they noticed about her. Just like Obama they hated her from day one for who she is.

That's the difference, and therein lies the real 'derangement'.

 

[nota bene]

No, I read your summary of the article. Are you telling me you started a thread and chose to omit the important parts? If so, how come? If not, then try answering my post honestly. It'd be a refreshing change.

You can't "take a page" unwittingly. That's stupid. Also, Trump DELIBERATELY gins up media drama by doing the things I mentioned. Ocasio-Cortez has not, as I mentioned.

Seriously, did you even read my post or did you just skip to the part where you make an asinine comment because you have no legitimate response? I'm genuinely curious if you even bothered to take the time to comprehend what I wrote.

There wasn't much to "comprehend." I posted to you what I did because the article answers all your questions. You'd know this if you'd read the article rather than only my post. But okay, I'll answer despite your insinuating that I'm generally dishonest.

You: "Uhh...what has she done to warrant all the media attention she gets? Unlike Trump, she hasn't made racist statements. Unlike Trump, she hasn't flagrantly violated the law. Unlike Trump, she hasn't shoved her wealth in people's faces."

One recent example of Ocasio-Cortez creating media attention was her joining the protestors outside of Pelosi's office. She does make uninformed or silly comments fairly frequently (the article offers examples) which create attention too. And if you're keeping up, you know that she isn't wealthy like Trump.

You: "The more accurate way to paint what is happening is that the right wing media is focusing obsessively on her, for reasons I still haven't understood."

From the article you couldn't bother to read: "The head of the DNC not long ago referred to her as 'the future of the Democratic party.' She’s received fawning, glowing-to-the-point-of-incandescent coverage from the mainstream media and outsized critical attention from Fox News and other right-leaning outlets."

Did you notice that Goldberg is talking about the outsized attention she is receiving from both lefties and righties? This is key to his point, which has escaped you. It's not just right-leaners who are focusing obsessively on her. It's not just right-wing media paying attention to her. One reason, as Goldberg notes, is that she frequently says silly and untrue things. If you'd like examples, read the article.

 

[TDGonDP]

She is good business for both left- and right-wing media outlets. They have a vested interests in promoting her as the next political messiah or the the next dictator. Shareholders should be happy.

Time for another system!

 

[nota bene]

She is good business for both left- and right-wing media outlets. They have a vested interests in promoting her as the next political messiah or the the next dictator. Shareholders should be happy.

Time for another system!

I can't agree with that, but you're right--she is very good for media business!

 

[Cattle Company]

No, I read your summary of the article. Are you telling me you started a thread and chose to omit the important parts? If so, how come? If not, then try answering my post honestly. It'd be a refreshing change.

You can't "take a page" unwittingly. That's stupid. Also, Trump DELIBERATELY gins up media drama by doing the things I mentioned. Ocasio-Cortez has not, as I mentioned.

Seriously, did you even read my post or did you just skip to the part where you make an asinine comment because you have no legitimate response? I'm genuinely curious if you even bothered to take the time to comprehend what I wrote.

I comprehended your post. And I determined it was 99% honesty evasion. Please refrain from lecturing people until you learn to be honest. Thanks!

 

[Kal'Stang]

No, I read your summary of the article. Are you telling me you started a thread and chose to omit the important parts? If so, how come? If not, then try answering my post honestly. It'd be a refreshing change.

You can't "take a page" unwittingly. That's stupid. Also, Trump DELIBERATELY gins up media drama by doing the things I mentioned. Ocasio-Cortez has not, as I mentioned.

Seriously, did you even read my post or did you just skip to the part where you make an asinine comment because you have no legitimate response? I'm genuinely curious if you even bothered to take the time to comprehend what I wrote.

Due to character limit and copyright reasons a person cannot always list everything that YOU feel may be important. If you want to know what is important then read the article. Hell, you should read the article anyways just so that you know what the hell you're talking about instead of choosing to remaining ignorant.

 

[ElChupacabra]

Jonah Goldberg addresses the curious phenomenon of the "_____Derangement Syndrome," crediting the late Dr. Krauthammer for the coinage, and says that while there are some who immediately leap to the worst/most outrageous of interpretations about someone they despise, sometimes the ones making the accusation are themselves the ones who refuse to see the facts, "taking comfort in the fallacy that the motives, real or imagined, of a critic automatically disqualify the criticism."

Because we live, he says, in a moment of extreme negative partisanship in which millions of people are motivated more by dislike of the other party than a fondness for their own, "being hated by the right people is the best way to get not just a big following but an intensely loyal one." Ocasio-Cortez is taking advantage of this and is playing for suckers both those who leap to criticize and those who reflexively rush to defend her:

Ocasio-Cortez, wittingly or not, has appropriated a technique mastered by President Trump.

Trump prefers positive attention, but he’ll take negative attention over no attention every time, in part because he knows his supporters will intensify their dedication to him in response to allegedly unfair attacks. AOC is doing the same thing. By forcing partisans to take sides, she generates controversy. Controversy attracts media attention. Media attention generates even more controversy. And so on.

As with Trump, sometimes she clearly knows what she’s doing, and other times she simply displays her ignorance. But at this stage, it doesn’t matter. The more right-wing partisans attack her, the more left-wing partisans rally to her. The more left-wingers rally to her, the more justified the Right feels in paying attention to her. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/12/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-controversy-playbook-right-left/

In the end all of this is just adults reliving high school, right?

 

[sangha]

Because they have the same amount of political experience

Touche

 

[sangha]

Jonah Goldberg addresses the curious phenomenon of the "_____Derangement Syndrome," crediting the late Dr. Krauthammer for the coinage, and says that while there are some who immediately leap to the worst/most outrageous of interpretations about someone they despise, sometimes the ones making the accusation are themselves the ones who refuse to see the facts, "taking comfort in the fallacy that the motives, real or imagined, of a critic automatically disqualify the criticism."

Because we live, he says, in a moment of extreme negative partisanship in which millions of people are motivated more by dislike of the other party than a fondness for their own, "being hated by the right people is the best way to get not just a big following but an intensely loyal one." Ocasio-Cortez is taking advantage of this and is playing for suckers both those who leap to criticize and those who reflexively rush to defend her:

Ocasio-Cortez, wittingly or not, has appropriated a technique mastered by President Trump.

Trump prefers positive attention, but he’ll take negative attention over no attention every time, in part because he knows his supporters will intensify their dedication to him in response to allegedly unfair attacks. AOC is doing the same thing. By forcing partisans to take sides, she generates controversy. Controversy attracts media attention. Media attention generates even more controversy. And so on.

As with Trump, sometimes she clearly knows what she’s doing, and other times she simply displays her ignorance. But at this stage, it doesn’t matter. The more right-wing partisans attack her, the more left-wing partisans rally to her. The more left-wingers rally to her, the more justified the Right feels in paying attention to her. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/12/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-controversy-playbook-right-left/

IOW, it is the Big Bad Lefties who made the right wingers complain that she did not look poor enough to be a Socialist :roll:

 

[TDGonDP]

I can't agree with that, but you're right--she is very good for media business!

You must like the drama.

I like to think that I'm a reformed political junkie. But there are relapses as I watch the power ebb and flow.