They Support Sarah
November 25, 2009 4:50 AM   Subscribe

This post was deleted for the following reason: What was supposed to be the good thing about posting this? What we got was a bunch of LOLPALINITES, a bunch of retread arguments, some driveby nastiness, and a pile of flags. -- cortex



 
I want to editorialize, but the people in the video speak for themselves.
posted by double block and bleed at 4:50 AM on November 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


book signings. Crap.
posted by double block and bleed at 4:51 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


I've seen these floating around and but I haven't had the courage to watch one. I fear my belief that Sarah Palin is the Worst Thing In America will be disproved.
posted by DU at 4:53 AM on November 25, 2009


I suspect you could have done the same thing during Obama's campaign for President. Replace "common sense" with "hope" and "change"...

Not that I'm equating Palin and Obama, or even their supporters. But the fact is that most people know exactly nothing about politics and policy, and when you dig beneath their breathless support for a candidate it shows.
posted by Philosopher Dirtbike at 4:56 AM on November 25, 2009 [20 favorites]


Yeah, I love how NO one has a clue why they hate the things they hate. It's kind of scary as fuck. The lady at 2:12 is priceless.
posted by chunking express at 4:58 AM on November 25, 2009


A suspicion of the existence of a false equivalance, that's the best you can do?
posted by DU at 5:00 AM on November 25, 2009 [11 favorites]


I was at the gym, on the treadmill, watching the news coverage of her visit to Ft. Bragg-a ton of folks went out there to see her and to get a book signed-and I was bemused to see that someone I know personally was on camera tickled that she had talked Palin into signing her cast as well.


I really really REALLY am not looking forward to 2012.
posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 5:08 AM on November 25, 2009 [5 favorites]


I'm wondering how many of those people will actually read all of her book.
posted by JanetLand at 5:09 AM on November 25, 2009


Yeah, we all want to hate whats-her-name, but I agree with Dirtbike, an edited video showing the expected percentage of stupid people in a large crowd could be made on either side of the fence... so, basically this is a lolpalinites thing...
posted by HuronBob at 5:10 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


"I'm wondering how many of those people will CAN actually read all of her book"
posted by HuronBob at 5:12 AM on November 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


It's about the nature of culture and the unexamined life. People create a world view which feels comfortable and safe and it seems to make sense to them, like a dream does before you wake up. It's a lot easier to see on others.
posted by Obscure Reference at 5:14 AM on November 25, 2009 [16 favorites]


Not anything against the post but I can't watch this. I've had enough wall-to-wall Palin "coverage" on the "news" the past two weeks to last two lifetimes.
posted by blucevalo at 5:18 AM on November 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


I suspect you could have done the same thing during Obama's campaign for President. Replace "common sense" with "hope" and "change"...

Not that I'm equating Palin and Obama, or even their supporters


Actually, that is precisely what you did.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:20 AM on November 25, 2009 [11 favorites]


I like how they also showed all the people that had pertinent, prudent answers to the questions rather than cherry-picking the moronic answers!

They address this accusation in the clip description.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:21 AM on November 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


I usually see things here first, then a few days later (or weeks, months, years), I find someone has linked to the same thing at Facebook. This time around, though, a Facebook friend scooped MeFi. I'll be damned.

I couldn't watch all of this: it's too depressing, and too predictable. I mean, hell, how much of this kind of thing does one need to see, really? Dumb people are dumb.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 5:23 AM on November 25, 2009


I agree with a couple of others, this isn't helpful. I recall a video done during the Primary season on Obama supporters with a similar theme, and I thought it disingenuous then. Doing a similar video with Palin supporters only proves you're pretty good with the editing program, frankly.
posted by Asim at 5:24 AM on November 25, 2009


The Daily Show had a pretty funny clip the other night about the reaction to Palin's book in a New York bookstore — or rather the lack of a reaction.
posted by orange swan at 5:25 AM on November 25, 2009


A suspicion of the existence of a false equivalance, that's the best you can do?

Huh? I explicitly said I wasn't EQUATING anything. Being able to do the same thing with Obama supporters doesn't mean there is any equivalence. The entire reason I typed the second sentence of my post was so no one would misunderstand me. I was only saying that these clips reflect something broader in American politics, and should not be used simply to make fun of Palin supporters.

Drawing a connection is NOT claiming an equivalence.
posted by Philosopher Dirtbike at 5:25 AM on November 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Y'all have seen the video of Palin's supporters booing her after she skips out early on hundreds of folks who waited in line for up to 6 hours to get their books signed, right? I love the guy yelling "QUITTIN' ON THE JOB! QUITTIN' ON THE JOB!"

Fame is fickle, thank god.

I really really REALLY am not looking forward to 2012.

Sarah Palin will self-destruct long before the 2012 Republican primary.
posted by mediareport at 5:28 AM on November 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


"He's legalizing all the illegal aliens... so she won't have the votes."

Umm, yep.
posted by netbros at 5:28 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Hearing people talk about martial law and the barring of future elections makes me cringe. I now realize just how much of a jackass I sounded like circa 2004. *facepalm*
posted by Cat Pie Hurts at 5:30 AM on November 25, 2009 [10 favorites]


Columbus represent! Go banana!
posted by Otis at 5:30 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Actually, that is precisely what you did.

No, it clearly isn't. Their supporters are different populations. Being able to do this (show that many of them are clueless) with a subset of the two populations does not mean the populations are in any way "equivalent". Noting properties which reflect something broad in American politics is not equating. This should be obvious; I can't believe I even have to say it.
posted by Philosopher Dirtbike at 5:30 AM on November 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


I want to see eight minutes straight with the guy in the Steelers jacket.
posted by gman at 5:30 AM on November 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Probably the worst thing about this is that it happened in my city.


.........Yeeeesh.
posted by spirit72 at 5:34 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Guy in the Steelers Jacket 2012!
posted by mullacc at 5:34 AM on November 25, 2009


A lot of these people have never bought a book before. Really.
posted by twoleftfeet at 5:34 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


It's like interviewing peasants from the Middle Ages about why they like the king (or queen).... Hurray! Now the thickies have a leader. Yeeeeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
posted by Monkeymoo at 5:40 AM on November 25, 2009


What people don't seem to realize about Palin's "Going Rogue" is that it's her attempt to tell America that she has the same superpower sucking ability as X-Men legend Rogue. At the slightest touch she takes a person's superpower as her own. This is why John McCain no longer has X-ray vision.

Will she ever know love?
posted by drezdn at 5:41 AM on November 25, 2009 [19 favorites]


As horrifying as this is… It’s sort of amazing that the on-messageyness works. Most people can repeat the surface level talking points verbatim. Also I have to say book signings generally are wing nut central. Guy in the steelers jacket is always there. Even if it is Jonah Lehrer talking about his too quickly published How We Decide, it’s just that he’s asking arcane questions about the book jacket.
posted by edbles at 5:43 AM on November 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Being able to do the same thing with Obama supporters doesn't mean there is any equivalence.

First of all, what does the phrase "the same thing" mean if not some kind of equivalence?

Second of all, my main objection wasn't so much the false equivalence as the hypothetical nature of the Obama supporter clips in question. Go get your clips (adhering to the random selection and almost-full presentation this clips purports) and THEN we can argue about how equivalent they are.
posted by DU at 5:45 AM on November 25, 2009 [5 favorites]


No, it clearly isn't. Their supporters are different populations. Being able to do this (show that many of them are clueless) with a subset of the two populations does not mean the populations are in any way "equivalent". Noting properties which reflect something broad in American politics is not equating. This should be obvious; I can't believe I even have to say it.

You're technically in the right, of course. But most people who make this predictable "Oh but you could do the same thing with Obama supporters" point do so for a reason — to imply that videos like this are hopelessly cherry-picked, or to suggest that there's basically the same amount and type of idiocy on both sides of the spectrum. Might not have been your motivation, but the intention, I'd argue, is usually to attempt to neutralize evidence of vast and disproportionate stupidity on the right.
posted by game warden to the events rhino at 5:46 AM on November 25, 2009 [7 favorites]


so, basically this is a lolpalinites thing..
It doesn't have to be a lolpalinites thing. It can be a discussion about populist candidates both past and present. It can be a discussion about whether or not people are less informed about the issues today as opposed to a 100 years ago. It can be a discussion about what needs to change so that people are informed with real facts as opposed to vague talking points circulating on the internet and among church groups.

Hearing people talk about martial law and the barring of future elections makes me cringe. I now realize just how much of a jackass I sounded like circa 2004

That was exactly what I was thinking-- how many MeFites were sure that martial law would be declared and there would be no election in 2008? I didn't actually believe it would happen but I was afraid *something* would happen. Why? I don't think it is because I am stupid or uninformed, I do think it had something to do with the demonization of Cheney, Rove, and Bush. My dislike of them transformed them into super villains who would stop at nothing to keep control of the country. Therefore, I can sympathize with the Obama haters-- I'm sure in their little circles of like-minded individuals it is hard to understand how he ever got elected; he must have done something illegal or immoral.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:49 AM on November 25, 2009 [11 favorites]


"They made a porn movie about Sarah Palin, and the same actress, Lisa Ann, played me in the porn version of 30 Rock. Weirdly, of the three of us, Lisa Ann knows the most about foreign policy." -- Tina Fey
posted by jeffburdges at 5:55 AM on November 25, 2009 [44 favorites]


They address this accusation in the clip description.

Actually, they sort of dodge it rather than dispell it:

CHERRY-PICKING
As for accusations of cherry picking, which are commonly thrown at interview-based videos, it simply isn't what we did. We interviewed only a few more people than ended up in the video, not hundreds, and what was cut was done for time purposes. The people were selected at random--some offered to be interviewed--and we were only there for about 90 mins (it gets dark early and fast in Ohio right now). What didn't make it into the video was just more footage of people talking generically or about taxes/spending, drilling, and abortion, and we constructed blocks in the piece to represent those issues. Of course the piece was edited to be entertaining (this is YouTube, after all, where the currency is cat videos) but we don't believe we misrepresented the attitudes of the people at that signing in any way.


Ah, so you cherry-picked before you started filming, yes, that makes it so much better.

They may have been cherry-picking, but I think that the harvest of cherries was particularly bountiful in that place and time.

Agreed, but then again it was a Borders at a strip mall at 4:00 in the afternoon. What sort of demographics are you expecting to draw?
posted by Pollomacho at 5:59 AM on November 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


It's about the nature of culture and the unexamined life. People create a world view which feels comfortable and safe and it seems to make sense to them, like a dream does before you wake up. It's a lot easier to see on others.

"The unexamined life is not worth living." - Socrates

"Don't look a gift horse in the mouth." - American Proverb
posted by explosion at 6:00 AM on November 25, 2009


it was a Borders at a strip mall

There are Borders *not* at strip malls?
posted by mediareport at 6:00 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Could you do it with Obama supporters? Maybe. I remember one failed attempt, though.
posted by Astro Zombie at 6:01 AM on November 25, 2009 [20 favorites]


I was going to quote some of this stuff but these people are just absolutely too fucking stupid. Remember when that right-wing douchebag tried to railroad that young Obama supporter into looking stupid on camera, and he had intelligent, thoughtful answers?

Note that the right-wing douchebag interviewer continually interrupted him, changed the subject, and was unbelievably rude - trying to give a stupid motherfucking checks and balances lesson to a guy who is clearly about ten or, say, a millon times smarter than he is.

Now contrast that to the video linked in the FPP, where the interviewer is polite, waits for the interviewees to finish speaking, and they still can't say anything except freedom and cutting spending ("all of it!") and changing taxes to be more "endraprenu, entraprenerral, en, entraprenural."

Goddamn what a bunch of fucking idiots. Check out the dude in the camouflage. He is wearing all camouflage. At a bookstore. And you know that motherfucker has never needed camouflage in his life. "Ain't no way this chunk-style can catch me; I'll just sit on his shoulder and pick the lice out of his hair." Birds and deer and shit all up on him like Snow White.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 6:01 AM on November 25, 2009 [34 favorites]


I keep trying to imagine what kind of response an intelligent Palinitista might give.

I got nothin.
posted by srboisvert at 6:02 AM on November 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


There are Borders *not* at strip malls?

Sometimes they are in the inside type malls. You know, the high class malls.
posted by Pollomacho at 6:03 AM on November 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


it was a Borders at a strip mall at 4:00 in the afternoon. What sort of demographics are you expecting to draw?

I'm not sure I understand the point here. Does going to a Borders in the afternoon label one an idiot? Is Borders like Wal-Mart?
posted by JanetLand at 6:06 AM on November 25, 2009


The more I watch tea party people, the more I am convinced 95% of the political and personal objections people have to Obama are just a sheen of varnish on top of bubbling racism. I can't put my finger on it exactly, but I just feel like these people all want to scream "HE'S A NIGGER! AND I HATE NIGGERS!" and know they can't or shouldn't so they create these fantastical stories about what he is or isn't, or what he's doing or isn't doing. And of course the figureheads (Beck, Palin, etc) just fill that space.
posted by jckll at 6:10 AM on November 25, 2009 [11 favorites]


JanetLand, I think the point is that there seems to be a correlation between intelligence and being at work during the day.
posted by dearsina at 6:12 AM on November 25, 2009


First of all, what does the phrase "the same thing" mean if not some kind of equivalence?

The existence of clueless people in two different populations does not mean the two populations are equivalent with respect to said clueless people. I could go to Alabama, and find rich people. I might use this to make some statement about how rich people are in Alabama, and that they are, perhaps, more rich than in other states, because the ones I picked are fantastically rich. You might then say, "Yes, but there are also rich people in California. What's your point?" Are you drawing a false equivalence? No, of course not. You are not making any statements about the equivalence of the two populations. The fact that there are rich people in both populations is not an "equivalence," unless you have a VERY broad definition of equivalence.

Second of all, my main objection wasn't so much the false equivalence as the hypothetical nature of the Obama supporter clips in question. Go get your clips (adhering to the random selection and almost-full presentation this clips purports) and THEN we can argue about how equivalent they are.

No one claimed any kind of equivalence. All I said was that I suspect there were clueless people in Obama's camp. Thus, you could have done the same thing, that is, find the clueless people, at Obama rallies. It would be extraordinary if that WEREN'T true, so, the burden of proof seems to be on anyone claiming it isn't, lack of clips notwithstanding.

And if you think going to a Palin booksigning is a random sample of Palin supporters, especially since the Palin people EXPLICITLY CHOSE certain locations over others (there was some news about this recently), you don't what a random sample is. A random sample from a biased sample is still biased.
posted by Philosopher Dirtbike at 6:15 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


I think the point is that there seems to be a correlation between intelligence and being at work during the day.

That, or a correlation between intelligence and having a boss that will let you off work to go see Sarah Palin. Or that only dumb people go to strip malls. Or that Pollomacho isn't intelligent. Take your pick.
posted by mediareport at 6:17 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


I'm not sure I understand the point here. Does going to a Borders in the afternoon label one an idiot?

Of course not, but you might be expected to encounter more retirees and housewives at that time.
posted by applemeat at 6:18 AM on November 25, 2009


it was a Borders at a strip mall at 4:00 in the afternoon. What sort of demographics are you expecting to draw?

I'm not sure I understand the point here. Does going to a Borders in the afternoon label one an idiot? Is Borders like Wal-Mart?


I was wondering this myself. And here I was thinking "I've got these Borders coupons and a big sale coming up. Maybe I should stop by Borders for Black Friday deals," but then I'd be awful and Wal-Marty.
posted by grubi at 6:20 AM on November 25, 2009


Does going to a Borders in the afternoon label one an idiot? Is Borders like Wal-Mart?

Well, it's 4:00 and you are standing in line in the rain in a parking lot of a crappy chain bookstore to get a book signed by a woman who's top 5 greatest accomplishments are in this order:

1. Winning as Governor of Alaska.
2. Accepting the nomination for Vice-President (and subsequently sinking that campaign)
3. Winning as Mayor of Wasilla, AK
4. Mothering
5. Winning the Ms. Wasilla contest

Now, none of that automatically makes you a moron. I'm sure Susanne Sommers' new book drew a crowd too, I'm just saying if this is how you choose to spend your time at 4:00 on a weekday as opposed to something like working or going to school, well, that probably places you in a special, elite class of folks.
posted by Pollomacho at 6:20 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


I think the point is that there seems to be a correlation between intelligence and being at work during the day.

What an utterly asshat thing to say. My mother worked the night shift at a hospital many years ago. This afforded her time to run errands during the day. Are you saying she's stupid?
posted by grubi at 6:22 AM on November 25, 2009


This is how you compare the supporters of politicians.
posted by Philosopher Dirtbike at 6:23 AM on November 25, 2009


What an utterly asshat thing to say. My mother worked the night shift at a hospital many years ago. This afforded her time to run errands during the day. Are you saying she's stupid?

I think you need to look up the definition of correlation.
posted by Philosopher Dirtbike at 6:24 AM on November 25, 2009


Ok, so I don't like this being posted, but I'll go with Secret Life of Gravy.

Previous populists, I'll start:

William Jennings Bryan - Had is own book, flamed out during the Scopes trial but made a good showing amongst the farmers and poor during hard times. He provoked the first "What's the Matter With Kansas".
posted by lysdexic at 6:24 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


There's a stand-alone Borders in the North and Clybourne corridor in Chicago, near such trashy abandoned stripmall shells as CB2, Sur La Table, and the incoming Apple Store.
posted by jock@law at 6:27 AM on November 25, 2009


Politics these days (and perhaps it was always thus, and I just wasn't paying attention) reminds me more and more of high school football supporters. There may be any of hundreds of reasons why you support team x: your kid's on the team, your kid's boyfriend is on the team, you used to go to school there, you still go to school there, what have you.

The point is not which team you support, or why. The point is the other team sucks.
posted by Pragmatica at 6:28 AM on November 25, 2009 [5 favorites]


Palin running for 2012 is going to get Obama reelected by a second landslide.
posted by mistersquid at 6:32 AM on November 25, 2009


My mom is a huge Palin supporter, also a teabagger (I know, my mom, awesome right?) who went to 9/12 on the Mall and participates in a local 9/12er group that has regular meetings in the Philly suburb she lives in. I looked up the group's website after she told me its name (she mentions it as often as possible because she is basically on a neverending quest to provoke me into political argument) and it was interesting to notice that these groups are motivating to address the information deficit in their supporter base. They know it's a problem. So they're host "classes" and "seminars" where they try to get everyone on the page with talking points under the guise of adult education. I think my mom just went to the cap and trade seminar and is about to take communism class. No shit.
posted by The Straightener at 6:32 AM on November 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


I think you need to look up the definition of correlation.

With respect, you need to look up the definition of false equivalence.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:32 AM on November 25, 2009


I think you need to look up the definition of correlation

What about correlation's dictionary definition changes the implied statement from being "If you aren't working during the day, you might be less intelligent"? Intelligence has nothing to do with jobs. There are morons who work during the day and geniuses who don't work at all.

The implication appears to be "if you are a housewife or have a flexible-hour minimum wage job then you have the free time to express your idiocy, as you are unable to work a REAL job."

Don't fucking condescend and tell me the problem is I just don't understand. It was insult, and I took it that way.
posted by grubi at 6:34 AM on November 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


I'm just saying if this is how you choose to spend your time at 4:00 on a weekday as opposed to something like working or going to school, well, that probably places you in a special, elite class of folks.

Is there a stronger way of responding to this beyond "Fuck you"?


What? My mother is a retired college professor. She's got plenty of free time at 4:00 in the afternoon. As she is not a moron she doesn't spend that time in line in the rain at a strip mall waiting for a moron to sign a book.
posted by Pollomacho at 6:38 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Ah, so you cherry-picked before you started filming, yes, that makes it so much better.

Are you seriously arguing that, if you wanted to find out what Palin supporters think about Sarah Palin, you shouldn't go to an event where Palin fans will congregate? Without a doubt, your comment has to be the weakest accusation of cherry-picking I've read in ages. If this is cherry-picking, asking a human being about their opinions on breathing would be cherry-picking, ffs.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:39 AM on November 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


Correction to my comment, Bryan didn't "flame out" at the Scopes trial, but it sure looked like an Internet Brawl©:
An area of questioning involved the book of Genesis and if Eve was actually created from Adam's rib, where Cain got his wife, and how many people lived in Ancient Egypt. Darrow used these examples to show that the stories of the Bible could not be scientific and should not be used in teaching science with Darrow telling Bryan, "You insult every man of science and learning in the world because he does not believe in your fool religion."[23] Bryan's declaration in response was "The reason I am answering is not for the benefit of the superior court. It is to keep these gentlemen from saying I was afraid to meet them and let them question me, and I want the Christian world to know that any atheist, agnostic, unbeliever, can question me anytime as to my belief in God, and I will answer him."[24]

Stewart objected, demanding to know the legal purpose of Darrow's questioning. Bryan, gauging the effect the session was having, snapped that its purpose was "to cast ridicule on everybody who believes in the Bible." Darrow, with equal vehemence, retorted, "We have the purpose of preventing bigots and ignoramuses from controlling the education of the United States."
posted by lysdexic at 6:40 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


gman: "I want to see eight minutes straight with the guy in the Steelers jacket."

Drive 90 miles southeast on the QEW. I'll introduce you to a dozen guys like that and you can talk to them all night. There will be wings.
my life sucks.
posted by kuujjuarapik at 6:40 AM on November 25, 2009 [9 favorites]


Secret Life of Gravy: "how many MeFites were sure that martial law would be declared and there would be no election in 2008? I didn't actually believe it would happen but I was afraid *something* would happen."

Whenever I start feeling chagrined about my own Bush paranoia, I remind myself that after all he did eliminate habeas corpus and mainstream torture. That is a matter of historical record. So even if he didn't go all the way, he certainly made threatening lunges in that direction.

As for equivalencies between Palin supporters and Obama supporters, that's silly. Palin supporters don't have blood on their hands. (Yet.)

Obama supporters do.
posted by Joe Beese at 6:40 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


I suspect you could have done the same thing during Obama's campaign for President. Replace "common sense" with "hope" and "change"...

Actually, I'm not so sure. I asked a lot of people why they supported Obama during the primary season and while some of them were clearly wrapped up in the excitement, I most often heard some combination of:

Universal Healthcare
Iraq
Intelligence
Civil Liberties/Guantanamo
Gay Marriage
First Black President
posted by phrontist at 6:41 AM on November 25, 2009


Jesus Fuck, what is wrong with this thread? Do we really have such an awful reaction to all things Palin that we have to turn around and start saying that going to strip mall bookstores makes you an idiot, that a bunch of people we're already calling idiots are also ugly, and etc etc I wonder if they can read what a bunch of thickies people on the right are dumber than people on the left Wal Mart shoppers are dumb

Can we start over? Because this is the kind of thread that makes us look exactly as hateful and stupid as anything on Free Republic.
posted by shakespeherian at 6:41 AM on November 25, 2009 [7 favorites]



Palin running for 2012 is going to get Obama reelected by a second landslide.


It really depends on the next three years.

My fear is that democrats will vote in the primaries for Palin because they see her as the weakest candidate. However, she still might be able to defeat Obama if he doesn't accomplish what the majority of voters want, or if the economy gets worse.
posted by drezdn at 6:42 AM on November 25, 2009


Hey guys, grab your shotguns! We got a barrel over here and I think it's full of fish!
posted by The Bellman at 6:44 AM on November 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


I could go to Alabama, and find rich people. I might use this to make some statement about how rich people are in Alabama, and that they are, perhaps, more rich than in other states, because the ones I picked are fantastically rich. You might then say, "Yes, but there are also rich people in California. What's your point?"

The only conclusion I'm drawing from this example is that the person bringing up California is an idiot. And if I'm mapping that to the Palin/Obama example correctly....that's you?

All I said was that I suspect there were clueless people in Obama's camp.

And all I'm saying is that you anecdotal data, however bad it is, is still better than handwaving suppositions about what some hypothetical anecdotal might show.
posted by DU at 6:45 AM on November 25, 2009


O-H! :( <>

I remember one failed attempt, though.

That kid for President in 2028!

posted by Kwine at 6:48 AM on November 25, 2009


html borkathon!
posted by Kwine at 6:48 AM on November 25, 2009


My fear is that democrats will vote in the primaries for Palin because they see her as the weakest candidate.

You mean that liberals will register to vote as Republicans en masse in order to rig the election in Obama's favor?

I want Sarah Palin nothing near the White House, but that doesn't mean I'm going to change my voter registration.
posted by oinopaponton at 6:49 AM on November 25, 2009


Astro Zombie: "Could you do it with Obama supporters? Maybe. I remember one failed attempt , though."

Holy Crap! I'm totally forming the Derrick for Congress campaign committee.
posted by Reverend John at 6:50 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Speaking as a Canadian, what I find sad lately is a common "were a joke in the eyes of the world" stance among Republicans. They seem to truly think of America as Walmart, with the rest of the world as corner stores.
posted by davebush at 6:51 AM on November 25, 2009


With respect, you need to look up the definition of false equivalence.
How can I have been claiming a FALSE equivalence, if I wasn't claiming an equivalence? The point of my first post was that the video is not useful beyond LOLPALINSUPPORTERS. I was then accused of claiming an equivalence between Palin and Obama supporters, which I did not do - I only implied that there are subsets of both camps which share similar properties, which is not an equivalence (unless you assume that I was inferring something about the populations at large by this). I THEN posted a link to a USEFUL comparison of Kerry and Bush supporters, which clearly shows that they are not equivalent.

I mean, seriously. I know it can be hard to make yourself understood on the internet sometimes, but you seem to be willfully misunderstanding me.

Don't fucking condescend and tell me the problem is I just don't understand.
Feel free to take what they said as an insult - they may have meant it that way, I don't know. But a claim about correlation in a population is not a claim about YOUR MOTHER. Frankly, I don't know of any evidence to back up their claim about such a correlation. But that doesn't change the fact that a claim of a correlation is not a claim any particular about individuals.
posted by Philosopher Dirtbike at 6:52 AM on November 25, 2009


They may be morons non-adept interviewees but they're in the can for the same side as me so I'm cool with them.

Not that I'm equating Palin and Obama, or even their supporters.

Why not? They're both total cults of personality. The sooner the average person develops an equal-opportunity hatred towards both these strains of idiocy the better. There are similar videos showing the idiocy of Obama voters.

I think a lot of Palin supporters are groping towards the idea that a lot of leftists are in favour of measures such as anti-hate-speech legislation etc that are against basic post-Enlightenment Western values, but can't quite put their finger on it, and don't express it very well. You can see this in comments about Palin representing "freedom of speech" and so on. So I tend to cut them a bit of slack even though they can't quite articulate their positions clearly.
posted by L.P. Hatecraft at 6:53 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Words I think people should look up: diorama, arcanum, gourmand, putative, lumen, coryphaeus ...
posted by chunking express at 6:55 AM on November 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


Are you seriously arguing that, if you wanted to find out what Palin supporters think about Sarah Palin, you shouldn't go to an event where Palin fans will congregate?

No, I'm not arguing that at all or anything like it.

They said themselves that they selected people at random before they asked the questions. Perhaps they tried to select a true cross section. Perhaps they did not. That is all. Is this even an argument? I didn't realize I was actually arguing that there was certainly cherry-picking.

Seems like everything I've said in this thread has been hostilely misconstrued. Let me make just one more attempt to clear the air before I leave.

I do not think that people who are not working at 4:00 are morons.

I am not sure there has been cherry-picking, but I take politically charged videos from YouTube with a grain of scepticism regardless how much I agree with their leanings.
posted by Pollomacho at 6:59 AM on November 25, 2009


Words I think people should look up: diorama...

This video does remind me of that scene in Stand By Me.
posted by gman at 7:02 AM on November 25, 2009


Sorry, make that "we're a joke in the eyes of the world"
posted by davebush at 7:04 AM on November 25, 2009


The only conclusion I'm drawing from this example is that the person bringing up California is an idiot. And if I'm mapping that to the Palin/Obama example correctly....that's you?

The person who used the biased sample to make claims (or, implications, say) about the average income in Alabama being higher than the others (perhaps I wasn't clear about that...) based on some rich people they found is clearly off base. If you point out that in California, they have people of the same income is a way of showing that the original inference was based on flimsy information. To make it map better, let's say there are only two states. Clearly, the fact that there are people of the same high income in California means that you can't use their existence in Alabama to infer that Alabama has a higher income than California. But noting the existence of high-income people in both populations is not a statement about equivalence.

The bottom line is, if you want to know something about how much Palin supporters, ask a random sample of them in a poll, like was done in the poll I linked above. The video is funny, but next to useless in making inferences about what Palin supporters, on average, know. So, what's the video good for? Only a laugh. At some Palin supporters.
posted by Philosopher Dirtbike at 7:06 AM on November 25, 2009


OHIO! Aarrghghll...ohiooo....arrgghh *gnash gnash gnash* ohio...rraaarghhh....
posted by Baby_Balrog at 7:11 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


With respect, you need to look up the definition of false equivalence.
How can I have been claiming a FALSE equivalence, if I wasn't claiming an equivalence?


Me: I saw this big gray animal when I was in Africa. I'm not saying it was an elephant, but it had a long trunk and these tusk-like protrusions.
Friend: I think you need to look up the definition of elephant.
Me: I already specifically said it wasn't an elephant!
posted by DU at 7:11 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Previous Populists, continued...

Eugene V. Debs, known for running for president from prison, and getting measurable, if insignificant, votes.
posted by lysdexic at 7:12 AM on November 25, 2009


Jesus Fuck, what is wrong with this thread? Do we really have such an awful reaction to all things Palin that we have to turn around and start saying that going to strip mall bookstores makes you an idiot, that a bunch of people we're already calling idiots are also ugly, and etc etc I wonder if they can read what a bunch of thickies people on the right are dumber than people on the left Wal Mart shoppers are dumb

Can we start over? Because this is the kind of thread that makes us look exactly as hateful and stupid as anything on Free Republic.
posted by shakespeherian at 6:41 AM on November 25


I'm not real concerned about the feelings of a bunch of ignorant besweatshirted Morlocks. Based on their responses to very simple questions, it's doubtful that they could possibly have human emotions other than fear, greed, and self-preservation. We need further study of these strange creatures. Do they bury their dead? Create art? I have even heard stories that their "football" teams are loosely associated with some sort of educational system, although this is of course pure conjecture at this time.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 7:13 AM on November 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


MetaFilter: the feelings of a bunch of ignorant besweatshirted Morlocks
posted by DU at 7:15 AM on November 25, 2009


Set sneer lasers to kill
posted by atrazine at 7:17 AM on November 25, 2009


I am asking myself why haven't I been using the word Morlock until now.
posted by The Straightener at 7:20 AM on November 25, 2009


One I never heard of, but who intrigues me, Mary Lease.

Who can forget Huey Long? "Every Man a King!"
posted by lysdexic at 7:21 AM on November 25, 2009


Why not [say that Palin and Obama supporters are equivalent]? They're both total cults of personality. The sooner the average person develops an equal-opportunity hatred towards both these strains of idiocy the better. There are similar videos showing the idiocy of Obama voters.

If you read the poll I linked above, you'll see that Kerry supporters were more knowledgeable about candidates' views than Bush supporters. To the extent that Bush/Kerry and Palin/Obama map supporters overlap, we'd expect similar results from a good poll of Palin and Obama supporters. They aren't equivalent. As I've tried to explain to others in this thread, but they appear to misunderstand me, the existence of clueless people in the two groups of supporters does not make them equivalent. Your video does nothing to change that fact.

I dislike cults of personality as much as the next guy, but until people become robots, you aren't going to get rid of peoples' tendency to be drawn toward them. Until we all get our new robotic brains, I will vote for the candidate that agrees with me on policy the most, and avoid supporting candidates. I'll argue all day about policy and give money to policy advocacy organizations, but I try not to get involved in supporting candidates.
posted by Philosopher Dirtbike at 7:22 AM on November 25, 2009


Why not? They're both total cults of personality.

Wow, a discredited talking point from two years ago. I love nostalgia hour. Now do the one about Obama starting his campaign in the home of a domestic terrorist.
posted by Astro Zombie at 7:22 AM on November 25, 2009 [8 favorites]


As for equivalencies between Palin supporters and Obama supporters, that's silly. Palin supporters don't have blood on their hands. (Yet.)

Obama supporters do.
posted by Joe Beese


The BLOOD! It won't wash off! I voted and now I am in completely indirect abd abstract way a murderer (if you define murder as continuing a war you didn't start for a plethora of reasons!) THE BLOOD!!!!! IT IS ON ME AND IT WASHES OVER ME AND EVERYONE KNOWS! EVERYONE CAN SEE!

THE BLOOD!
posted by haveanicesummer at 7:23 AM on November 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


You know, I work with some of your so-called Morlocks, and I don't get them, but they're not subhuman, they're not completely without compassion, and they're not completely incapable of voting in their own self interest.

You're not helping yourself or anybody else with that bullshit, OC.
posted by lysdexic at 7:23 AM on November 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Another "I weep for the future of this country" moment.
Those are coming with increasing frequency.
posted by Balisong at 7:25 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Sarah Palin will self-destruct long before the 2012 Republican primary.

Her star will have fizzled out long before the primary field has taken shape. Can you imagine her taking the stage in a debate with the likes of a Romney, Giuliani, Jindal or any of the other potential candidates? Plus, the whole leaving office before the end of her term...the leftover baggage from '08...the enemies made... The majority of MeFites may believe all Republicans are vacuous, retarded, Bible-thumping gun owners most likely to appear on peopleofwalmart.com, but they really aren't dumb enough to nominate Palin.
posted by VicNebulous at 7:26 AM on November 25, 2009


I suspect you could have done the same thing during Obama's campaign for President. Replace "common sense" with "hope" and "change"...


As a matter of fact, Sean Hannity did exactly that a couple of weeks after the election last November. It was called "How Obama Got Elected" and he did interviews with Obama's supporters. It's still on YouTube, but I can't link to it because I'm at work and work blocks YouTube. I think it's this link, based on some Googling.

Let's just say we shouldn't be casting stones, here.
posted by magstheaxe at 7:27 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Commentary from the intelligentsia:

"I'm wondering how many of those people will CAN actually read all of her book"

A lot of these people have never bought a book before. Really.

Hurray! Now the thickies have a leader.

...these people are just absolutely too fucking stupid.

...parade of freaks and mutants...



Just as closed-minded and unthinking as anything in the video. Also, what shakespeherian said.
posted by zennie at 7:27 AM on November 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Morlocks are not subhuman. They're the dominant race in the future, directly descended from humans. They live in a technological society, although it's likely that they don't understand how the machines work, and they survive by eating people who are weaker than them.

I'm not saying this is also true of Palin supporters. I'm just saying I haven't had dinner with them.
posted by Astro Zombie at 7:27 AM on November 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


I for one, know that this was cherry-picking and that there were a number of bemonocled Rhodes Scholars just around the corner, talking in depth about how Palin's populist ideology and trickle-down Reaganism are at their core, the solutions to problems we can't even comprehend.
posted by haveanicesummer at 7:28 AM on November 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


A lot of these people have never bought a book before. Really.
posted by twoleftfeet at 5:34 AM on November 25 [+] [!]


A lot of these people have never read a book before. Really.
posted by Mastercheddaar at 7:28 AM on November 25, 2009


Holy Crap! I'm totally forming the Derrick for Congress campaign committee.

While it was nice that he knew something about what he was talking about, he was essentially toeing the "blue dog" corporate democrat angle. Talking about public/private partnerships, etc.
posted by delmoi at 7:29 AM on November 25, 2009


Oh cheap laffs, sometimes you are the bestest.
posted by mazola at 7:31 AM on November 25, 2009


I may not agree with Derrick, but if you want to know the difference between the two parties, consider the post-interview careers of Derrick and Joe the Plumber.
posted by Astro Zombie at 7:32 AM on November 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Here's someone I'd like to know more about: Susan Price Hamill, a lawyer who looked at the Bible and tax law, and nearly got the Alabama constitution changed to reflect progressive values.
posted by lysdexic at 7:32 AM on November 25, 2009


I'm not real concerned about the feelings of a bunch of ignorant besweatshirted Morlocks.

That is, until the ignorant besweatshirted Morlocks elect and anoint their Morlock potentate in 2012 and he or she unravels everything the non-Morlocks have ever believed in.

I love how some are so dead certain that Palin won't be a factor in 2012. Everybody was sure 10 years ago that a certain ignoramus named Bush wouldn't be a factor in 2000, for almost exactly the same reasons, because John McCain, Liz Dole, Orrin Hatch, and Steve Forbes (it is to laugh) were all so much more literate and had so many more of the important GOP muckety-mucks who mattered wrapped up. We all know what happened with that.
posted by blucevalo at 7:33 AM on November 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Fish, meet barrell.
posted by docpops at 7:34 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Just as closed-minded and unthinking as anything in the video.
posted by zennie at 7:27 AM on November 25


I don't think that's true. I observed an event, gathered evidence, and made a reasonable conclusion. When adult human beings cannot articulate – at all – why they like a thing, that is weird and scary.

Imagine that you have a car that you love. And I'm the market for a car, and I ask you what you like about it. And you say "it's good." And I ask, is it the handling? The fuel efficiency? And you reply "it's good." Okay, I reply, can you tell me anything about it? How much did it cost you? Is there anything I should know? And again, you reply, "It's just good. I like it. It's a real good car."

Would this be a conversation you would be proud to have?
posted by Optimus Chyme at 7:35 AM on November 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


I'd switch to independant temporarily to vote for Palin in the primary, though I doubt she'd win it. Her support levels are way too low with independants and Democrats for many Republicans to vote for her, but I could be wrong.

I have heard that she's lobbying to have the foreign morlocks naturalized though, so she may have the votes by 20omgtheworldisending12.

[NOT MORLOCKIST!]
posted by haveanicesummer at 7:37 AM on November 25, 2009


I keep trying to imagine what kind of response an intelligent Palinitista might give.

I got nothin.


srboisvert, listen to arch-douchebag Bill Kristol sometime. The sheer mendacity of that man is a window into the values and intentions of the moneyed beltway conservatives. I wonder if he even knows what his principles really are anymore, other than winning.

-
posted by General Tonic at 7:38 AM on November 25, 2009


Just as closed-minded and unthinking as anything in the video.

I'm open-minded. What, precisely, would you like me to be open-minded about? That the Palin-supporting contingent is not, in generally, woefully undereducated about issues and are supporting her primarily because they feel she represents a paranoid and anti-intellectual worldview that they share? Because I'm open to that. Give me some evidence, and I will consider it with a fair and open mind. At this point, however, I believe the former, because it is consistent with all the evidence I have.
posted by Astro Zombie at 7:39 AM on November 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


I came here to make a joke like, "Do these people know that rogue might be a FRENCH word?"

But then I took a step back and looked at all the incredibly ugly generalizations about people who go to Borders (or even WalMart) or shop at malls on weekday afternoons. Some of the posters here don't come off any better than the Palinistas in the way you automatically label, stereotype and dismiss in three easy steps.
posted by NorthernLite at 7:41 AM on November 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


They seem about as thoughtful as people you find at a white supremacist rally. And there is a lot of overlap with their talking points. This video misrepresents her supporters? I find that really hard to believe.
posted by chunking express at 7:41 AM on November 25, 2009


Some of the posters here don't come off any better than the Palinistas in the way you automatically label, stereotype and dismiss in three easy steps.

Was there more than one commenter who did this? And wasn't that commenter immediately called on it?
posted by Astro Zombie at 7:43 AM on November 25, 2009


"What are some of her policies you like?"
"I don't know what you mean by that, where you're going with that..."

As if it's some sort of a cruel ruse? He's asking you to pick something about her fucking politics that appeals, it's not a trick! She's supposed to be a politician... Jesus. What the fuck, people!?
posted by opsin at 7:44 AM on November 25, 2009


It's funny because they talk just like her.
posted by Burhanistan at 7:45 AM on November 25, 2009


But then I took a step back and looked at all the incredibly ugly generalizations about people who go to Borders (or even WalMart) or shop at malls on weekday afternoons. Some of the posters here don't come off any better than the Palinistas in the way you automatically label, stereotype and dismiss in three easy steps.
posted by NorthernLite


Ugh, just the kind of thing someone posting on Metafilter at 10:41 AM EST on the Wednesday before Thanksgiving would say! Morlock city right here, folks.
posted by haveanicesummer at 7:46 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


There is really a lot of condescension in this thread. Oh, and name calling. And anger. Don't forget the anger!

Happy holidays!
posted by MarshallPoe at 7:47 AM on November 25, 2009


And as for the fears that this guy is the President who would use martial law to stop an election. I mean, sorry... This guy is the one they're worried about pulling shit like that!? Wow...
Just... wow.
posted by opsin at 7:47 AM on November 25, 2009


Sometimes a thread pops up in MeFi-land that enlightens, educates, entertains, and makes me proud to my core to be among such erudite and articulate group of peers.






And sometimes there are threads like this one.
posted by kaseijin at 7:47 AM on November 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


From what I can tell of real, live Palin supporters is that they like her because she stands for

"family values", translating to "no abortion!",

"Free enterprise", translating to "stop taxing me already!"

She's pretty, while still being an older mom, which goes a hell of a long way. A local optometrist is selling and advertising glasses "As worn by Sarah Palin" for $500.

She drives us nuts. That is by far the biggest selling point. "She gets the liberals all mad!"

She doesn't make me mad, I'm mostly indifferent. I'm not certain she won't get the nomination in '12, but I don't think she'll get the election. The money is not behind her. I think that's fueling quite a bit of teab*gger resentment, which will be very damaging to the Republican Party.
posted by lysdexic at 7:47 AM on November 25, 2009


someone trolls stupid comments at a book signing from rightists so someone can post it here and troll stupid comments from leftists

prediction for 2012 - stupidity wins
posted by pyramid termite at 7:48 AM on November 25, 2009


Can we start over? Because this is the kind of thread that makes us look exactly as hateful and stupid as anything on Free Republic.

Well, I think there's a tendency some people have to take the comments they least agree with and act like they represent the whole thread. It seems to happen a lot, like 3 out of 20 people will say X and people are like "Howcome we're saying X!? What's wrong with us!?"

That said, I think there is an undercurrent of hating poor people even on meta filter, particularly when they are poor white people. They are not disliked for being poor per se, but rather for being culturally poor. There was an post about Juggalos a while that really brought out the hate. And then this article featuring photographs of a poor rural/exurban girl and people were hating on her for eating junk food.

There is also a tendency to think that who support republicans are all poor and stupid, when in fact (as you would expect, based on actual policy) poor people are more likely to be Democrats.
posted by delmoi at 7:51 AM on November 25, 2009


And as for the fears that this guy is the President who would use martial law to stop an election. I mean, sorry... This guy is the one they're worried about pulling shit like that!? Wow...
Just... wow.
posted by opsin


He's a constitutional lawyer! He knows how to do it! Plus he's black so everyone will let him because affirmative action illegal alien tax hike socialist New York Times health care bowing Muslim cap and trade free or die!

Tree of liberty man, that's all I'm saying. 109:08.
posted by haveanicesummer at 7:52 AM on November 25, 2009


And I hate to post again, but...

The public spectre?
That wouldn't keep me from not voting for her?

They think they know what they're talking about! Sigh.
posted by opsin at 7:52 AM on November 25, 2009


I'm not sure this discussion is improved by wagging fingers at people who are legitimately outraged that a former vice presidential candidate has brought into sharp relief that an entire segment of American voters prefers ignorance to education, selfishness to civic duty, and intolerance to tolerance. Walking amongst a group of Palin supporters and asking, at random, remedial questions about why they support her is not trolling. There is no reason at all to assume they shouldn't have a cogent answer to that question, and the inarticulate and naked lack of thought that her supporters actually produce is worth discussion, and also worth decrying.
posted by Astro Zombie at 7:53 AM on November 25, 2009 [10 favorites]


blucevalo: "I love how some are so dead certain that Palin won't be a factor in 2012."

Nate Silver: 10 Reasons That Sarah Palin Could Win the Republican Nomination

Paul Krugman: ... the predicted unemployment rate in 2012... is higher than the rate that let Bill Clinton run on “it’s the economy, stupid”.

Ellen Gill: The mandate can be found in Section 5000A. It kicks in a year before the pre-existing exclusion exclusion does.

Dead certain? Not me.
posted by Joe Beese at 7:53 AM on November 25, 2009


: When adult human beings cannot articulate – at all – why they like a thing, that is weird and scary.

Is that so? Because I can think of any number of such things to ask people that would make them stumble. Especially on camera, on the spot.


Imagine that you have a car that you love. And I'm the market for a car, and I ask you what you like about it. And you say "it's good." And I ask, is it the handling? The fuel efficiency? And you reply "it's good." Okay, I reply, can you tell me anything about it? How much did it cost you? Is there anything I should know? And again, you reply, "It's just good. I like it. It's a real good car."

Would this be a conversation you would be proud to have?


Of course not.

However, I believe the operative question is, actually, whether such a conversation would mean that I was of sub-normal intelligence. And according to some of the commentary here, perhaps also sub-human. I would like to believe that the answer to that would be the same.
posted by zennie at 7:53 AM on November 25, 2009


.
posted by ob at 7:54 AM on November 25, 2009


"I really really REALLY am not looking forward to 2012."

Not me. Now that Lou Dobbs is talking about throwing his hat in the ring I am almost wetting myself in anticipation.
posted by mr_crash_davis mark II: Jazz Odyssey at 7:55 AM on November 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


(That was for the thread and indeed all Sarah Palin threads)
posted by ob at 7:55 AM on November 25, 2009


Is that so? Because I can think of any number of such things to ask people that would make them stumble. Especially on camera, on the spot.

And you think asking specifics about why Palin supporters support he is one of those questions? If you ask me why I like Elvis Costello, I'll be able to explain to you exactly why, and the conversation will last at least an hour.
posted by Astro Zombie at 7:56 AM on November 25, 2009


WATCH: Robin Williams Takes On Sarah Palin .
posted by ericb at 7:57 AM on November 25, 2009


I will end with that perennial favorite, Teddy Roosevelt.

He wrote dozens of books, went into wild, uncharted territory just to chart it, and after having been disappointed by his hand-picked successor in the White House, started his own party, and got trounced but good for having betrayed his class.
posted by lysdexic at 7:59 AM on November 25, 2009


« Older AskMetafilter Roundup   |   I think that making people laugh is good enough... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments