|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 1:57 pm
Satire?!
Propaganda is a horrible idea. Troggy and Omni have swayed me. Satire for the win! Plus, I was already good at that to begin with. I only failed myself.
So I'll make a list of great satire, parodies, and jokes that I find on the internet. You can add your own commentary on certain situations, like Hilary's Kindergate or Hillary crying for votes.
I'll make the list later [/procrastinate]
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 2:48 am
Quote: So who agrees? Hillary uses underhanded tactics to attack Obama. I believe we can propagate facts against Hillary's or Edward's Campaign. I don't think it's such a good idea. Understandably, we don't represent the Obama Campain, but we've seen full well how well the "They are not representative of me" argument works, true or not, and despite smearings success in the past, it's apparent that it's not working this go around. Both candidates that have the most smear adds have been on a downward spiral (Hillary and Romney) due to those adds. Understandably, our little contributions will never be recognized by any more then maybe 100 youtubers and would never have any real impression anyway, but I still don't think it would be a good idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:30 am
Yeah I think cheap shots are decidedly against the spirit of Obama's campaigning style, and they would do us a disservice. He's actually done rather well to keep the message to a positive tone, and we should certainly back him up on it, since it's very rare these days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:09 am
I'm with the above two posters. Underhanded attacks would be a big mistake, but youtubes, or whatever, comparing Hillary to Obama not so much. wink
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:48 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 12:43 pm
i really have no problem whatsoever with satirical attacks on either two, escpecially if it's for the lulz.
however mean-spirited/vicious stuff is generally a no no with obama.
that said, i will still maintain my current level of belligerence to clinton and edwards supporters, and i will continue to troll/argue with the people at various liberal blogs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 1:55 pm
Don't be gay, Anarcho. Obama would be ashamed. And can you just imagine it? Obama, sternly looking down his nose at you, scolding you in his best speech voice for doing precisely what he is fighting against.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:00 pm
thrasymacus i really have no problem whatsoever with satirical attacks on either two, escpecially if it's for the lulz. however mean-spirited/vicious stuff is generally a no no with obama. that said, i will still maintain my current level of belligerence to clinton and edwards supporters, and i will continue to troll/argue with the people at various liberal blogs Satirical Attacks? Then lets do that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 3:03 pm
The worst part about viral marking for Paul are the idiots rooting for him on youtube. Let's not do sleazy attack ads. Satire is fun to do as are truthful and accurate reasons why people should not vote for Clinton.
Nothing personal, nothing below the belt. You attack her record, her stances and her words. Say nothing about her personal life. NOTHING.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
