Kendrick Lamar teaches us that, in public debate, refuting your opponent's arguments point by point is less effective than identifying your opponent's single greatest weakness and maintaining message discipline.
I don’t think it will have the same effect as “certified pedophile”. 1 in 9 Americans had been to prison, lots of people know someone who is a felon they can sympathize with. There are far less diddlers and people don’t like them. The lesson here would be to repeat the SA civil conviction IMO.
You’re both massively overstating the percentage of Americans have been to prison (more like 1 in 20) and assuming that most people have been to prison will identify with someone else as convicted of a crime (instead of thinking their circumstances are unique, unlike “real” criminals).
I would have to see a study with the numbers, I know 15 years ago it was 1 in 10 and they haven’t slowed down on locking people up.
Felons can’t vote, I’m talking about the people whose parents or aunts and uncles went to prison, calling someone a felon(derogatory) is more likely to alienate them.
And given that the DNC is willing to abandon any group in pursuit of the illusive uneducated white vote this seems counterproductive to their end goal. They would have more appeal using the felon line in front of a bunch of pious Arab nerds but burned that bridge to appeal to the Billy Bobs.
The least they could do is campaign to who they think are the most important demographic worthy of alienating all others the right way, and if you want that meth country vote SA is more damning than generic “felon”, which could be read as a Merle Haggard type. There’s a reason SVU is top Law & Order
It's even less than 1 in 20 according to bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/... which says it's "1 in 20 will go to prison at some point in their lives" not "have gone already."
This is legitimately true. Watch a terf fall apart when you ignore every attempt they make at invalidating gender, and just focusing in on protecting women. "Oh, you're worried about women being harmed in prisons, so then, you support prison abolition, right?"
Similarly, a dude comedian who says he was "cancelled for his opinions." Just hammer them with, "What were those opinions again? Say them out loud, right now."
This is a tactic I use as well, along with, “show me your abolition work”
Similarly, name one trans woman who has made a meaningful impact in her sport
Lamar gave Drake ample warning of what he was going to get if he went after his family, and Drake, king of the glass house, bumbled into it face first.
Yes, and play the message SIX TIMES at your live and streamed concert from one of the few remaining affluent Black zip codes in 🇺🇸 on JUNETEENTH. Can’t unhear it.
Persuasive speech is this way in general. You could do a laundry list of reasons, but more effectively you should pick the one or two things that matter most to your core audience and develop that.
It's also a more honest approach.
A fascist who is good at debate club is still a fascist. A debate where you just shrug at whatever they say, point to the history of fascism, and go "Fuck this dude" over and over again is a better one than engaging with the Nazi like they are some kind of scholar.
Spending just 30 minutes in any politics chatroom shows you the same thing. Biden's debate prep team is clearly out of touch. With limited time, forget "good writing rules": ignore what you can't refute, toss in red herrings and straw men, then add some ad hominem attacks.
Not once did he find it necessary to natter on like a weenie about "kitchen table issues," either. He's probably doing well enough that he wouldn't be interested in working as a consultant, though. 😕
