US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the US has seen evidence of Chinese attempts to “influence and arguably interfere” with the upcoming US elections, despite an earlier commitment from leader Xi Jinping not to do so.
I think the weird arguments are coming from almost all fake accounts. A couple of them behave like people who genuinely believe the things they’re saying, but actually the vast majority of them do not. In my opinion.
I’ll never claim to be 100% accurate at telling who is and isn’t a faker (and I’m not sure the effort is even a worthwhile thing to spend much energy on), but just consider from this thread the difference of people who are saying things like:
It’s cute when the US accuses countries of interfering with elections like they’re protecting their world record or something
the hypocrisy is astounding. The USA has been interfering in elections for the year dot.
And people who are saying things like:
After this dude has been caught in like half a dozen lies on behalf of Israel in the last few months, who believes anything he has to say about anything?
They are priming the response when Biden loses, so they can blame someone else for their ineptitude and failure to govern.
To me, it sounds like one grouping read the article / headline, had thoughts occur to them based on the article they read, and typed out those thoughts. It sounds like the other grouping has a little bulleted list in front of them “things we’d like to bring up about the Biden administration” and made a halfhearted attempt at "smooth"ly interjecting them into this topic.
I’ve seen them slip and interject a talking point that’s a total incongruity for the target audience / forum (as one of them did down below with January 6th being a peaceful protest), and I’ve seen them apparently fail to register that the talking point they’re bringing up relates in some way to the topic of the article – just sort of blandly repeat it with that same “we all agree” fellow kids type of energy instead of grasping the obvious relationship between what they’re saying and what’s in the article or whatever.
I think the weird arguments are coming from almost all fake accounts. A couple of them behave like people who genuinely believe the things they’re saying, but actually the vast majority of them do not. In my opinion.
I’ll never claim to be 100% accurate at telling who is and isn’t a faker (and I’m not sure the effort is even a worthwhile thing to spend much energy on), but just consider from this thread the difference of people who are saying things like:
And people who are saying things like:
To me, it sounds like one grouping read the article / headline, had thoughts occur to them based on the article they read, and typed out those thoughts. It sounds like the other grouping has a little bulleted list in front of them “things we’d like to bring up about the Biden administration” and made a halfhearted attempt at "smooth"ly interjecting them into this topic.
I’ve seen them slip and interject a talking point that’s a total incongruity for the target audience / forum (as one of them did down below with January 6th being a peaceful protest), and I’ve seen them apparently fail to register that the talking point they’re bringing up relates in some way to the topic of the article – just sort of blandly repeat it with that same “we all agree” fellow kids type of energy instead of grasping the obvious relationship between what they’re saying and what’s in the article or whatever.