Why is it people have a tendency to post BS political questions they know will elicit certain responses?

Question

I notice this from both conservatives and liberals. Is this just to start arguments or do you think most posters are generally legitimate?

Answer 1

Don't worry too much about it, it's the beginning of something good. They're posting to start arguments, that's for certain, and then award "best answer" to whoever agrees with them most vehemently. The good part, is that disagreement is the beginning of debate, and active debate is the lubrication of democracy. Baiting is a silly and immature thing to do, but if it keeps people talking about the issues, then I think it's a necessary evil.

Answer 2

You don't change a lot of minds - at least not immediately. Almost all the posts will be the same.

I think over time you do change some minds though.

I used to be basically a socialist, I believed the whole class-warfare stuff, until I developed an academic interest in economics and finance and read up on the subjects - I soon discovered that not only were the class warfare arguments fallacious, but that they were deliberately deceptive - these folks took numbers that said one thing and rephrased them in carefully crafted sentences that, while interpreted one way would be accurate, were meant to be interpreted in the opposite way.

And example: "the share of the national income received by the bottom 20% fell in the 1980s." Let's leave aside the word "received" which insinuates that there is no relationship between your income and what you do all day.... "The national income" in nominal dollars doubled and in real dollars increased by about 40% over that decade - in absolute terms the real income 'received' by the bottom 20% was higher in 1989 than it had been in 1980. Moreover 85.8% of the households in the "bottom 20%" in 1980 were in higher 'quintiles' by 1989 - more had made it to the top group than were still at the bottom, and 63% of them had made it to the top 3/5ths.

In other words, it's kind of like arguing that if a high school allocates more of an increasing budget to the senior prom, that's "unfair to underclassmen" - it's not, not only because the total budget increased but also because 90% of the underclassmen will one day be seniors.

Of late the m.o. is to refer to everything in the relative - if I make 20% more in real dollars than I did a decade ago and T. Boone Pickens makes 200% more, am I "falling behind?" Is it a race? Do Americans want to be No. 1 on a list? Or do they see better lifestyles and think "I want that." Maybe a bit of both, but I'm sure they don't want to be WORSE off than they used to be but move up the list because other people fell farther!

It's not just the falsehood of the statements but the efforts to deceive - the lies - that really bother me. Bush cherry picking the intelligence that went into his report, Clinton parsing the definition of "sex" - these are nothing compared to what Krugman does.

As a result of doing the research, not only do I know better now, I also endeavor to spread the word.

So I post, and when I post responses, I fill up that "know your source" box with some of the data that I read and that convinced me I'd been lied to.

I do think that anyone with intellectual honesty and rigor takes a look at it and I think that I do change a few minds - and it's the minds of those with intellectual rigor and honesty that I want!

And no matter how readers VOTE, they're better informed - at the very least even if they still vote the way they would, deep inside they know the economy doesn't resemble a Dickens novel. Horatio Alger may be an overstatement but it's a lot closer to the truth than Oliver Twist.

Answer 3

It's called "trolling" or being a troll. Some people simple nothing more useful to say, they resort to childish inflamatory statements.

The practice goes back to the dawn of the internet. Post something inflamatory for the purpose of provoking an argument. The less coherent and the more inflamatory the better. It's done to get attention.

Answer 4

specific. recently i've got have been given rather go that many Qs in straight forward terms seem published on my computing device by making use of way of Yah Boo & Hiss "6 minutes in the past" - in straight forward terms to locate that regardless of the undeniable fact that speedy i attempt to make an A - i'm 60 minutes at the back of many others. attempting to do it extra immediately - 'genuine time' (???) i've got been rather shocked how oftentimes the Q has been immediately "deleted" - whether curiously particularly harmless. Why/sigh - ??? - you will in straight forward terms end the "team" won't be able to verify a good shaggy dog tale - get the element of "entertainment" or their censorship systems are carp. That pronounced - I see you have controlled to get the deleted Q on reveal screen - so in line with danger the screening technique in straight forward terms works as quickly as ???

Answer 5

These are the most entertaining questions. When people use this sight to ask, "How many U.S. senators are there?", which would be considered a legitimate political question, what would you learn from that? The fact that someone is baiting or trolling or whatever else you want to call it, this method stirs debate. I think people use this sight to share opinions, and asking loaded questions is one way to do that.

Answer 6

Childishness and stupidity.

Many posters are just idiots seeking reactions from their stupid and insulting Q's & A's. They have nothing to contribute, have no thoughts worth voicing, do nothing but drag everything down into the gutter where they reside.

Answer 7

they are trolls that need to be fed to survive,if ignored they will find other ways to get attention. they are not a reflection of libs,cons,dems or repubs. what is more surprising those that fall for the bait or believe trolls represet any political group

Answer 8

Juveniles playing games.