How do we get people to agree on a common set of facts?

[Goldwater]

There are no facts.

Nothing is true, everything is permitted. Live by the Creed, Die by the Creed.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Time.

The only way a disagreement over basic facts can be resolved is when the two sets of facts collide with reality and one is proven the stronger.

In this country we had a very divisive EU referendum with the winning Leave campaign pushing a set of alternative facts: "£350m for the NHS if we leave", "German industry will lobby to get us a favourable deal", "the EU is on the verge of collapse anyway", "Europe needs us more than we need them because we buy their products", "the ROTW will be lining up to sign trade deals with us" etc. etc., beating out the facts of the Remain campaign. Anyway, this delusion was rampant among government ministers and a small majority of the public and is only beginning to slowly dissipate now that Brexit negotiations have begun and fantasy is crashing into reality.

So with Trump: if he really did collude with Russia, and if he really is as awful and incompetent as Democrats believe, then the only thing they can do is wait for this to be exposed by the investigation and Trump's agenda. Bush won two elections and his incompetence crashing into reality permanently discredited neoconservatives and "compassionate conservatism". So with Trump.

The question is then what will trigger the "I told you so moment" where enough people believe a narrative to the point that there are consequences?

I think people were just tired of Bush when they finally forced him to share power. Maybe because enough people had died in Loiusiana and Iraq and that those fence splitters who went to Bush in 04 were done "giving hom a chance" with his war. The last straw was clearly when it was found out that enough people couldn't pay their bills so that they had to fire millions of people. Then, instead of the 45% who never believed him and the 3% that learned quickly knowing Bush sucked, those 5% who were just giving him a chance also acknowledged that Bush wasn't the right person. The other 46-47% lives were dependent upon their set of facts that the Republican Party's narrative was the only acceptable one. However, they weren't enough to prevent a reasonable response to the facts.
 

Now, it seemed those people who gave Bush a chance wanted to give "someone new" a chance. What will it take for enough people to be convinced of Trump's malfeasance and that there is an alternative

I think there's enough evidence for Trump's malfeasance or incompetence on the table already. To get an alternative to Trump will take two things.First, a good alternative. Second, more than Russiagate.

Yes, Trump and his campaign's actions re: Russia look suspicious as all get out, if not worse. They may even result in eventual impeachment. But there needs to be an element of real politics, if you will. Russia should not be forgotten, but neither should opposition to Trump forget that there is more (far more) than Russia. The whole gamut of reprehensibility and deplorability by Trump and the GOP needs to be opposed loud and long. And a credible, coherent set of responses needs to be created to the GOP's agenda of oppression and hatred. And we need candidates who can campaign and lead, skills that are even more important than navigating DC. (Although we can see how having an incompetent apprentice who knows nothing of politics is serving the GOP in DC, so don't count that out either.)

Or we could let the usual crew of hacks take their corporate handouts and lead the left (and the party) to another decade of disaster.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

There are no facts.

Nothing is true, everything is permitted. Live by the Creed, Die by the Creed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[pbrower2a]

Most likely some calamity that compels people to accept the choice between a reality that may be uncomfortable and inconvenient and a reality too horrific to contemplate.

Think of World War II.

[Reaganfan]

[Person Man]

It is a fact that anyone who jumps off a 50-story building in normal street clothes will die. If anyone disagrees, please prove us wrong by completing this feat without dying.

Most likely some calamity that compels people to accept the choice between a reality that may be uncomfortable and inconvenient and a reality too horrific to contemplate.

Think of World War II.

That's probably how facts become universal. A weird form of Cultural Darwinism? Eventually thise who make poor choices because they believe in lies will eventually make a choice that removes them from contention. It could happen on a large scale and we see this with hypernormalization in the post-1975 USSR and other societies in that position.

 

[afleitch]

To burst say the alt-right bubble then yes you'd need a war that's lost, an economy bust or a president in jail. In other words you need some sort of personal suffering. Some ideological falsehoods need to lose on the 'battlefield'.

[Person Man]

To burst say the alt-right bubble then yes you'd need a war that's lost, an economy bust or a president in jail. In other words you need some sort of personal suffering. Some ideological falsehoods need to lose on the 'battlefield'.

Natural Consequences. And its not enough to have lost 5000 troops somewhere due to mission creep in a war where the initial mission was accomplished and to have 10% UE because people aren't paying their mortgages. That was enough to break the bubble for like a year?

It took losing Iran, and Stragflation with 11%UE to get Reagan.

[Devout Centrist]

Bloodshed?

[EnglishPete]

To burst say the alt-right bubble then yes you'd need a war that's lost, an economy bust or a president in jail. In other words you need some sort of personal suffering.

That never seems to stop Marxists and other leftists pushing their failed ideas.

[All Along The Watchtower]

To burst say the alt-right bubble then yes you'd need a war that's lost, an economy bust or a president in jail. In other words you need some sort of personal suffering. Some ideological falsehoods need to lose on the 'battlefield'.

There was widespread personal suffering within the Weimar Republic, particularly in its last few years.


No guarantees there I'm afraid.

[pbrower2a]

It is a fact that anyone who jumps off a 50-story building in normal street clothes will die. If anyone disagrees, please prove us wrong by completing this feat without dying.

Most likely some calamity that compels people to accept the choice between a reality that may be uncomfortable and inconvenient and a reality too horrific to contemplate.

Think of World War II.

That's probably how facts become universal. A weird form of Cultural Darwinism? Eventually those who make poor choices because they believe in lies will eventually make a choice that removes them from contention. It could happen on a large scale and we see this with hypernormalization in the post-1975 USSR and other societies in that position.

The password is "failure".

The economic system fails because it ignores the complexity of human nature. A war fails because the opposing side is not doomed by its 'cultural' or 'racial' inadequacy. Just think of how distressing it must have been for a German aviator to realize that he had been shot down from a  fighter aircraft with a "N----r" pilot. (The insulting word is the same in German as in English, except that German nouns are capitalized). The bodies of druggies fail because of the side effects of drugs.

When all else fails, truth remains.

  

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

As Pete himself might agree, previous consensus was facilitated by a monolithic media structure. The obvious pitfalls of such a structure, or of state media, and so on, is that an institution monopolizing the truth may do with it what it sees fit. The left has a proud history of pillorying institutional and orthodox pillars of "truth" and "common sense". It is only natural that the triumph over orthodoxy would backfire on them (in some way, the right's purported belief in "individual liberty" has done the same to them. Having a non-state institution lead the march to restore sanity (I know I'm pirating Jon Stewart here) only creates another voice in an allegedly pluralistic system. Having state regulations on the spreading of fictions be implemented in a way so as to break down the average American's "bubble" runs the risk it always has--of becoming oppressive, manipulative, or politicized.

[Xing]

Get people to acknowledge that everyone is wrong sometimes. Oh wait, that's impossible for most people.

[Person Man]

It is a fact that anyone who jumps off a 50-story building in normal street clothes will die. If anyone disagrees, please prove us wrong by completing this feat without dying.

Most likely some calamity that compels people to accept the choice between a reality that may be uncomfortable and inconvenient and a reality too horrific to contemplate.

Think of World War II.

That's probably how facts become universal. A weird form of Cultural Darwinism? Eventually those who make poor choices because they believe in lies will eventually make a choice that removes them from contention. It could happen on a large scale and we see this with hypernormalization in the post-1975 USSR and other societies in that position.

The password is "failure".

The economic system fails because it ignores the complexity of human nature. A war fails because the opposing side is not doomed by its 'cultural' or 'racial' inadequacy. Just think of how distressing it must have been for a German aviator to realize that he had been shot down from a  fighter aircraft with a "N----r" pilot. (The insulting word is the same in German as in English, except that German nouns are capitalized). The bodies of druggies fail because of the side effects of drugs.

When all else fails, truth remains.

  

John 8:32

[Hammy]

Lets all be honest with ourselves--when have people agreed on any common set of facts in the first place?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

There are no facts.

2+2=4