Honestly, that might be this Wemple guy's intent... Tucker had an ongoing feud with him towards the beginning of his primetime run on FOX. He butted heads with him probably as often as Kurt "Tentacle Enthusiast" Eichenwald, and even sold Wemple themed mugs:
I think the intent is to encourage in-fighting within this community. The ideal situation for the opposition is to divide Trump supporters along certain controversial issues, and since most are against Tucker they want to toss him some support but more importantly they just want to keep the issue alive for its potential to cause division. They don’t really care if we support Tucker or not. They only care that it’s an issue that has potential to cause in-fighting and weaken the community.
Note that Bannon saying not to discuss the Tucker issue is ironically a meta issue that has possibly more potential to cause division than the original issue, since most on here are against Tucker but people seem fairly evenly split between thinking the issue should or shouldn’t be discussed.
This is a good post. It is a very standard tactic to whip up internal disputes within an enemy faction. Just about the oldest trick in the book.
I don't like, at all, what Tucker did but he has also done such sterling service in the past, and literally faced physical danger for it (remember when Antifa rioted outside his house?) that I will give him the benefit of the doubt, for now. How much longer he keeps that is up to him. He needs to stand up to his corrupt sellout bosses at Fox, if he leaves the network to speak freely, I think we should give him a chance.
I think the important thing is not really whether you give Tucker a chance or not, but remembering not to engage in in-fighting (as opposed to respectful debate) with other true Trump supporters over their decision to abandon Tucker or not, whether they agree with Bannon’s statements about signal/noise, etc.
Honestly, that might be this Wemple guy's intent... Tucker had an ongoing feud with him towards the beginning of his primetime run on FOX. He butted heads with him probably as often as Kurt "Tentacle Enthusiast" Eichenwald, and even sold Wemple themed mugs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spZX1KlXhMw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0erOLzryN0
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/02/15/tucker_carlson_roasts_washington_posts_erik_wemple_i_see_you_as_a_political_hack.html
https://tuckercarlsonstore.com/products/tucker-wemple-coffee-mug-1
I think the intent is to encourage in-fighting within this community. The ideal situation for the opposition is to divide Trump supporters along certain controversial issues, and since most are against Tucker they want to toss him some support but more importantly they just want to keep the issue alive for its potential to cause division. They don’t really care if we support Tucker or not. They only care that it’s an issue that has potential to cause in-fighting and weaken the community.
Note that Bannon saying not to discuss the Tucker issue is ironically a meta issue that has possibly more potential to cause division than the original issue, since most on here are against Tucker but people seem fairly evenly split between thinking the issue should or shouldn’t be discussed.
This is a good post. It is a very standard tactic to whip up internal disputes within an enemy faction. Just about the oldest trick in the book.
I don't like, at all, what Tucker did but he has also done such sterling service in the past, and literally faced physical danger for it (remember when Antifa rioted outside his house?) that I will give him the benefit of the doubt, for now. How much longer he keeps that is up to him. He needs to stand up to his corrupt sellout bosses at Fox, if he leaves the network to speak freely, I think we should give him a chance.
I think the important thing is not really whether you give Tucker a chance or not, but remembering not to engage in in-fighting (as opposed to respectful debate) with other true Trump supporters over their decision to abandon Tucker or not, whether they agree with Bannon’s statements about signal/noise, etc.