I must have talked about the Cultural Cognition Institute to you at least half a dozen times in the past however many years now, right? Anyway, they’re a group that conducts studies on similar techniques, so it’s conceivable that somebody may have performed research related to this topic. They specifically answer questions like this one:
And the short, incredibly over-simplified answer is “yes,” people believe things more readily when they come from a source they already believe to be trustworthy, and it’s a whoooooooooole mess of shit.
Anyway, I want to circle back to this point:
By your own admission, you don’t actually know that, you assume it to be true. But now we have evidence that Democrats have used these tactics in a 2017 race, so why do you still believe that 2018 was a “clean” win?
That’s the crux of the problem; this story has raised a red flag, and now that red flag has thrown distrust into the mix.
It’s like the bowl of brown M&M’s in the concert rider. When you raise that flag, you have to look at everything else too.
Of course, that’s also a problematic line of reasoning because I’m implying a false equivalence. “Democrats did it once so they’re just as bad as the GOP so both sides are equally bad.”
I suppose that would be one benefit of disclosure laws - right now, we exist in a state of “we can’t know so we can’t draw firm conclusions,” but if we knew more we might be able to draw a clearer picture.