Monica de la Cruz Hernandez Wants to Move Battleship Texas to Town Lake (1 Viewer)

[dillydang]

Monica de la Cruz Hernandez has big plans for Texas in her bid for representative of District 15. They include universal background checks for all public and private gun sales, wind and solar farms from the border with Oklahoma to the Gulf of Mexico, and moving the Battleship Texas to Town Lake as part of a southern border defense strategy. Warning: satire.

 

[dillydang]

I'm not sure why you thought I needed the definition of satire. I know the definition of satire, and my point is that while some may find this particular site humorous, it does not meet the definition of satire. There is no "using wit to draw attention to both particular and wider issues in society."

It's just taking shots at a candidate. That's not satire. It might be comedy. Somebody might find it hilarious. But that doesn't make it satire.

SamAndreas

Confession time. The satire, or silly humor, is not the point. The existence of the blog site is. It's part of a larger effort to compete with GQP campaign sites on an SEO basis. Better on-site SEO means better search results positions for targeted keywords, provided secondary conditions are met. The dominant secondary condition includes widespread links to the blog sites, with widespread distribution of the blog addresses and the secondary posts (like this thread) on social media.

If enough blog sites exist with large numbers of incoming links, they will push the target campaign site down so far into the results it will receive virtually no organic search traffic. It's a small but meaningful exercise in free speech that can tip an election one way or the other.

The blog site could have been a near faithful copy of the campaign site, but what fun would that be? I'd rather take a bit more time to make some obvious and some subtle digs at the candidate.

Furthermore, the Monica Cruz blogs exist only to show how the technique works. Since no Dem is running against her (Vicente got squeezed out by gerrymandering and is running in D34), I'm not sure if this project is even worth expanding to the 100 blog sites I recommend for anyone applying this tactic.

See Twitter @real_Uncle_Sam for more details and links to documents explaining the system. The blogs don't include that information because it isn't relevant to the purpose of the sites and could distract visitors who are being directed away from Cruz' official site.

 

[brandon]

Better on-site SEO means better search results positions for targeted keywords, provided secondary conditions are met.

If SEO is what you're going for, you've got a lot of work to do, starting with registering a domain. It's not necessary, but it sure helps.

The blog site could have been a near faithful copy of the campaign site, but what fun would that be? I'd rather take a bit more time to make some obvious and some subtle digs at the candidate.

Cool. So it's not satire. It's just shots at a candidate, like I said. Also, it was a site you created, like I said.

Furthermore, the Monica Cruz blogs exist only to show how the technique works.

Is it really working, though?

monica for congress - Google Search

 

[SamAndreas]

I think the odds are high that this *slight* connection is nothing more than coincidence.

It doesn't matter if it's nothing more than coincidence, or the intent of the author when it was created. Once it exists if it's funny, it's funny. Irony is often accidental.

Have you ever watched Bill Maher? The audience laughs and who knows why.

Once in a while I know why. But sometimes I don't know why.

 

[brandon]

It doesn't matter if it's nothing more than coincidence, or the intent of the author when it was created. Once it exists if it's funny, it's funny. Irony is often accidental.

Have you ever watched Bill Maher? The audience laughs and who knows why.

Once in a while I know why. But sometimes I don't know why.

Respectfully, you’re shifting the goalposts a bit.

The discussion was whether this was satire, not irony. Satire is an intentional commentary on societal issues. You don’t accidentally create satire.

 

[SamAndreas]

Respectfully, you’re shifting the goalposts a bit.

The discussion was whether this was satire, not irony. Satire is an intentional commentary on societal issues. You don’t accidentally create satire.

It's good for goalposts to be shifted.

The book Catch22 is very interesting as satire if one "accidentally" happens to read the subtext which is present in Catch22 into to the 22nd chapter of forth book of the Torah; Numbers22.

The author says, no, that he didn't do that of a purpose. But it's there, and it's very interesting. There's a character in Catch22, the old man in the whorehouse, who tells Yossarian his views about the way to win wars, is to lose them. It's interesting who that character with that view on war reads into in Numbers22.

 

[dillydang]

If SEO is what you're going for, you've got a lot of work to do, starting with registering a domain. It's not necessary, but it sure helps.


Cool. So it's not satire. It's just shots at a candidate, like I said. Also, it was a site you created, like I said.


Is it really working, though?

monica for congress - Google Search

Not yet. It's just a demo I produced by myself with only 3 blogs. It would work fine under the right conditions. Twenty or more blogs, each with many incoming links from other sites (like forums), plus social media exposure for all the blogs and forum posts, then it would work. The method depends on two things: better on-site SEO than the target site (already true for my demos), and volume. Volume in blogs, backlinks, and social media exposure is what pushes the fake sites up in the results. While it does help to have a dedicated domain using an important keyword, it isn't essential.

I'm looking for people who are tired of talking about GOP offenses and are now motivated to do something. The methods can work with enough people. If you know anyone ready to act, send them to real Uncle Sam on Twitter.

 

[samiam5211]

Confession time. The satire, or silly humor, is not the point. The existence of the blog site is. It's part of a larger effort to compete with GQP campaign sites on an SEO basis. Better on-site SEO means better search results positions for targeted keywords, provided secondary conditions are met. The dominant secondary condition includes widespread links to the blog sites, with widespread distribution of the blog addresses and the secondary posts (like this thread) on social media.

If enough blog sites exist with large numbers of incoming links, they will push the target campaign site down so far into the results it will receive virtually no organic search traffic. It's a small but meaningful exercise in free speech that can tip an election one way or the other.

The blog site could have been a near faithful copy of the campaign site, but what fun would that be? I'd rather take a bit more time to make some obvious and some subtle digs at the candidate.

Furthermore, the Monica Cruz blogs exist only to show how the technique works. Since no Dem is running against her (Vicente got squeezed out by gerrymandering and is running in D34), I'm not sure if this project is even worth expanding to the 100 blog sites I recommend for anyone applying this tactic.

See Twitter @real_Uncle_Sam for more details and links to documents explaining the system. The blogs don't include that information because it isn't relevant to the purpose of the sites and could distract visitors who are being directed away from Cruz' official site.

I think this is too close to the line of disinformation IMO. Not in intent, but by effect.

Maybe after the boomers are gone, but I think this is the type of thing we need less of right now.

 

[brandon]

I think this is too close to the line of disinformation IMO. Not in intent, but by effect.

Maybe after the boomers are gone, but I think this is the type of thing we need less of right now.

Wholeheartedly agree.

I think in this case if we’re fighting fire with fire, it’s America that burns.

 

[dillydang]

I think this is too close to the line of disinformation IMO. Not in intent, but by effect.

Maybe after the boomers are gone, but I think this is the type of thing we need less of right now.

I see your point. My motivation comes from the dirty tricks the GOP has been using since the 1960s. I'm unwilling to incite people to violence the way far too many conservative politicians now do as a core campaign tactic. So I resort to free speech, satire and internet marketing. I'd like to use only persuasion for political change. I'm certain it doesn't work at this time. I'm all for Story Corps and One Small Step, as reported by 60 Minutes. I have my doubts that their approach could work with Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell in the booth. Oh, the moderators might get the two to share amusing stories and find some common ground on a human level. But political agreement? No, not on the record. When we get past this awful chapter in American history, I'll be happy to join you.

 

[SamAndreas]

I'm more of a gentle person who likes to not go about harboring great angst. That's healthy.

I was a cold war warrior, been there done that. I see a world which has gone from worst, to being measurably better overall.
Sure the current high jinks seem outlandish, they always do. Kids are always going to hell in a hand basket. The world is always coming to an end. Sixty some years of it I've seen.

For most people it apparently seems to seem that the current time is always the worst of times. And they usually have rose colored glasses on when they remember the past. That's a case of having optimism and pessimism mixed up. Both are needed but they both need to be in the right place.

I wasn't old enough for Vietnam, but I did get a full measure of the Cold war. I've actually seen and touched thermal nuclear war devices. I consider them to be very large bombs. I've seen on a bombing range how a large place can absorb quite a pounding with smaller conventional weapons and still have a remarkable amount of stuff left untouched. And I presume a fairly large number of people if it had been a city not a range would still be left alive.

People can live through a hell of a lot. Optimism is what I try for current events. Republicans are kin folk of Democrats. They're about 70% to 80% the same with 20% to 30% difference. Some folks only see the difference.

I wish political folks would calm the fork down.

 

[Taurus]

There's an obscure satirical reference you might not be aware of, it's this book:

Notice the authors name. The plot of the book parallels the candidate Monica de la Cruz's vision for the same battleship Texas. That is to fix it up to save America, again. I think that satisfies the requirement of "using wit to draw attention to both particular and wider issues in society." MAGA, guns, and the Southern border immigration are a wider issues than just a rematch for that one House seat.

From the OP link

"Cruz Hernandez will build a canal and move Battleship Texas to Town Lake to make Austin great again. In the process, it will be restored to a full working condition so that the southern border can be protected at a far remove. When fully recovered, the Battleship Texas will be able to throw 500-pound shells all the way to Mexico City. By declaring all inland waterways to be part of the US Navy, Texas will have the full legal authority to deploy Battleship Texas for defense."​

No way is it intentional satire because if it was, they'd mention removing the 16" guns from the Texas and replacing them with particle cannons.

 

[SamAndreas]

No way is it intentional satire because if it was, they'd mention removing the 16" guns from the Texas and replacing them with particle cannons.

You've read the book. I did too.



Right now I would be my estimate that the Texas is beyond any practice restoration. If they want to keep the superstructure as intact as it is now, they better slip it ashore and put the above water line part on a high and dry poured concrete foundation.

Even that cost would be immense.

 

[Taurus]

You've read the book. I did too.



Right now I would be my estimate that the Texas is beyond any practice restoration. If they want to keep the superstructure as intact as it is now, they better slip it ashore and put the above water line part on a high and dry poured concrete foundation.

Even that cost would be immense.

I've never met anyone who's even heard of that book, much less read it.
+10 Internets for the abyssal-deep cut

 

[samiam5211]

I see your point. My motivation comes from the dirty tricks the GOP has been using since the 1960s. I'm unwilling to incite people to violence the way far too many conservative politicians now do as a core campaign tactic. So I resort to free speech, satire and internet marketing. I'd like to use only persuasion for political change. I'm certain it doesn't work at this time. I'm all for Story Corps and One Small Step, as reported by 60 Minutes. I have my doubts that their approach could work with Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell in the booth. Oh, the moderators might get the two to share amusing stories and find some common ground on a human level. But political agreement? No, not on the record. When we get past this awful chapter in American history, I'll be happy to join you.

I feel like we are caught in a feedback loop of radicalization, and it's like a Chinese finger trap. The harder we pull the tighter it grips us.

You can't defeat extremism with more extremism.

 

[CoolBrees]

I see this as akin to Antifa efforts.

Obviously good intentioned, but lacks an individual or individuals to shape the vision and desired effect/endgame. It turns into guerrilla warfare on the internet. Fun to mess with the idiots on the right but I fail to see the larger impact.

Antifa has a worse reputation as a whole than the Proud Boys, aka neofascists. It isn’t because more people are white nationalist like the mouth breathers in the PB, they just have better PR and individuals (cough 45 cough) to give them credence. Without a mouthpiece you never get to set the message.

 

[dillydang]

You can't defeat extremism with more extremism.

You're right. Sigh, it's just such a daunting task to get untrapped. How do you convince 30 million Americans to listen to reason instead of to Trump? What does it take to get 100 million Americans (wild-arse guess) to stop calling each other names, to stop threatening violence, and actually debate policy issues?

I know of one approach that has proven successful at inducing a radical shift in worldview towards peaceful cooperation and acceptance of others. Trouble is, it tends to be a trigger for ridicule and hostility from conservatives, the very group most likely to benefit from the method. The combination of talk therapy and psychedelic drugs just doesn't sit well with a philosophy rooted in scarcity, clan loyalty, individuality, and fear.