2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Du'ers who post on JPR, are you proud of the many discussions on JPR about Hillary's health? [View all]NanceGreggs
(27,820 posts)
posing as a site for progressives, while promoting RW talking points and sourcing material from RW publications, websites, blogs, etc.
Links are often provided to obscure websites, with the caveat I cant vouch for this source and yet the most outlandish, ludicrous, easily-debunked stories about HRC and any number of Democrats are immediately accepted as fact, regardless of source.
Youll often see posts saying, I recently read that Hillary has MS, when it is obvious that the only place the poster read that is on JPR itself.
JPR is a classic echo-chamber, where speculation gets bounced around from one thread to another until it becomes established fact, merely by virtue of it having been repeated over and over until members are convinced it MUST be true, because theyve read the same story multiple times.
Any news sources that contradict or completely debunk any anti-HRC/anti-Dem Party rumours are immediately declared not trustworthy, while RW sources are lauded as being honest and completely accurate.
Its amazing to watch people who declared themselves as True Progressives while posting on DU now touting RW sources as the be-all and end-all when it comes to what should be believed and accepted as irrefutable fact. It makes you wonder whether self-identifying as a progressive on a Democratic site for years ever had any validity whatsoever, or whether such posters were impostors with a very different agenda all along.
In any event, if you plan to join JPR, it is wise to have a nose-ring inserted beforehand because youre going to be led by it from the minute you sign-up. Questioning any anti-HRC/anti-Dem facts proffered by RW sources or simply fabricated by fellow JPR members will result in being labelled as a blaspheming heretic who refuses to drink the Kool-Aid, and must be dealt with accordingly.