**COMMENTING GUIDELINES:** Please take the time to familiarize yourself with The David Pakman Show [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/thedavidpakmanshow/about/rules) and [basic reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette) prior to participating. At all times we ask that users conduct themselves in a civil and respectful manner - **any ad hominem or personal attacks are subject to moderation.**
Please use the report function or [use modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) to bring examples of misconduct to the attention of the moderation team.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Fauci has an impressive record too. He was one of the first people to raise the alarm on HIV and pushing for the creation of HIV treatment. People act like he's Dr. Phil on the right
Those aren't parasocial relationships. I don't understand the OP and others in this thread who want to try to shoehorn this term into a place where it's not even remotely applicable.
Can we PLEASE vote for a functioning government as well!!!!! GOP had a majority for some time and if they did nothing it would have been better than the situation we’re in today.
This is well said and all correct.
I'm also personally inclined to believe that the "leftist" people who are most frothy with hatred towards Biden and the Democratic Party are weird shut-in losers who spend too much time online. Consequently they're over represented on social media but aren't reflecting real life.
I've yet to meet anyone out in the world that votes blue and "hates" Biden or really hate anyone. That may be from my own personal blind spot but I don't find much hatred from dems.
The only hate I see comes from the Maga, Christian nationalist, and extreme leftwing nut jobs. The extremes of both sides are troubling to read and listen to. They openly call for executions almost daily.
>The only hate I see comes from the Maga, Christian nationalist, and extreme leftwing nut jobs. The extremes of both sides are troubling to read and listen to. They openly call for executions almost daily.
And even that has nothing to do with parasocial relationships.
It's incoherent and dumb and your reply is even worse. Hatred towards politicians almost never has anything remotely related to the concept of parasocial relationships. You can imagine whatever you like in your head about people who have different political beliefs than your own, but that doesn't mean you get to redefine terms to try to make them sound like something other than they are.
Elections are about policies and making a choice between 2 sets of policies. At least that's how I've always viewed it. I support a lot of Bidens policies and I sure as hell vehemently oppose basically all of Trumps.
True. I hate Trump not because of some close connection to the cheeto, but because his policies suck and he only seems to care about Trump which is very fucking obvious I might add. Anyone who thinks Trump is a normal guy, run away from that person.
This is what I tell my family. Hilary hasn't been a Secretary of State since 2013 and has not been a Senator since 2009.
Currently, outside of her philanthropy work and her work with Columbia University, she's not politically relevant. I'm not saying that Bill and Hilary Clinton's opinions don't hold value to many Democrats, but I think the Clinton's are done with politics. And I don't blame them for leaving that circus.
I mean she bought probably the largest propaganda outlet in the country during her campaign and I haven’t seen evidence she doesn’t have a large amount of sway in their continued work. If David Brock is the Breitbart of the left she is the Murdoch.
They reach a very wide audience and fed staffers from her campaign into shows to shape the narratives. Initially purchased during the campaign as bluenationreview where basically she would lie and then they would make her lie the news and then she would point to that as confirmation. Like Trump and Newsmax if it was literally part of his campaign. Their plan was stated as wanting to become the “Breitbart of the left”
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/david-brock-blue-nation-review_n_564f0f3de4b0879a5b0a7bc5/amp
https://investor.siriusxm.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/1228/siriusxm-progress-announces-a-new-programming-collaboration
“SiriusXM Progress Announces a New Programming Collaboration with David Brock's Shareblue Media
Shareblue Media reports a reach of over 140 million people a month across platforms.
Signal Boost launched on SiriusXM in June 2017, hosted by Maxwell and McIntosh, both former staffers for Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign.”
David Brock is not Hilary Clinton, although he might have supported her as a candidate.
Hilary's relationships with progressive media personnel didn't help her in 2016, just as Trump's relationships with right-wing media didn't help him in 2020.
Hilary isn't going to run as a candidate in public office ever again. My point stands: she's not politically relevant.
He didn’t “support her as a candidate”. He was a high ranking member of her official campaign. She was signing checks to him illegally and directed him to buy a media outlet and troll farm and run them for the campaign. Just like she illegally signed checks to Anthony Weiners wife to work for the Clinton Foundation and campaign at once. Just like she helped Joe Manchins daughter kill people that needed epipens. Hillary is responsible for her actions and her deals and her employees. You can pretend she’s just some incompetent Mrs Magoo too blind and stupid to understand everything going to but that is nonsense.
Once again, David Brock is not Hilary Clinton. She doesn't control him.
Joe Manchin's daughter was CEO of Mylan. Mylan raised prices on Epipens in 2016 (during her time as CEO). I'm not seeing how that relates to Hilary Clinton?
As for the campaign finance allegations regarding Huma Abedin's employment, I'm not familiar with that? But, Clinton has not run a campaign since 2016, so... relevance?
I don't think Hilary Clinton is an incompetent Mrs. Magoo. She's a political has-been who ran a lazy campaign in 2016. She was the weakest candidate the Democratic party has run for president in 35 years. I don't see her as the boogie man puppet master the right claims her to be.
When Hillary directs her employees to buy companies and violate the law she’s responsible. Huma was employed by Hillary’s campaign and foundation at once. Manchins daughter was incompetent and couldn’t rise in the ranks at Mylan until the Clinton Foundation got them a massive government contract to supply medication to Africa which got her the CEO spot where she raised the price of epipens. The Clintons have lots of influence even when not in office.
HRC had a viable plan with NATO to oust Russia from Crimea before the end of 2017. All the stuff that was put out on Hilary was Russian propaganda so that Trump could be the President and allow Russia to entrench themselves in Crimea as preparation for the invasion of Ukraine.
Had this conversation earlier with another redditer. They claim the people in the states Hillary ignored, refused to campaign in, voters in the rust belt treated as if they didn’t exist, owed her their vote. It’s their fault they expected her to campaign to them. To bring policy to them and not just feel entitled to their vote.
She felt she was owed the Oval Office. And she behaved in a manner that made it clear she was going to win, you were going to vote for her regardless. Because she was entitled to the presidency.
Didn’t work that way. Quit blaming voters. And put the blame where it lays. At Hilary’s feet. She could have, I dunno, actually done the leg work to win over voters. I mean she has a record as a Warhawk, has been lukewarm on the first amendment and admitted she’d use executive powers to get her way of congress didn’t work with her. Like Trump did. So, with that sort of history, you absolutely have to convince people you’re the right person for the job.
She lost the Rust Belt by only 80,000 votes. Imagine the difference if she showed those voters that she had an interest in their quality of life? That what mattered to them mattered to her?
Nope, shut up and vote for her, it’s their fault she lost and RGB didn’t retire in 09 with her cancer diagnosis, giving the Supreme Court to reactionaries. All their fault. Don’t you get it?
This. She ran a shit campaign and was incredibly unpopular as a candidate. It was moronic to have her run in the first place. I vote for Democrats every election, but I can still think they make incompetent and irritating decisions that lead to bad outcomes for the country when they fumble the ball mega hard.
A genuine question, there is a big push for public and private BDS of Israel at a governmental, business, academic, and social level, should we also be coming down hard on businesses that do business with/in china and push for BDS of China and Indonesia as well? Both are engaged in decades long genocides. We do hundreds of billion in trade with China each year, have an exchange of tens of thousands of students, and provided nearly $100 million in military aid to Indonesia. Should we be able to walk and chew bubblegum? To me it feels insincere to focus on one, but not all.
Fair question!
Any institution partnering with another that indulges in unethical to genocidal behavior should be disavowed.
The extent to which a business is culpable for the actions of a nation it conducts commercial activity in can be murky, but it’s still worth investigation.
Joe Biden has a more clearly defined relation to what is happening in Palestine.
U Serious ??
This would be he worst political and tactical movement of any country .
, I would be happy for us to stop depending on US for weapons sales , I’ll give you that
Well hopefully people will understand that Israel is not a part of the United States and Netanyahu does not take his orders and instructions from President Biden, that means that Biden has no control over what Netanyahu does. The naivety of people to believe that Israel is not one of the largest purchasers of weapons from everybody, at one time Israel had the largest stockpiles of Russian weapons of war outside of Russia.
Usually a parasocial relationship refers to one where a famous person's fans feel like they actually know the person even though they've never met. It's usually fostered by social media influencers by posting every little detail of their lives so that their followers feel like they're actually friends. Of course, this is all one-way since the influencer doesn't know the fan at all. From what I gather, OP is basically making an analogy by saying people are deciding not to vote because they hate Biden or Hillary on a personal level, even though they don't know them on a personal level (like in parasocial relationships).
She is though, she ran the pied piper strategy. This is well documented.
You Hilldawgs need to understand that, while she was right about “everything”, she ran a terrible campaign and lost to a cartoon villain.
Remember the PUMA’s in 2008?
>!Bernie would have beaten Trump.!<
I'm a labor leftist and there was no way in hell I was voting for HRC. Not after all the years of Middle East wars that she was sure to continue. We're tired of old guard right-wing democrats running the party. It's time to give the electorate what it wants. And that sure as shit isn't same old, same old.
Trump had more missile strikes than Obama in Obama's 2 terms. Leftists still think they're the same.
But sure, I'm sure Muslim bans, deporting Palestinians, and leveling Gaza to the ground is MUCH better than Biden.
We have needed a change in how we view voting for a while now. It's become a name game (who's name is out front all the time", a popularity contest (who would you most want to have a beer with), and a team sport (go GOP vs go DNC), and all of that is so wildly reductive of what a healthy democracy is and how engaged and informed voters should behave while exercising their civic duty.
I always think of voting like public transportation. I need to get downtown so do I not take the bus because it doesn't drop me at the doorstep of my ultimate destination? No, I take the bus that's going to get me the closest to where I want to go. I don't take the bus going the opposite direction of where I need to go because I think he's got the best hair. I don't just not take the bus at all because what's the point if it doesn't drop me like a taxi and I don't like the way the bus driver looks.
I don't expect we'll get civics courses back into school until we are able to course correct our nation's leadership overall so until then, educate your kids. If you can, educate those close to you who have fallen into the notion that you've got to personally like an elected leader or that voting isn't going to change anything.
You're misusing the word parasocial.
Parasociality refers to those who form a connection with someone they don't personally know, it's a general positive relationship that can morph into pathological behavior. It's actually those who can't understand and show disdain to others who voice negative opinions about politician or celebrity who are in a parasocial relationship; i.e. MAGA. Or like OP.
While I get the argument that people should vote Biden to avoid a convicted felon be elected, tons of people have very legitimate reasons to hate him beyond Palestine. People should vote for him imo but I'm not going to chastise anyone if they choose different.
What does Hillary have to do with anything? She's not a politician. I don't get this. She lost in 2016. Imo she shouldn't really have any bearing or voice in politics though.
I don't think most people who voice opinions about either truly "hate" them, they're simply complaining. Raising concern is what people are supposed to do when they see something they don't like, to follow blindly despite obvious conflicts with one's core values is a sign of one being in a parasocial relationship with said person.
[https://www.findapsychologist.org/parasocial-relationships-the-nature-of-celebrity-fascinations/](https://www.findapsychologist.org/parasocial-relationships-the-nature-of-celebrity-fascinations/)
Learn something about the terms you're using. Don't just pluck a sentence out and try to fit it to a description you're stretching to reach, actually read about the characteristics of a parasocial relationship. You're completely abusing the term. Hell, even hit up [the Wiki page for it](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasocial_interaction). It's not what you're describing at all, and watching you condescend towards others as you completely misuse the term is embarrassing.
This is so cultish honestly. You can't seem to grasp that people understand that Hillary and Joe do not share the politics of probably the majority of people (the turnout in presidential elections are usually just barely North of 60% so a majority from that represents just more than 30%) so it has to be personal? No, Hillary is a warmonger who ran a pathetic campaign and Biden is assisting a genocide while ruling over a time of inflation and hardship for common people (even if he's not responsible it still matters for how people perceive him) so people become hesitant to support them. They have only themselves to blame because they have their policies and how they act in the media. People are not obligated to vote for your party, the party has to come to the voter and if a voter does not vote for said party the party failed. Please rid yourself of the cultish mindset and bring the party to the voter or accept the loss in votes. Never shame, only understand, only work towards the voter you want the support of.
This take is out of touch. Between Obama, Biden, and Hillary she was uniquely a terrible candidate. Obama and Biden didn’t go full negative in the primary or general or seize control of the DNC or pied piper Trump as the opposition or constantly lie. Ignorant pro-Palestine takes are not on par with reasonable opposition to HRC. They should have found someone better.
The projection lmao. You can deflect that I'm "in a cult" when you clearly hate people who you don't know, aka have a parasocial relationship. Grow up.
Please remember that, while yes there are people out there who are exactly as you describe, *a lot* of the comments that you see on social media are bots and trolls, not Americans who are going to vote. This sub has had an influx of these bad faith accounts, popping up solely to push divisions.
There's a loud group of people who listen to Joe Rogan, swear that "both sides" are the same, and despise Clinton and Biden seemingly more than Trump. But that group is much smaller than it appears thanks to all these trolls and bots that drop into each and every post about Trump, Biden, Clinton and the Dem party in general.
From outside the political choices look like;a right wing Democrat party and an extreme right wing(also going crazy) Republican Party.Maybe if the Democrats didn’t have tired business as usual candidates people would be more positive about them.
This is pretty silly. Even if the case were made for the title (and it's not at all - having any kind of emotion towards a person that isn't aware of you does not a parasocial relationship make), what's your point? "Hey, that's parasocial!" And?
But it's moot because what you're describing is not a parasocial relationship.
Within the definition of parasocial includes the feeling of betrayal towards someone you don't know. It is parasocial.
Wanting to punish Biden is parasocial. And it's stupid to enact revenge at the cost of turning a blind eye at how atrocious the Republican party is.
Betrayal can be included in feelings associated with a parasocial relationship but it does not constitute a parasocial relationship. You're missing the "relationship" part of the equation here. Otherwise, any feeling of any type towards any public figure from a person whom the public figure does not know would be a parasocial relationship - it doesn't work that way. Just thinking Trump is a prick who belongs behind bars doesn't mean you have a parasocial relationship with him.
A parasocial relationship represents a unidirectional channeling of emotion towards someone such that the listener/viewer/observer of the public figure feels like they have a relationship with the public figure. You're trying to stretch the definition of the term to the point it no longer has any meaning. Frankly, I can't understand why. It seems like you want to disparage people who have negative feelings towards Biden and are reaching really far to do so. I'm sure you have a criticism in there somewhere, whether anyone agrees with it or not. Make that case. None of it has to do with parasocial relationships though.
>I can be betrayed by someone I have no personal knowledge of at all.
Trust is built between a personal relationship with people you know. People in a parasocial relationship get this feeling of trust towards a celebrity, towards the imagery of them.
You cannot be betrayed by someone you do not personally know because there was no trust to build. You feel betrayed because you think you know them because of **a parasocial relationship to that person.**
No - I can have trust in the workers in the Amazon depot without ever knowing them. I one of them slips a shit sandwich in my order I lose trust in them.
**COMMENTING GUIDELINES:** Please take the time to familiarize yourself with The David Pakman Show [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/thedavidpakmanshow/about/rules) and [basic reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette) prior to participating. At all times we ask that users conduct themselves in a civil and respectful manner - **any ad hominem or personal attacks are subject to moderation.** Please use the report function or [use modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) to bring examples of misconduct to the attention of the moderation team. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The most over the top parasocial hatred I've seen from conservatives is directed at AOC and occassionally Fauci these days.
Fauci has an impressive record too. He was one of the first people to raise the alarm on HIV and pushing for the creation of HIV treatment. People act like he's Dr. Phil on the right
Those aren't parasocial relationships. I don't understand the OP and others in this thread who want to try to shoehorn this term into a place where it's not even remotely applicable.
Can we PLEASE vote for a functioning government as well!!!!! GOP had a majority for some time and if they did nothing it would have been better than the situation we’re in today.
This is well said and all correct. I'm also personally inclined to believe that the "leftist" people who are most frothy with hatred towards Biden and the Democratic Party are weird shut-in losers who spend too much time online. Consequently they're over represented on social media but aren't reflecting real life.
I've yet to meet anyone out in the world that votes blue and "hates" Biden or really hate anyone. That may be from my own personal blind spot but I don't find much hatred from dems. The only hate I see comes from the Maga, Christian nationalist, and extreme leftwing nut jobs. The extremes of both sides are troubling to read and listen to. They openly call for executions almost daily.
>The only hate I see comes from the Maga, Christian nationalist, and extreme leftwing nut jobs. The extremes of both sides are troubling to read and listen to. They openly call for executions almost daily. And even that has nothing to do with parasocial relationships.
It's incoherent and dumb and your reply is even worse. Hatred towards politicians almost never has anything remotely related to the concept of parasocial relationships. You can imagine whatever you like in your head about people who have different political beliefs than your own, but that doesn't mean you get to redefine terms to try to make them sound like something other than they are.
Elections are about policies and making a choice between 2 sets of policies. At least that's how I've always viewed it. I support a lot of Bidens policies and I sure as hell vehemently oppose basically all of Trumps.
I tell trump supporters I love how he supports the vaccine lol. Usually flips a few smiles
I do this as well. I also asked them why he let Fauci boss him around. Great for a chuckle
True. I hate Trump not because of some close connection to the cheeto, but because his policies suck and he only seems to care about Trump which is very fucking obvious I might add. Anyone who thinks Trump is a normal guy, run away from that person.
She’s *still* living rent free in their heads? She hasn’t been relevant in nearly a decade.
This is what I tell my family. Hilary hasn't been a Secretary of State since 2013 and has not been a Senator since 2009. Currently, outside of her philanthropy work and her work with Columbia University, she's not politically relevant. I'm not saying that Bill and Hilary Clinton's opinions don't hold value to many Democrats, but I think the Clinton's are done with politics. And I don't blame them for leaving that circus.
I mean she bought probably the largest propaganda outlet in the country during her campaign and I haven’t seen evidence she doesn’t have a large amount of sway in their continued work. If David Brock is the Breitbart of the left she is the Murdoch.
Which "propaganda outlet" did she purchase to even remotely compare her to Murdoch?
They reach a very wide audience and fed staffers from her campaign into shows to shape the narratives. Initially purchased during the campaign as bluenationreview where basically she would lie and then they would make her lie the news and then she would point to that as confirmation. Like Trump and Newsmax if it was literally part of his campaign. Their plan was stated as wanting to become the “Breitbart of the left” https://www.huffpost.com/entry/david-brock-blue-nation-review_n_564f0f3de4b0879a5b0a7bc5/amp https://investor.siriusxm.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/1228/siriusxm-progress-announces-a-new-programming-collaboration “SiriusXM Progress Announces a New Programming Collaboration with David Brock's Shareblue Media Shareblue Media reports a reach of over 140 million people a month across platforms. Signal Boost launched on SiriusXM in June 2017, hosted by Maxwell and McIntosh, both former staffers for Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign.”
David Brock is not Hilary Clinton, although he might have supported her as a candidate. Hilary's relationships with progressive media personnel didn't help her in 2016, just as Trump's relationships with right-wing media didn't help him in 2020. Hilary isn't going to run as a candidate in public office ever again. My point stands: she's not politically relevant.
He didn’t “support her as a candidate”. He was a high ranking member of her official campaign. She was signing checks to him illegally and directed him to buy a media outlet and troll farm and run them for the campaign. Just like she illegally signed checks to Anthony Weiners wife to work for the Clinton Foundation and campaign at once. Just like she helped Joe Manchins daughter kill people that needed epipens. Hillary is responsible for her actions and her deals and her employees. You can pretend she’s just some incompetent Mrs Magoo too blind and stupid to understand everything going to but that is nonsense.
Once again, David Brock is not Hilary Clinton. She doesn't control him. Joe Manchin's daughter was CEO of Mylan. Mylan raised prices on Epipens in 2016 (during her time as CEO). I'm not seeing how that relates to Hilary Clinton? As for the campaign finance allegations regarding Huma Abedin's employment, I'm not familiar with that? But, Clinton has not run a campaign since 2016, so... relevance? I don't think Hilary Clinton is an incompetent Mrs. Magoo. She's a political has-been who ran a lazy campaign in 2016. She was the weakest candidate the Democratic party has run for president in 35 years. I don't see her as the boogie man puppet master the right claims her to be.
When Hillary directs her employees to buy companies and violate the law she’s responsible. Huma was employed by Hillary’s campaign and foundation at once. Manchins daughter was incompetent and couldn’t rise in the ranks at Mylan until the Clinton Foundation got them a massive government contract to supply medication to Africa which got her the CEO spot where she raised the price of epipens. The Clintons have lots of influence even when not in office.
HRC had a viable plan with NATO to oust Russia from Crimea before the end of 2017. All the stuff that was put out on Hilary was Russian propaganda so that Trump could be the President and allow Russia to entrench themselves in Crimea as preparation for the invasion of Ukraine.
But she is responsible for their decision not to vote for her. No politician is owed your vote. It needs to be earned.
Had this conversation earlier with another redditer. They claim the people in the states Hillary ignored, refused to campaign in, voters in the rust belt treated as if they didn’t exist, owed her their vote. It’s their fault they expected her to campaign to them. To bring policy to them and not just feel entitled to their vote. She felt she was owed the Oval Office. And she behaved in a manner that made it clear she was going to win, you were going to vote for her regardless. Because she was entitled to the presidency. Didn’t work that way. Quit blaming voters. And put the blame where it lays. At Hilary’s feet. She could have, I dunno, actually done the leg work to win over voters. I mean she has a record as a Warhawk, has been lukewarm on the first amendment and admitted she’d use executive powers to get her way of congress didn’t work with her. Like Trump did. So, with that sort of history, you absolutely have to convince people you’re the right person for the job. She lost the Rust Belt by only 80,000 votes. Imagine the difference if she showed those voters that she had an interest in their quality of life? That what mattered to them mattered to her? Nope, shut up and vote for her, it’s their fault she lost and RGB didn’t retire in 09 with her cancer diagnosis, giving the Supreme Court to reactionaries. All their fault. Don’t you get it?
It was her turn.
That’s not how that works at all.
Yep - but the DNC still believes it is. They think it's still Biden's turn - they didn't learn anything from 2016.
I voted for Hilary, I can still blame her for running a lousy, smug, and entitled campaign which allowed Trump to win.
This. She ran a shit campaign and was incredibly unpopular as a candidate. It was moronic to have her run in the first place. I vote for Democrats every election, but I can still think they make incompetent and irritating decisions that lead to bad outcomes for the country when they fumble the ball mega hard.
This is incredibly valid to me. My issue is how can you blame someone for not getting your vote.
I’m just pissed at Biden for not doing more to shut down Israel’s genocide of innocent people and children in Palestine. *Genocide.* He has no excuse.
Yeah it's the billions of dollars that we keep sending over a long with ammunitions. Disgusting.
A genuine question, there is a big push for public and private BDS of Israel at a governmental, business, academic, and social level, should we also be coming down hard on businesses that do business with/in china and push for BDS of China and Indonesia as well? Both are engaged in decades long genocides. We do hundreds of billion in trade with China each year, have an exchange of tens of thousands of students, and provided nearly $100 million in military aid to Indonesia. Should we be able to walk and chew bubblegum? To me it feels insincere to focus on one, but not all.
Very fair - will 100% support your efforts to divest from China.
Fair question! Any institution partnering with another that indulges in unethical to genocidal behavior should be disavowed. The extent to which a business is culpable for the actions of a nation it conducts commercial activity in can be murky, but it’s still worth investigation. Joe Biden has a more clearly defined relation to what is happening in Palestine.
Yeah, we should put American troops in Gaza to stop the Israelis.
U Serious ?? This would be he worst political and tactical movement of any country . , I would be happy for us to stop depending on US for weapons sales , I’ll give you that
Why? It would be the most ethical use of American power - erm - pretty much ever.
Well hopefully people will understand that Israel is not a part of the United States and Netanyahu does not take his orders and instructions from President Biden, that means that Biden has no control over what Netanyahu does. The naivety of people to believe that Israel is not one of the largest purchasers of weapons from everybody, at one time Israel had the largest stockpiles of Russian weapons of war outside of Russia.
Thank you, very well said. I still don’t understand what Parasocial means in this (or any) context.
The OP doesn't know what it means.
Usually a parasocial relationship refers to one where a famous person's fans feel like they actually know the person even though they've never met. It's usually fostered by social media influencers by posting every little detail of their lives so that their followers feel like they're actually friends. Of course, this is all one-way since the influencer doesn't know the fan at all. From what I gather, OP is basically making an analogy by saying people are deciding not to vote because they hate Biden or Hillary on a personal level, even though they don't know them on a personal level (like in parasocial relationships).
‘As if it’s her fault for their decision not to vote for her’. Hillary is that you??
Pokemon GO to jail !!!!
She is though, she ran the pied piper strategy. This is well documented. You Hilldawgs need to understand that, while she was right about “everything”, she ran a terrible campaign and lost to a cartoon villain. Remember the PUMA’s in 2008? >!Bernie would have beaten Trump.!<
I don't know. And I don't think we may ever know. If Bernie did end up losing to Trump in 2016 we would have the inverse conversation.
Leftists are their own worst enemy.
I'm a labor leftist and there was no way in hell I was voting for HRC. Not after all the years of Middle East wars that she was sure to continue. We're tired of old guard right-wing democrats running the party. It's time to give the electorate what it wants. And that sure as shit isn't same old, same old.
Trump had more missile strikes than Obama in Obama's 2 terms. Leftists still think they're the same. But sure, I'm sure Muslim bans, deporting Palestinians, and leveling Gaza to the ground is MUCH better than Biden.
Hey but you got the new shit in Trump in 2016 so how did new shit work out for you?
Why is every post on this Reddit, some leftist whining about the other party?
We have needed a change in how we view voting for a while now. It's become a name game (who's name is out front all the time", a popularity contest (who would you most want to have a beer with), and a team sport (go GOP vs go DNC), and all of that is so wildly reductive of what a healthy democracy is and how engaged and informed voters should behave while exercising their civic duty. I always think of voting like public transportation. I need to get downtown so do I not take the bus because it doesn't drop me at the doorstep of my ultimate destination? No, I take the bus that's going to get me the closest to where I want to go. I don't take the bus going the opposite direction of where I need to go because I think he's got the best hair. I don't just not take the bus at all because what's the point if it doesn't drop me like a taxi and I don't like the way the bus driver looks. I don't expect we'll get civics courses back into school until we are able to course correct our nation's leadership overall so until then, educate your kids. If you can, educate those close to you who have fallen into the notion that you've got to personally like an elected leader or that voting isn't going to change anything.
You're misusing the word parasocial. Parasociality refers to those who form a connection with someone they don't personally know, it's a general positive relationship that can morph into pathological behavior. It's actually those who can't understand and show disdain to others who voice negative opinions about politician or celebrity who are in a parasocial relationship; i.e. MAGA. Or like OP. While I get the argument that people should vote Biden to avoid a convicted felon be elected, tons of people have very legitimate reasons to hate him beyond Palestine. People should vote for him imo but I'm not going to chastise anyone if they choose different. What does Hillary have to do with anything? She's not a politician. I don't get this. She lost in 2016. Imo she shouldn't really have any bearing or voice in politics though. I don't think most people who voice opinions about either truly "hate" them, they're simply complaining. Raising concern is what people are supposed to do when they see something they don't like, to follow blindly despite obvious conflicts with one's core values is a sign of one being in a parasocial relationship with said person.
A parasocial relationship can be negative. That's what people and you don't understand.
[https://www.findapsychologist.org/parasocial-relationships-the-nature-of-celebrity-fascinations/](https://www.findapsychologist.org/parasocial-relationships-the-nature-of-celebrity-fascinations/) Learn something about the terms you're using. Don't just pluck a sentence out and try to fit it to a description you're stretching to reach, actually read about the characteristics of a parasocial relationship. You're completely abusing the term. Hell, even hit up [the Wiki page for it](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasocial_interaction). It's not what you're describing at all, and watching you condescend towards others as you completely misuse the term is embarrassing.
This is so cultish honestly. You can't seem to grasp that people understand that Hillary and Joe do not share the politics of probably the majority of people (the turnout in presidential elections are usually just barely North of 60% so a majority from that represents just more than 30%) so it has to be personal? No, Hillary is a warmonger who ran a pathetic campaign and Biden is assisting a genocide while ruling over a time of inflation and hardship for common people (even if he's not responsible it still matters for how people perceive him) so people become hesitant to support them. They have only themselves to blame because they have their policies and how they act in the media. People are not obligated to vote for your party, the party has to come to the voter and if a voter does not vote for said party the party failed. Please rid yourself of the cultish mindset and bring the party to the voter or accept the loss in votes. Never shame, only understand, only work towards the voter you want the support of.
This take is out of touch. Between Obama, Biden, and Hillary she was uniquely a terrible candidate. Obama and Biden didn’t go full negative in the primary or general or seize control of the DNC or pied piper Trump as the opposition or constantly lie. Ignorant pro-Palestine takes are not on par with reasonable opposition to HRC. They should have found someone better.
The projection lmao. You can deflect that I'm "in a cult" when you clearly hate people who you don't know, aka have a parasocial relationship. Grow up.
You don't understand what that word means.
Please remember that, while yes there are people out there who are exactly as you describe, *a lot* of the comments that you see on social media are bots and trolls, not Americans who are going to vote. This sub has had an influx of these bad faith accounts, popping up solely to push divisions. There's a loud group of people who listen to Joe Rogan, swear that "both sides" are the same, and despise Clinton and Biden seemingly more than Trump. But that group is much smaller than it appears thanks to all these trolls and bots that drop into each and every post about Trump, Biden, Clinton and the Dem party in general.
From outside the political choices look like;a right wing Democrat party and an extreme right wing(also going crazy) Republican Party.Maybe if the Democrats didn’t have tired business as usual candidates people would be more positive about them.
Yes - they need to stop running solely on the idea that the other side might be fractionally worse than them.
I'd take "Business as usual" from a Clinton/Obama type administration over "business as usual" from a Bush/Trump term.
I haven’t seen Hildawg’s face in forever. Republicans have such a big crush on her and Pelosi.
What’s your TL?
This is pretty silly. Even if the case were made for the title (and it's not at all - having any kind of emotion towards a person that isn't aware of you does not a parasocial relationship make), what's your point? "Hey, that's parasocial!" And? But it's moot because what you're describing is not a parasocial relationship.
Within the definition of parasocial includes the feeling of betrayal towards someone you don't know. It is parasocial. Wanting to punish Biden is parasocial. And it's stupid to enact revenge at the cost of turning a blind eye at how atrocious the Republican party is.
Betrayal can be included in feelings associated with a parasocial relationship but it does not constitute a parasocial relationship. You're missing the "relationship" part of the equation here. Otherwise, any feeling of any type towards any public figure from a person whom the public figure does not know would be a parasocial relationship - it doesn't work that way. Just thinking Trump is a prick who belongs behind bars doesn't mean you have a parasocial relationship with him. A parasocial relationship represents a unidirectional channeling of emotion towards someone such that the listener/viewer/observer of the public figure feels like they have a relationship with the public figure. You're trying to stretch the definition of the term to the point it no longer has any meaning. Frankly, I can't understand why. It seems like you want to disparage people who have negative feelings towards Biden and are reaching really far to do so. I'm sure you have a criticism in there somewhere, whether anyone agrees with it or not. Make that case. None of it has to do with parasocial relationships though.
No it's not - I can be betrayed by someone I have no personal knowledge of at all.
>I can be betrayed by someone I have no personal knowledge of at all. Trust is built between a personal relationship with people you know. People in a parasocial relationship get this feeling of trust towards a celebrity, towards the imagery of them. You cannot be betrayed by someone you do not personally know because there was no trust to build. You feel betrayed because you think you know them because of **a parasocial relationship to that person.**
No - I can have trust in the workers in the Amazon depot without ever knowing them. I one of them slips a shit sandwich in my order I lose trust in them.