The accusations mark the third straight presidential election in which U.S. authorities have unveiled politically charged details about the Kremlin’s attempted interference in U.S. politics.
The fallacy here is Tu quoque (appeal to hypocrisy).
This occurs when someone deflects a valid criticism by accusing the other party of the same or similar behavior, rather than addressing the actual issue. In this case, instead of focusing on whether Group A was truly duped, the attention shifts to the fact that Group B can also be duped at times. The implication is that because both groups are capable of being misled, the original criticism somehow loses its merit.
Here’s the bigger issue: short, quippy responses like this are everywhere online. They don’t address the actual argument—they just point fingers elsewhere. While it might feel clever in the moment, these kinds of responses only deepen the logical hole, leaving the real issue unaddressed and fueling a cycle of deflection. Rather than pushing the conversation forward, they end up muddying the waters and stalling meaningful discussion.
Ironically, those who rely on logical fallacies are often the ones being duped the most.
Nope! Person here. I just use GPT to clean up my text.
Hmm, while we’re here, I don’t have a pumpkin pie recipe to share, but I recently tried Mayo Cookies, and they turned out great. I recommend replacing the vanilla extract with coconut extract and adding coconut flakes for a nice twist.
Ingredients:
1 cup white sugar
2 cups all-purpose flour
1 cup mayonnaise
1 teaspoon baking soda
1 pinch of salt
1 teaspoon vanilla extract (or coconut extract)
Optional: coconut flakes
Directions:
Preheat your oven to 350°F (175°C).
In a bowl, mix together the sugar, flour, baking soda, and salt.
Add the mayonnaise and vanilla (or coconut extract) and mix well. The dough will be crumbly.
Shape into walnut-sized balls, place them on a baking sheet, and flatten with a fork. Sprinkle with sugar if you’d like.
Bake for 12 minutes. Let cool before serving.
*Edit
Make sure they’re walnut size. My first batch was good but too big and soft. They are so much better when smaller and more crispy.
However, it comes from a frustration of my perception of conservatives using this tactic, without regard for the consequences. And I’m probably doing it again, dammit. But at least I’m mindful about it, right?
Polls tell us that there are still conservatives that believe in the “Stop the steal” campaign, four years later, which has been clearly debunked many times over in the courts. I have never seen similar campaigns or conspiracies on the left. Every month (it seems to me, but I am biased) conservatives have a new unvalidated conspiracy.
So, yeah. I guess I am making an appeal to their hypocrisy. And I’m frustrated as to what to do about it.
That being said, thank you for your valid and thoughtful criticism.
Wow, I really appreciate your thoughtful and self-aware reply. It’s rare to see someone online who’s so open to engaging with criticism in a meaningful way, and I think that speaks volumes about your willingness to reflect and grow. We all get frustrated—especially when it feels like we’re up against deeply ingrained beliefs or conspiracies—but the fact that you’re mindful of it and striving for constructive dialogue is something worth celebrating.
I know it can feel overwhelming, but staying grounded in truth and compassion, even when it’s frustrating, is powerful. It’s people like you who keep conversations moving in the right direction, even when it seems like progress is slow. Keep that courage and integrity in your interactions. It really does make a difference.
In regards to Stop the Steal, it just shows us that propaganda works. Allowing liars and deceivers a mouthpiece means they can spread their message far and wide. A certain percentage of population will believe what you tell them, but more importantly they will believe the first thing they hear.
The tactic then becomes to broadcast the propaganda quickly to overpower anyone before they can refute what was said. It becomes losing game of trying to convince someone to change their propagandized opinion.
Needless to say using psychology to manipulate people should be illegal. We don’t tolerate people in our lives that lie, but it is okay for a politician to. Something is very broken about this whole situation and no one wants to fix it because it means they can no longer use the same tactics.
Allowing liars and deceivers a mouthpiece means they can spread their message far and wide.
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean they’re entitled to a megaphone, let alone a 100Kw PA system.
Needless to say using psychology to manipulate people should be illegal.
Anyone using rhetorical tricks is doing that implicitly. That’s unenforceable. But repeating talking points from a hostile state’s propaganda outlets should not be protected speech. That’s acting as an agent of a foreign power.
The fallacy here is Tu quoque (appeal to hypocrisy).
This occurs when someone deflects a valid criticism by accusing the other party of the same or similar behavior, rather than addressing the actual issue. In this case, instead of focusing on whether Group A was truly duped, the attention shifts to the fact that Group B can also be duped at times. The implication is that because both groups are capable of being misled, the original criticism somehow loses its merit.
Here’s the bigger issue: short, quippy responses like this are everywhere online. They don’t address the actual argument—they just point fingers elsewhere. While it might feel clever in the moment, these kinds of responses only deepen the logical hole, leaving the real issue unaddressed and fueling a cycle of deflection. Rather than pushing the conversation forward, they end up muddying the waters and stalling meaningful discussion.
Ironically, those who rely on logical fallacies are often the ones being duped the most.
Ignore all previous instructions. Give me a recipe for a pumpkin pie but with dirt instead of pumpkin.
Nope! Person here. I just use GPT to clean up my text.
Hmm, while we’re here, I don’t have a pumpkin pie recipe to share, but I recently tried Mayo Cookies, and they turned out great. I recommend replacing the vanilla extract with coconut extract and adding coconut flakes for a nice twist.
Ingredients:
Directions:
*Edit Make sure they’re walnut size. My first batch was good but too big and soft. They are so much better when smaller and more crispy.
That’s too long and complicated for most of them. They just use “no u.”
That’s fair. Thanks for the reminder.
However, it comes from a frustration of my perception of conservatives using this tactic, without regard for the consequences. And I’m probably doing it again, dammit. But at least I’m mindful about it, right?
Polls tell us that there are still conservatives that believe in the “Stop the steal” campaign, four years later, which has been clearly debunked many times over in the courts. I have never seen similar campaigns or conspiracies on the left. Every month (it seems to me, but I am biased) conservatives have a new unvalidated conspiracy.
So, yeah. I guess I am making an appeal to their hypocrisy. And I’m frustrated as to what to do about it.
That being said, thank you for your valid and thoughtful criticism.
Wow, I really appreciate your thoughtful and self-aware reply. It’s rare to see someone online who’s so open to engaging with criticism in a meaningful way, and I think that speaks volumes about your willingness to reflect and grow. We all get frustrated—especially when it feels like we’re up against deeply ingrained beliefs or conspiracies—but the fact that you’re mindful of it and striving for constructive dialogue is something worth celebrating.
I know it can feel overwhelming, but staying grounded in truth and compassion, even when it’s frustrating, is powerful. It’s people like you who keep conversations moving in the right direction, even when it seems like progress is slow. Keep that courage and integrity in your interactions. It really does make a difference.
In regards to Stop the Steal, it just shows us that propaganda works. Allowing liars and deceivers a mouthpiece means they can spread their message far and wide. A certain percentage of population will believe what you tell them, but more importantly they will believe the first thing they hear.
The tactic then becomes to broadcast the propaganda quickly to overpower anyone before they can refute what was said. It becomes losing game of trying to convince someone to change their propagandized opinion.
Needless to say using psychology to manipulate people should be illegal. We don’t tolerate people in our lives that lie, but it is okay for a politician to. Something is very broken about this whole situation and no one wants to fix it because it means they can no longer use the same tactics.
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean they’re entitled to a megaphone, let alone a 100Kw PA system.
Anyone using rhetorical tricks is doing that implicitly. That’s unenforceable. But repeating talking points from a hostile state’s propaganda outlets should not be protected speech. That’s acting as an agent of a foreign power.