Jump to content

Talk:Nicole Shanahan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thomas Massie description

[edit]

Thomas Massie is not "ultraconservative", whatever that means. He is a classic paleolibertarian or libertarian conservative, with similar views to someone like Ron Paul. The ideological classifications on here are so lazy and sloppy, if not bad faith. 2601:249:9100:BEE0:A18D:391C:7BA2:181F (talk) 22:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 September 2024

[edit]

Change "ultraconservative" to "conservative libertarian" 2601:249:9100:BEE0:A18D:391C:7BA2:181F (talk) 22:47, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Source doesn't reflect the change. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:10, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2024

[edit]

Under the Political Views section, the bottom paragraph states: >Shanahan echoed conspiracist rhetoric common in the QAnon and Christian nationalist movements, suggesting that "the government might be satanically possessed" and that "almost demonic forces" have "overtaken our agencies and our culture".

The source linked does not include a quote from Shanahan using the phrase "Satanically possessed". In fact, the source elaborates on her usage of "almost demonic forces." Shanahan is quoted as having said "Corporate capture of the government has resulted in massive harm to human and ecological life [...] I believe that is evil."

Given that the citation used a) doesn't include the language mentioned in this paragraph, and b) explains her verbiage such that it becomes innocuous, this paragraph is intellectually dishonest. Tardigrayed (talk) 06:05, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The quote about the government being "satanically possessed" is indeed in Dickenson's referenced article,[1] which links to Shanahan's tweet[2] about "things most Americans love" and "the "uniparty hate".
The main claim in the referenced article is that Shanahan uses such language as a "dog whistle" to the QAnon and Christian nationalist followers. I don't think the paragraph in this article is intellectually dishonest in its brief recap of the reference's claim.
I think a problem might be the ambiguity in the "Political views" sub-section title. It is within a section regarding Shanahan's role in RFK Jr. campaign. Much of the Political views sub-section describes Shanahan's views and statements congruent with or contributing to the campaign's message. The paragraph you are objecting to describes her role in sprinkling certain loaded language into the campaign, without claiming these views for herself.
So I don't think citing Dickenson's thesis is "dishonest." But I agree this article has a problem, which might be addressed by reorganizing the "political views" sub-section. Or perhaps removing the sentences, if it seems this contribution to the campaign is minor. -- M.boli (talk) 13:25, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Dickinson, Tim (June 26, 2024). "Is Nicole Shanahan Flirting With QAnon and Christian Nationalism?". Rolling Stone.
  2. ^ @NicoleShanahan (June 23, 2024). "Things the uniparty hate" (Tweet) – via Twitter.