User Controls
This is a coup: "Secret Bipartisan Campaign"
-
2021-02-07 at 11:58 PM UTCI mean - exactly what they did, controlled the narrative via the media, used 'big tech' to stifle organisation, directly orchestrated large-scale protests - these are all things directly out of the CIA's 'colour revolution' or 'regime change' handbook. I can find you the actual documents if you're interested in reading them.
They recently tried the same thing in Russia with those ridiculous Navalny protests - media saturation, social media saturation, organising protests directly out of US embassies...The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2021-02-08 at 12:14 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra 'The establishment' is the group of people where wealth and power is currently, and has been for a long time, concentrated. We're talking about the Military-Industrial Complex, core financial institutions, the israel lobby, the political class proper and I guess more recently, 'Big Tech'. The people who hold the reigns and don't want to let go.
Most, if not all of the groups mentioned in the article are special interest groups and PAC's. I don't disagree that those groups hold the reigns of power, it's just that isn't what this is about. The article says they all got together and had a child sacrifice dinner at the Zuck cave late in the campaign, that's pretty much it. I remember Trump courting to the Israeli lobby about the 2020 election back in 2018 and sending out a ton of tweets about how he is better for Israel than the Dem's are. We are talking about an election where the incumbent LOST as well. Some of these folks had to change guard after and likely participated in this group because it seemed like the right thing to do.
Originally posted by aldra Why do you think Donald Trump was voted in? 'Lesser of two evils' aside, people were sick of the uniparty. They bicker about things like gay marriage and tranny bathrooms but offer bilateral support to endless wars, 'foreign aid', wealth transfer away from the middle class, endless immigration etc.
That's right. He was certainly, unapologetically new to politics. And he wasn't good at it and many people can see that. He was so bad that people still voted for another old white guy they pretty much already had who they already knew sucked but just sucked in a different way. They didn't want the new kinda shit, they went back to the old kinda shit because it tasted a little better.
Originally posted by aldra What principles? The US was founded, essentially, as a libertarian frontier and most of the founding documents were meant to empower white colonists against the threat of British control - they were never actually meant to apply to niggers, injuns or chinese railway workers.
I don't think you're saying anything relevant here and just wanted to type some racial slurs (although the omission of "chink" in place of "chinese" is glaring and shows CLEAR yellow bias) but America (and most colonial powers) became what it was by expanding the colony and bringing in those tired poor and huddled masses to exploit the labour of. The Founding Fathers were real dick dragging men who figured people like Turnip would someday vie for office hence so many checks and balances of power have been installed in the democratic institutions over the years. Hopefully this same system of checks and balances can prevent unchecked power corrupting and executive expansion becoming the word of law.
Honestly the scariest thing about the article is that as divided as America is right now, some special interest groups managed to get together to work on an agenda while most americans can't agree with each other about a single thing. When this happens, choices can be made for people. Fortunately, it seems like their agenda aligned with what most of America thought/felt/couldn't articulate above a loud bray, but if this is a litmus test for what can be undertaken en masse, it went over pretty well for the parties involved -
2021-02-08 at 12:20 AM UTC"The 2020 Election Was Heavily Influenced by a Vast, Secretive, (Bipartisan) Conspiracy - And That's a Good Thing"
EDIT: Wait this Time, not NYT. -
2021-02-08 at 12:26 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra I mean - exactly what they did, controlled the narrative via the media, used 'big tech' to stifle organisation, directly orchestrated large-scale protests - these are all things directly out of the CIA's 'colour revolution' or 'regime change' handbook. I can find you the actual documents if you're interested in reading them.
They recently tried the same thing in Russia with those ridiculous Navalny protests - media saturation, social media saturation, organising protests directly out of US embassies…
yes, Canada/other countries have been funding "democracy efforts" in Ukraine/other countries since 2000 or so. Everyone knows this, it's dirty but that's literally how politics works. What does this have to do with fraud?
"They used political/industry/media to influence voting blocs and finesse people"
"Isn't that literally how politics always works?"
"yes but it's dishonest"
"durrrrrrrrrrr you must be new"
At least it was their own country (cept for the zralis) -
2021-02-08 at 12:34 AM UTC
Originally posted by Sudo That's right. He was certainly, unapologetically new to politics. And he wasn't good at it and many people can see that. He was so bad that people still voted for another old white guy they pretty much already had who they already knew sucked but just sucked in a different way. They didn't want the new kinda shit, they went back to the old kinda shit because it tasted a little better.
1. Curbing immigration was the number one thing he was voted in for, because it was something that directly affected the middle and lower classes - both unskilled and skilled (through H1B visas, among other things) were and are driving down job prospects for employees, with employers benefiting due to bigger talent pools, lower costs of employment and competition driving down wages in a more general sense. The establishment made him their bitch, not necessarily because he was 'new to politics' but because they will not accept changes that bite into their power. A similar thing happened to Bernie because he was a 'dangerous socialist', even though nobody from a country that has actual socialist parties would ever call him that.
2. People wanted the 'old kind of shit' because they were told to. Like I said, media saturation, social media saturation and stifling any organisation of groups outside of the allowed parameters.
Originally posted by Sudo I don't think you're saying anything relevant here and just wanted to type some racial slurs (although the omission of "chink" in place of "chinese" is glaring and shows CLEAR yellow bias) but America (and most colonial powers) became what it was by expanding the colony and bringing in those tired poor and huddled masses to exploit the labour of. The Founding Fathers were real dick dragging men who figured people like Turnip would someday vie for office hence so many checks and balances of power have been installed in the democratic institutions over the years. Hopefully this same system of checks and balances can prevent unchecked power corrupting and executive expansion becoming the word of law.
I'm asking you why you think the 'Founding Fathers' would effectively oppose someone like Trump. They were largely concerned with sovereignty, both state and personal, but only for who they believed to be 'Real Americans™'. They were concerned with their own people first and foremost.
PS. I've never seen 'Chink' in a history book, I think it's more recent thing -
2021-02-08 at 12:35 AM UTC
Originally posted by Sudo yes, Canada/other countries have been funding "democracy efforts" in Ukraine/other countries since 2000 or so. Everyone knows this, it's dirty but that's literally how politics works. What does this have to do with fraud?
"They used political/industry/media to influence voting blocs and finesse people"
"Isn't that literally how politics always works?"
"yes but it's dishonest"
"durrrrrrrrrrr you must be new"
At least it was their own country (cept for the zralis)
the entire point is that democracy is a farce, and if you accept that this is 'how politics works' the only reasonable response is to burn it all to the ground. -
2021-02-08 at 1:03 AM UTCReading Aldra posts is like reading a mashup of conservative Twitter hot takes he tries so hard to pass off as his own. You literally can't get him off of his talking points because there's nothing else to type.
Originally posted by aldra seems rather contradictory no?
Only if you're willingly ignorant about what's being said and what happened.
The ballots were received on time. Then authenticated. Then counted. Which was exactly how it was supposed to be. Your failure to understand that just speaks to your hunger to feed your internal narrative that DEEP STATE BAD -
2021-02-08 at 1:33 AM UTCThe arguements presented against the coup kinda remind me of the sort of arguments that Christians would present against evolution back in the day, before Christians all left the real internet and went to facebook.
It can be fun to engage in debate with deniers. But after a while, once your understanding grows, you want to move onto the next level of understanding, and such arguments just become kinda insulting.
Anyway, it's worth noting that if I wrote that Time magazine piece here on the forum, people like Larry would be attacking it. -
2021-02-08 at 1:42 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra 1. Curbing immigration was the number one thing he was voted in for, because it was something that directly affected the middle and lower classes - both unskilled and skilled (through H1B visas, among other things) were and are driving down job prospects for employees, with employers benefiting due to bigger talent pools, lower costs of employment and competition driving down wages in a more general sense. The establishment made him their bitch, not necessarily because he was 'new to politics' but because they will not accept changes that bite into their power. A similar thing happened to Bernie because he was a 'dangerous socialist', even though nobody from a country that has actual socialist parties would ever call him that.
2. People wanted the 'old kind of shit' because they were told to. Like I said, media saturation, social media saturation and stifling any organisation of groups outside of the allowed parameters.
1. No, it was a combination of things. To say Trump's election was entirely about immigration isn't true. Is about "the establishment" moreso but also an emphasis on blue collar jobs, the economy, disenfranchisement from the left and the 2 party system etc. etc. etc. Also in the same paragraph you make excuses for his shitty performance.
2. It's because the media told them to be afraid of immigrants. Not really though, but only because you can't make blanket statements that media messaging is why 150 million people do the things they do. There are really far too many inferences being drawn here. You are also forgetting that THE INCUMBENT PRESIDENT LOST. He is literally given the biggest platform in the country. Doesn't matter if everytime he's on CNN they superimpose devil horns, there's not a huge media apparatus that is super duper unfair to the most powerful position in the world. It's like when trump said "presidential harassment" and I laughed out loud to myself in my prison cell. Wariat was there too, he drew some gay porn about it.
Originally posted by aldra I'm asking you why you think the 'Founding Fathers' would effectively oppose someone like Trump. They were largely concerned with sovereignty, both state and personal, but only for who they believed to be 'Real Americans™'. They were concerned with their own people first and foremost.
PS. I've never seen 'Chink' in a history book, I think it's more recent thing
Here are a couple articles about the founding fathers and Trumpism.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/americas-revolutionary-era-founders-knew-a-trump-could-come-along/news-story/403bf09338e86d70e0cd109d3fd7d61f <----this ones aussie commentary
https://www.inverse.com/article/15350-george-washington-saw-donald-trump-coming-and-predicted-what-would-happen-next
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/01/george-washington-farewell-address-donald-trump
I originally said it because of a quote from Hamilton I saw and read discussion about before but I didn't find it right away.
This has gotten farther and farther from the subject of actual, tangible, concrete, or really in any way shape or form; voter fraud, and is closer to the topic of "was an old Billionaire American President treated less than fairly?" which when you call it what it is, is pretty cringey. "Too bad he couldn't consolidate any more power than he did in 4 years." Yup. Tragedy of the century. -
2021-02-08 at 1:45 AM UTCdid you read any of those articles? because I know you didn't read the first one
-
2021-02-08 at 1:51 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra did you read any of those articles? because I know you didn't read the first one
yeah it was about some guy named Ellis who wrote a book in 2001 and writes a blog for conservatives who got flack because of comments he made about trump in relation to the FFs. I agree it probably shouldn't have been included and I really only did because of the URL -
2021-02-08 at 1:55 AM UTCI mean the first link is paywalled lol
-
2021-02-08 at 2:05 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra I mean the first link is paywalled lol
I read the whole thing. That's weird. Guess it's only accessible from joogle. This is the author and book that was mentioned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Brothers. You can google other stuff yourself but the founding fathers were reeel G's. -
2021-02-08 at 2:08 AM UTCYou know who's great at 'Fortifying' elections?
LukashenkoThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2021-02-08 at 3:03 AM UTCDiverting the debate into the weeds is a common tactic too.
The simple reality is that Trump was winning by a comfortable margin in several swing states, all of who closed their count overnight, and the next day Biden got a big bump.
And do you believe that if Sudo or Larry or Techno were working in one of those counting centers they wouldn't have been throwing Biden ballots into the machine a few times?
The election was fraudulent because there is no way it couldn't have been given all we know.
Too many people who were willing to do anything to "save democracy", even riot, kill, burn, destroy, and lie.
You think the same people who were covering up for antifa terror and arson for 6 months would be above a little vote fraud?The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2021-02-08 at 3:11 AM UTC
Originally posted by Donald Trump Diverting the debate into the weeds is a common tactic too.
The simple reality is that Trump was winning by a comfortable margin in several swing states, all of who closed their count overnight, and the next day Biden got a big bump.
And do you believe that if Sudo or Larry or Techno were working in one of those counting centers they wouldn't have been throwing Biden ballots into the machine a few times?
Lol common mistake by people that are clueless about what happened.
Hand counted vote audits have shown that nobody "ran ballots through da machines 3-7 times!"
Only the dishonest and willfully ignorant still claim this bullshit -
2021-02-08 at 3:11 AM UTC
Originally posted by Sudo I read the whole thing. That's weird. Guess it's only accessible from joogle. This is the author and book that was mentioned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Brothers. You can google other stuff yourself but the founding fathers were reeel G's.
I'll read them a bit later, concentration's shot
Originally posted by rabbitweed You know who's great at 'Fortifying' elections?
Lukashenko
he's a pretty cool guy though -
2021-02-08 at 3:13 AM UTC
-
2021-02-08 at 3:20 AM UTC
-
2021-02-08 at 3:22 AM UTC
