Donald Trump

"

morbo wrote:

^ this generation has been taught in school that you can have all the dreams you want, as long as you can imagine it. So now the election results, a statistical fact, becomes a "narrative frame" in sjw fantasyland.

Well, if you can make up your gender, then I guess you can make up who is your president too.

Damn, everything was going so smooth, all the bought media lied in favour of Hillary, Hollywood stars were already popping champagne... and then reality hits hard with a big stick. Have any snowflakes claimed PTSD yet?

The only fact here is an insecure voting system.

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

The only fact here is an insecure voting system.

Then better do a recount in states where Hillary supposedly won by a small margin.

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

"

morbo wrote:

^ this generation has been taught in school that you can have all the dreams you want, as long as you can imagine it. So now the election results, a statistical fact, becomes a "narrative frame" in sjw fantasyland.

Well, if you can make up your gender, then I guess you can make up who is your president too.

Damn, everything was going so smooth, all the bought media lied in favour of Hillary, Hollywood stars were already popping champagne... and then reality hits hard with a big stick. Have any snowflakes claimed PTSD yet?

The only fact here is an insecure voting system.

Just about every attempt to try and make voting more secure has been attacked by the left and taken to a judge to get turned over.

Hillary lost because as much as the anti-Trump crowd complained, they still had very little enthusiasm for Hillary. Trump won, because almost as much as the anti-Hillary crowd disliked Hillary, they felt enthusiastic that Trump would oppose what Hillary represented. There was a LOT of enthusiasm for Trump, and almost none for Hillary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-VzSG-2oYI


Hillary might have gotten Beeten no matter who she ran against, as this analysis shows:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGwwTfZtgWU

@TheAnuhart



WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW?

"

morbo wrote:

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

The only fact here is an insecure voting system.

Then better do a recount in states where Hillary supposedly won by a small margin.

Republicans could have asked for that. Probably there haven´t been any irregularities found in those elections, so it would be a waste of money.

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

To be honest I think Trump fans are like Trump, "accept the result - if I win"...

In fairness, the hillary side were the ones going hard on the "accept the result when it comes" mantra pre election.





Regarding the chaos of Trumps compaign, seeming lack of direction etc, there was an interesting documentary on BBC iPlayer from Adam Curtis recently called Hypernormalisation. It touched on many things as his films always do, there was a fair amount of Trump in it. There was also fair bit of Russia, and looking at Putins guy over there who has this way of weaving chaos, he would fund anti government organisations, pro government, lots of directly opposing forces, and then tell everyone thats what he was doing so that no one could be sure of anything. He then compares Trump to this, the way Trump would randomly spout left wing, right wing, conspiracy, anything off the cuff to the point where everyone knew you couldnt take what he said seriously which essentially disarmed the medias ability to hang anything against him on what he was saying. Im simplifying and bastardizing the ideas here, but it was interesting.

I think Adam Curtis docs should be essential viewing for anyone who enjoys politics and history regardless of topic tbh because they tell strange histories that you just dont get through normal channels. Im not sure theres a proper version I can link to anyone outside of the uk though as its iplayer only. Theres a clip of some of the parts that involve Trump here...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=he1S9fZHcK4



Here is a link to what looks like the full thing, but it wouldnt surprise me if its somehow chopped or messed with to avoid copyright capture stuffs like other full versions Ive come across on utubs, this ones 6 mins longer than the others tho so maybe its the full deal...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afBmN7icFRw


The doc itself is concerned with how we have essentially retreated to a fake, simple world view that all sides are trapped in because it acts like a safespace.

"

cipher_nemo wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

Reddit went full 1984 by shadow-editing posts on the_donald. The implications of this are rather scary tbh.

Original: http://archive.is/TErOc

Edited: http://archive.is/73EOh

Scroll down to the comments. /u/spez got replaced by the_donald admins. Inb4 it's just a prank bro.

On another note, /r/pizzagate got shut down. The mods muted the people who broke the rules by posting personal information, but the admins unmuted those guys so they can keep breaking the rules. A very convenient way to get rid off a subreddit.

I just researched all of that after your initial post, before you added more to it.

Insane stuff. Reddit admins such as /u/spez editing other people's posts, running scripts to artifically upvote other content, unmuting those that would help bring down a subreddit, and pretty much sticking it to /r/pizzagate like a convict bending over in the showers at a maximum security prison.

Any ways, seems like Reddit is showing just how much of an elitist bi**h they can be. Helped me lose any bit of respect I had for them, which was already slim, as I hated Reddit on several levels even before this pizzagategate. Is that going to be a new hashtag now? #pizzagategate ?

I don't really buy into all of the conspiracy theory rambling, but it does have the very important role, at least in this case, or exposing liberal elitists in the reddit "administration". Ha, a conspiracy theory helped for a change. May be I'll go start /r/redditelitism now?

Ok I saw a doc, well, a rambling stream of stuffs on youtuve regarding the pizzagate stuff the other night... holy cow lol.

There was a lot of "this person has a perfectly normal picture of what is probably their kid on their facebook, OMG THIS IS SINISTER THIS PERSON SHOULD BE LOCKED UP!" But there was actually so much stuff that raised an eyebrow that I was unsettled, theres certainly some smoke for sure.

Sad that reddit has lowered itself, not surprising tho unfortunately.

"

DalaiLama wrote:

Live by rules - not have their thought or speech controlled.

I didnt say ppl should have their thoughts or speech controlled, they can think and say what they like, but none of that should influence the rules of society, it should be pushed aside.

I have been in churches many times, enough that I can recite the lords prayer off by heart.

"

Disrupted wrote:

@TheAnuhart

WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW?

I totally laughed out loud, :D

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

Ok I saw a doc, well, a rambling stream of stuffs on youtuve regarding the pizzagate stuff the other night... holy cow lol.

There was a lot of "this person has a perfectly normal picture of what is probably their kid on their facebook, OMG THIS IS SINISTER THIS PERSON SHOULD BE LOCKED UP!" But there was actually so much stuff that raised an eyebrow that I was unsettled, theres certainly some smoke for sure.

I think that's a common - and deliberate - situation when looking into real conspiracies. Promoting irrelevant information increases the signal-to-noise ratio, and it can be difficult to distunguish an intentional disinformation spreader from a sincere investigator caught up with a red herring left deliberately, or innocently, by someone else. The latter, unfortunately, does much to discredit his cause, as not only does he misinform his audience despite his intentions, but opponents use earlier errors to discredit anything valid which happens to turn up later when there's real information to report (recent example: InfoWars' troubled past + Podesta emails).

I think Julian Assange understands this better than most. Wikileaks record on accuracy has been spectacular, and editorializing is mostly "third party solutioned" so it doesn't become a liability. Still, Wikileaks depends on viral memetics in much the same way GGG depends on trade indexers. (One of my strongest critiques of James O'Keefe is his editing of undercover footage; raw, unedited, un-subtitled content would be much more compelling, and third parties would make derivative videos with better presentation.)

In any case, there's definitely some weirdness in the Podestas talking in code. One doesn't just say "Do you think I'll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?" in emails between powerful people; that's clearly code. There's something going on.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

In any case, there's definitely some weirdness in the Podestas talking in code. One doesn't just say "Do you think I'll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?" in emails between powerful people; that's clearly code. There's something going on.

I haven't followed it as closely as some, but this seems to be the vibe of every part of it. All the evidence is circumstantial, but it's also very powerful and implausible that it's nothing. Kind of reminds me of the Paterno/Sandusky/PSU situation. We can be almost certain that at least 1 or 2 people have done something very wrong, but we have no idea what the larger circle knows, who is covering up what, or just how many people are involved in the first place.