Humans win power over the world and dominate/enslave their fellows, and in the process lose their soul. What benefits a person to gain the world’s approval and glory, but lose their own identity in the process?
Will be interesting to see what happens. Usually, when enthusiasm for your own candidate is low, voter turnout is low. When enthusiasm to stop the opponent is high, you would think voter turnout would be higher, but I recall in 2012 all the talk about people crawling through glass to vote against Obama, and the talk about polls that didn’t take this faction into account, and Obama won anyway (or the election was “hacked”, depending on if you’re a conspiracy nut or not 🙂 )
So I don’t know which way it goes. Most people appear to hate both candidates. Most people are fearful of one (or both) of them winning. Does this lead to a low voter turnout or a high voter turnout?
Also, if I were Hillary, I would want the polls showing me with a lead but not a huge lead, so that my people don’t stay home because “it’s in the bag”. So many unpredictables about this weird election.
The polls that matter more are the ones that come in showing a candidate has supposedly won or lost in an area, before the polls are closed. That has a direct propaganda effect on people.
Say, in Washington, the polls are 70% hillary and 30% Trump. And the end results are 65% hillary and 25% Trum, with 50% in, polls still open though. Half are exit poles, the other half can be insider info.
The Left can do a number of things in this situation. They can start shipping voters out to another city or state, so if they have excess number of Dem votes in one city, they will ship it to another city or state, to “stack the rolls”. Or they could have rejiggered the vote counts from a 55% hillary, to a higher one, to match the polls.
Why would they do that? To ensure that Trum voters don’t vote, because they think their state isn’t in the sway. It’s perception creating reality, or a self fulfilling prophecy, to push down the vote. A more subtle way than when the Demons had Black Panthers sitting at poles driving away voters from the other party.
If the count is close, such as 49% vs 49%, they may need to decrease enthusiasm by portraying the results as 70 vs 30%. Then when the final counts come, they can manipulate that or use the time to pull in more people that can vote multiple times.
A lot of the Left’s alphabet soup agencies are designed to work like this come election season. It’s not just the DNC coordinating things from one hierarchy. That would be very inefficient, and easy to hack through to expose.
To this, add in the DHS announcement that they would be stepping in to monitor the integrity of the election process in the wake of hacks of registration databases.
Given:
(a) this level of unpopularity
(b) this level of polarization
(c) a (not assured) possibility of close results (or results under the 50% threshold, perhaps more likely in this cycle because of (a))
(d) any public perception of tampering
then the possibility of a contested outcome is no longer remote at all. 2000 would look trivial in comparison.
And your Humpty Dumpty metaphor becomes most apt…
Supposedly, I’ve heard that elections can Save a nation like the Aztecs, who used blood magic sacrifices to turn living souls into a source of power and benefits.
I say supposedly, because I’ve never seen that happen in human history. Once a civilization’s population becomes evil, there’s no going back.
White turns black in a moment’s notice. Black can only turn to white after generations of suffering and effort. To use Go as a setup to describe the battle of good vs evil.
Back in 2000, Gore could only make up recounts and oversea votes by hand, as they recounted. The recount kept going up, did you hear? Missing votes or was it DNC slipping bribes and votes in, while invalidating military oversea votes for Bush 2?
The DNC and the Chicago Machine has been far more adept at this voter fraud con game. The Chicago Machine has been given a national brush stroke in the form of various public unions and OFA.
This is also part of the reason why the Left is a Hydra with many heads. Destroy one head, and it doesn’t matter, because it will regenerate from the support of the others and the main body. Get Clinton on charges? Her allies will shield her. Get the FBI to prosecute and DOJ will nullify. Find out the IRS is doing evil? They will take the Fifth and lawyers will then be sure to defend them.
This is the way villains work because it’s easy to see that the same rules don’t apply to heroes or enemies of villains. For enemies of the state, such as at Ruby Ridge, Waco 1, Waco 2, and enemies of America such as Hasan at Ft Hood 1 and the shooter at Ft. Hood 2, the state will determine which laws to enforce. If you belong to one of their allied groups, you will be given preferential treatment. If you are not part of the allied group, you will be exterminated, based on how much loot they can get from you.
Ymarsakar,
Those who would “win power over the world and dominate/enslave their fellows” never had a soul to begin with and, they seek to enslave as a twisted means of gaining an identity… for if they dominate others, they must be greater than them.
““Political tags – such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth – are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. “ R.A. Heinlein
“White turns black in a moment’s notice. Black can only turn to white after generations of suffering and effort.”
The greater the evil, the greater the sacrifice good must make to overcome evil.
“So I don’t know which way it goes. Most people appear to hate both candidates. Most people are fearful of one (or both) of them winning. Does this lead to a low voter turnout or a high voter turnout?” Bill
I’m leaning toward a high turnout.
“I’m leaning toward a high turnout.”
You may very well be right. I’m thinking a higher turnout may help Trump, but I find it hard to feel sure of anything in this crazy season. Can’t wait for this election to be over.
Whereas, I’m leary of what comes after the election.
Ymarsakar @4:27pm:
The DNC and the Chicago Machine has been far more adept at this voter fraud con game.
As it has long been. Which is why the administration inserting itself into the election process just at this point in time strikes me as suspicious, or at the very least, bound to create dangerous conspiracy theories. Given that the negatives are so high, and so comparable, this seems like a risk.
Tenth amendment notwithstanding.
I haven’t written off the public as evil yet. Certain parts of it are another matter entirely.
In that respect, they’re both Weiners.
Also, if I were Hillary, I would want the polls showing me with a lead but not a huge lead, so that my people don’t stay home because “it’s in the bag”.
It doesn’t work this way. A big lead will drive turnout of her supporters, not depress it. A big deficit does the opposite. Humans are weird that way.
“Humans are weird that way.”
Good point.
To some Trump supporters the only way his unfavorable characteristics could change their vote would be if they were killed by Trump at a rally on 5th Ave. The other supporters there would think it was great, Trump weeding someone that was insufficiently loyal; a cuck infiltrator. To make a yuge omelet you have to break some eggs. (some exaggeration)
the mask is off… if trump was not going to win or is not liked ehnough and that was the truth there would be absolutely no reason to expose ones totalitarian impulses and send armies of useful idiots to in essence act like nazxi brownshirts pushing socialism by attacking those who oppose it or want a candidate not approved by the fascists/communists
It is no secret that the mainstream media has decided that the threat presented by a possible Donald Trump presidency is so grave that it has suspended even the illusion of objectivity.
you either have communist/fascist rags attacking or their opposition playing fair trying to report everything honestly… I just renewed the daily news for the last time, as cartoon faces, speech bubbles containing snarky comments, and such – makes the news appear much like reading mad magazine in the 1970s
[i would not complement them by comparing them to harvard lampoon]
Jim Rutenberg granted permission to his fellow journalists “to throw out the textbook American journalism has been using for the better part of the past half-century, if not longer, and approach it in a way you’ve never approached anything in your career.”
there can be no freedom with a press like this
[and given the new move over speech, microagressions, micro assaults, and so on. you can be sure that being X will be a crime worthy of a camp, or oven or some more benign but no less onerous. you know. like they told me at the college, no matter how hard i work, what i achieve, or anything, i can never have a raise or promotion for the rest of my life, and they insured i cant leave either, so i have been cheated out of over a quarter million and am trapped doing consultant level work at entry level salary, and dying is my only way out now… 🙁 ]
The Observer and others have detailed the ways in which traditional media companies and even tech companies have colluded to maximize negative coverage of Trump and minimize negative coverage of his opponent, Hillary Clinton.
and so how do you know the world hates trump?
how can he even be in the race if he is hated?
wasnt Cruz loved more than Trump is hated?
you see, you and i have no idea at all what the public actually thinks of trump, other than what we think.
[edited for length by n-n]
Black helicopters don’t like Trump. Trump good. Evil leftists bad. Propaganda is propaganda. you, you, you. The condensed version.
The attacks on Trump supporters extend even beyond Trump relatives to include, bizarrely, the relatives of supporters. Buzzfeed did a whole story on whether Josh Kushner’s business would be hurt by the fact that – can you follow this? – his brother’s wife’s father is the presidential candidate. Is that the standard? Has there been a single article anywhere about the business prospects of Marc Mezvinsky’s siblings?
did you notice this was missing? remember that it was deemed bad to note that Cruz wife was a CFR person, a Goldman Sachs employee, and more… even the left said that was bad, then they went on finding supporters and going after their relatives… did you notice?
we are so used to ignoring this stuff we refuse to vote those out that do it, for them its normal, for their opposition its bad… its bad to note the relationships of people that make things questionable, like a mexican american judge who is part of race based organzations and promotions, is not biased… and its racist to say he might be and he refused to recuse themselves of it… yet, when FBI says we wont go after the criminal, thats ok, and there is no bias, its just homeland security, which acts more and more like a hybrid of the kgb and gru each day going forweards
The writer of the Buzzfeed story — the talented reporter Nitasha Tiku, who worked at the Observer and was happy to cash checks signed by Jared Kushner when she did–contacted several colleagues of Josh Kushner to determine whether they’d still be comfortable doing business with Josh’s investment firm, Thrive Capital. The Trump-opposing tech investor Chris Sacca is characterized by Tiku as saying, “The Trump connection might have affected Thrive directly.” The message from the MSM is clear: Support Donald Trump, and you–and maybe even your family–will be ridiculed, investigated and ignored.
this is classical blacklisting like the communist subversion stuff from HUAC, but now its the other way around, and you guys think you know the candidate you never met when the whole of the liberal press, and less liberal press are ganging up, their protesters are paid to protest and the candidate is damned if he does and damned if he doesnt.
he goes to mexico, thats bad
he doesnt go to mexico, thats bad too
ie. he is to be painted as bad no matter what he does.. even if what he has done matches what the left wants… racial discrimination stopped in palm beach and jews and blacks allowed at mar a lago… women paid more… paid leave is the norm… they even fault him for following the business practices that are created by the laws and rules they made… ie. he should ignore that they made it uneconomical to not use foreign labor, as a political protest against the laws he doesnt like?
[edited for length by n-n]
before you read about asch, take a look at this headline: Pollsters fight to figure out Trump phenomenon
now, i do not know how to teach people who dont know this about this in any shorter way
if i assert it without empirical reference, you can ignore it
if i dont blind assert, and give reference, it can be ignored and unread
if i dont blind assert and give the short description, its too long and neo may cut me down
damned no matter how i try given the complexity of the subject and the thesis
[the science of controlling people in groups has lots of stuff and if you dont know its work, you dont know what they use or do… madson avenue relies on this stuff and so do political campaigns!!!!!]
In psychology, the Asch conformity experiments or the Asch Paradigm refers to a series of studies directed by Solomon Asch studying if and how individuals yielded to or defied a majority group and the effect of such influences on beliefs and opinions
this is a major source of the techniques used in dialoguing to consensus and what you learn (without attribution) when you learn how to manipulate groups and get what you want from them as a manager or other corporate entity… guess where i first learned it? in fortune 10 training courses, and before that in my madison avenu short stint’
Groups of eight male college students participated in a simple “perceptual” task. In reality, all but one of the participants were “confederates” (i.e., actors), and the true focus of the study was about how this subject would react to the confederates’ behavior.
The confederates knew the true aim of the experiment, but were introduced to the subject as other participants. Each student viewed a card with a line on it, followed by another with three lines labeled “A”, “B”, and “C” (See accompanying figure). One of these lines was the same as that on the first card, and the other two lines were clearly longer or shorter (i.e., a near-100% rate of correct responding was expected). Each participant was then asked to say aloud which line matched the length of that on the first card. Prior to the experiment, all confederates were given specific instructions on how they should respond to each trial (card presentation). They would always unanimously nominate one comparator, but on certain trials they would give the correct response and on others, an incorrect response. The group was seated such that the real participant always responded last.
Subjects completed 18 trials. On the first two trials, both the subject and the confederates gave the obvious, correct answer. On the third trial, the confederates would all give the same wrong answer. This wrong-responding recurred on 11 of the remaining 15 trials.
It was subjects’ behavior on these 12 “critical trials” that formed the aim of the study: to test how many subjects would change their answer to conform to those of the 7 confederates, despite it being wrong. Subjects were interviewed after the study including being debriefed about the true purpose of the study. These post-test interviews shed valuable light on the study: both because they revealed subjects often were “just going along” and because they revealed considerable individual differences to Asch.
how do you think it turned out? note that the wrongs were OBVIOUSLY wrong
they were ridiculously wrong…
In the control group, with no pressure to conform to confederates, the error rate on the critical stimuli was less than 1%.
In the confederate condition also, the majority of participants’ responses remained correct (63.2 per cent), but a sizable minority of responses conformed to the confederate (incorrect) answer (36.8 per cent).
The responses revealed strong individual differences: Only 5 percent of participants were always swayed by the crowd. 25 percent of the sample consistently defied majority opinion, with the rest conforming on some trials.
An examination of all critical trials in the experimental group revealed that one-third of all responses were incorrect. These incorrect responses often matched the incorrect response of the majority group (i.e., confederates). Overall, 75% of participants gave at least one incorrect answer out of the 12 critical trials
hows that? now you know why the left lies about this…
its right out of dialoguing to consensus, and it plays on our biology going back to chimps and the idea that those who are not part of the group, end up dead… we are social creatures
Now apply that to the left and how they make you think that the 20% are really the majority, not a loud outsides perception majority, and that you should change your mind to align with them (gliechshaltung)
another study has to do with the perception of avoiding things that have problems
so politiclly they imply problems without evidence… while supressing problems with evidence
so hillary emails are constantly surpressed as to their legality, importance, etc… all minimizing
and trump is so clean they have to imply prolbems with his penis from his hand size, and blame him for that idea, and ignore LBJ and his big daddy and how he whipped it out all the time to intimidate others.
now… if you take the time to know a library of these things and put them together into a tool box of things to exploit and use, you may have a very bright career in poly sci working on candidates elections exploiting the biology of the constituents.
AND whats funny is that they will negate that this works on them… but if you set the study up and such, the people end up falling for it… After all, David Copperfield would not ahve made near a billion dollars doing tricks that only work on a few people.. they work on most people, and only a few it doesnt…
so think of this game and college..
5% are your outspoken republiucans willing to be attacked
20% are the people doing the manipulating (shaming, threatening, calling people names. ALL social biolotical games!!!)
and the rest, the 75%, you have no idea of because they go along to get along, and do so without constistency based on judgements of worth the fight or not, and most cases not… so its easier to lie and present a false image to that 20% than it is to combat them for no gain
this then has the result that others think that the 20% are much larger than they are
because they dont know the numbers of others who would not align, but do align to be included
this is more maginified in a socialist collective game, under the idea that a primate outside the collective dies out slowly and so we are very afraid to be alone like an aspergers person (me)…
(This is why i am usually of the 5% because aspergers value truth over social things… )
learn the game…
or lose the game…
there are no other choices…
which basically is the same with hillary vs trump
this follows one of the three legs of classical logic, and one of the four legs of philosophy
In logic, the law of excluded middle (or the principle of excluded middle) is the third of the three classic laws of thought. It states that for any proposition, either that proposition is true, or its negation is true.
The law is also known as the law (or principle) of the excluded third, in Latin principium tertii exclusi. Another Latin designation for this law is tertium non datur: “no third (possibility) is given”.
and read Marxist sociology… how to know how man functions so you can control man…
the whole iea of communism in the west is the tricking of the polity, while outside that its force without caring what the mules and draught horses think as long as they act..
I find it interesting that Drudge linked to an article today about the pollsters are worried about not capturing a segment of support for Trump. Call it whatever you want the ‘shy Tory’ or the ‘closet Trump supporter.’
I think this is the problem: the pollsters are not capturing the trend in new voter registrations and switched party registrations since the beginning of the year. They are not adjusting their pools to fit that change. And, therefore, are missing a percentage of Trump voters in their polls.
For example, it was in the news just last week that Republican registrations in Florida have been far outpacing Democrat registrations. Why aren’t the pollsters looking at that and thinking, “Gee, maybe I should add a few more Republicans to my sample.”
Instead, they are sticking to 2012 turnout numbers and, in some cases, using huge oversamples of women (I’ve been 60% women/40% men in several of these polls) or big Democrat oversamples.
Now, they could be using some of this based on 2012 turnout models, but I think they are beginning to realize they may be VERY off where the actual electorate will be in November 2016. They are worried their polls will be so wrong as to undermine their integrity as a pollster.
I just know that every speech Trump gives, every appearance he makes, he’s gathering more and more support. He is not losing support. And many polls are indicating that. Hillary has hit her ‘high’ and will not be able to reclaim it. The next 2 months will be more and more people being comfortable with Trump and moving in his direction. All he has to do is show them he is serious and can do the job. And so far, the last few weeks of speeches and appearances in LA and Mexico have shown that.
“Trumpism got shellacked in primary contests this week by two members of The Gang of Eight. Trump’s mini-me’s – aping the crudity, the protectionism, the anti-establishment blather – are all going down in flames, as they did last month in Paul Ryan’s blowout victory.
Which brings me to a question for those who are all in on the idea that this is some kind of political revolution: Why? If Trump’s success is all about these Very Important Issues, why aren’t those issues working for anyone else?
I actually think Rush Limbaugh’s explanation for why Trump’s then-alleged flip-flop on immigration wouldn’t matter: Because Trump is such an outsider in the minds of his supporters, that they don’t judge him by conventional political standards. I think that’s right – but it’s also just another way of saying, they like the entertaining celebrity and the way he flips the bird at politics as usual.” – Jonah G
One thing I noticed when trump said clinton is a “bigot” was the man on the right of the screen having a good laugh. It stood out in a big way when I first saw it on the news, and was not certain why it struck me so.
That it is “entertainment” for some people seems the right explanation, yet even that seems insufficient, as even those other outsider challengers who just lost should be just as entertaining – maybe they are poorer imitators of trump?
Contrast that with the woman on the left side who raised her eyebrows and cringes, and most of the rest who largely just stand and smile.
“so now.. how do you know what a poll response is when the people who support a candidate are beaten up, fired from work, followed home, and more?
knowing that you could get killeed supporting trump against the communists and fascists, would you answer some shmuck on the street asking something?”
We have Trump supporters on this blog – including yourselves. Have you been threatened personally, or is there any evidence that anyone has actually been killed, lost their job, etc, for supporting Trump?
Trump likes communists and fascists, by the way. You’ve noticed his admiration for guys like Putin, Saddam, etc.
K_E: “I just know that every speech Trump gives, every appearance he makes, he’s gathering more and more support. He is not losing support. And many polls are indicating that. “
You can’t in the same comment talk about how the polls are wrong and then say that polls are correctly showing his support growing.
Bill:
You write, “You can’t in the same comment talk about how the polls are wrong and then say that polls are correctly showing his support growing.”
Oh, no? Just watch 🙂 .
I know you realize this, but it’s done all the time, constantly, incessantly, with no sense of irony or contradiction or awareness. I see it here, there, and everywhere, and it always startles me but it really really shouldn’t.
It is all too common to be inconsistent in one’s arguments and use whatever works. I try not to do that. I hope I succeed.
K-E:
Could you provide a link to an article about how GOP registrations are outstripping Democratic registrations? I can’t find anything that says that.
“did you notice this was missing? remember that it was deemed bad to note that Cruz wife was a CFR person, a Goldman Sachs employee, and more… even the left said that was bad, then they went on finding supporters and going after their relatives… did you notice?”
And Steven K Bannon worked for Goldman Sachs. Square that circle.
And more and more/jk
I wonder how much progress Om has made on becoming an authority on strawmen arguments.
September 1st, 2016 at 10:14 am
Was what I forgot to add I was reading with my reply in mind.
September 1st, 2016 at 3:30 pm
Is a relatively good argument, although like Vander said, what difference does it make at this point. A play on Clinton’s words, making fun of the system, America, Congress, and CLinton all at once.
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Humans win power over the world and dominate/enslave their fellows, and in the process lose their soul. What benefits a person to gain the world’s approval and glory, but lose their own identity in the process?
Will be interesting to see what happens. Usually, when enthusiasm for your own candidate is low, voter turnout is low. When enthusiasm to stop the opponent is high, you would think voter turnout would be higher, but I recall in 2012 all the talk about people crawling through glass to vote against Obama, and the talk about polls that didn’t take this faction into account, and Obama won anyway (or the election was “hacked”, depending on if you’re a conspiracy nut or not 🙂 )
So I don’t know which way it goes. Most people appear to hate both candidates. Most people are fearful of one (or both) of them winning. Does this lead to a low voter turnout or a high voter turnout?
Also, if I were Hillary, I would want the polls showing me with a lead but not a huge lead, so that my people don’t stay home because “it’s in the bag”. So many unpredictables about this weird election.
The polls that matter more are the ones that come in showing a candidate has supposedly won or lost in an area, before the polls are closed. That has a direct propaganda effect on people.
Say, in Washington, the polls are 70% hillary and 30% Trump. And the end results are 65% hillary and 25% Trum, with 50% in, polls still open though. Half are exit poles, the other half can be insider info.
The Left can do a number of things in this situation. They can start shipping voters out to another city or state, so if they have excess number of Dem votes in one city, they will ship it to another city or state, to “stack the rolls”. Or they could have rejiggered the vote counts from a 55% hillary, to a higher one, to match the polls.
Why would they do that? To ensure that Trum voters don’t vote, because they think their state isn’t in the sway. It’s perception creating reality, or a self fulfilling prophecy, to push down the vote. A more subtle way than when the Demons had Black Panthers sitting at poles driving away voters from the other party.
If the count is close, such as 49% vs 49%, they may need to decrease enthusiasm by portraying the results as 70 vs 30%. Then when the final counts come, they can manipulate that or use the time to pull in more people that can vote multiple times.
A lot of the Left’s alphabet soup agencies are designed to work like this come election season. It’s not just the DNC coordinating things from one hierarchy. That would be very inefficient, and easy to hack through to expose.
To this, add in the DHS announcement that they would be stepping in to monitor the integrity of the election process in the wake of hacks of registration databases.
Given:
(a) this level of unpopularity
(b) this level of polarization
(c) a (not assured) possibility of close results (or results under the 50% threshold, perhaps more likely in this cycle because of (a))
(d) any public perception of tampering
then the possibility of a contested outcome is no longer remote at all. 2000 would look trivial in comparison.
And your Humpty Dumpty metaphor becomes most apt…
Supposedly, I’ve heard that elections can Save a nation like the Aztecs, who used blood magic sacrifices to turn living souls into a source of power and benefits.
I say supposedly, because I’ve never seen that happen in human history. Once a civilization’s population becomes evil, there’s no going back.
White turns black in a moment’s notice. Black can only turn to white after generations of suffering and effort. To use Go as a setup to describe the battle of good vs evil.
Back in 2000, Gore could only make up recounts and oversea votes by hand, as they recounted. The recount kept going up, did you hear? Missing votes or was it DNC slipping bribes and votes in, while invalidating military oversea votes for Bush 2?
The DNC and the Chicago Machine has been far more adept at this voter fraud con game. The Chicago Machine has been given a national brush stroke in the form of various public unions and OFA.
This is also part of the reason why the Left is a Hydra with many heads. Destroy one head, and it doesn’t matter, because it will regenerate from the support of the others and the main body. Get Clinton on charges? Her allies will shield her. Get the FBI to prosecute and DOJ will nullify. Find out the IRS is doing evil? They will take the Fifth and lawyers will then be sure to defend them.
This is the way villains work because it’s easy to see that the same rules don’t apply to heroes or enemies of villains. For enemies of the state, such as at Ruby Ridge, Waco 1, Waco 2, and enemies of America such as Hasan at Ft Hood 1 and the shooter at Ft. Hood 2, the state will determine which laws to enforce. If you belong to one of their allied groups, you will be given preferential treatment. If you are not part of the allied group, you will be exterminated, based on how much loot they can get from you.
Ymarsakar,
Those who would “win power over the world and dominate/enslave their fellows” never had a soul to begin with and, they seek to enslave as a twisted means of gaining an identity… for if they dominate others, they must be greater than them.
““Political tags – such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth – are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. “ R.A. Heinlein
“White turns black in a moment’s notice. Black can only turn to white after generations of suffering and effort.”
The greater the evil, the greater the sacrifice good must make to overcome evil.
“So I don’t know which way it goes. Most people appear to hate both candidates. Most people are fearful of one (or both) of them winning. Does this lead to a low voter turnout or a high voter turnout?” Bill
I’m leaning toward a high turnout.
“I’m leaning toward a high turnout.”
You may very well be right. I’m thinking a higher turnout may help Trump, but I find it hard to feel sure of anything in this crazy season. Can’t wait for this election to be over.
Whereas, I’m leary of what comes after the election.
Ymarsakar @4:27pm:
The DNC and the Chicago Machine has been far more adept at this voter fraud con game.
As it has long been. Which is why the administration inserting itself into the election process just at this point in time strikes me as suspicious, or at the very least, bound to create dangerous conspiracy theories. Given that the negatives are so high, and so comparable, this seems like a risk.
Tenth amendment notwithstanding.
I haven’t written off the public as evil yet. Certain parts of it are another matter entirely.
In that respect, they’re both Weiners.
It doesn’t work this way. A big lead will drive turnout of her supporters, not depress it. A big deficit does the opposite. Humans are weird that way.
“Humans are weird that way.”
Good point.
To some Trump supporters the only way his unfavorable characteristics could change their vote would be if they were killed by Trump at a rally on 5th Ave. The other supporters there would think it was great, Trump weeding someone that was insufficiently loyal; a cuck infiltrator. To make a yuge omelet you have to break some eggs. (some exaggeration)
But now a serious analysis of Trump:
https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/08/31/media-swoons-over-poll-tested-heavily-scripted-consultant-controlled-trump/2/
Mainstream Media: Defeat Trump By Attacking His Supporters
First they come after you, then they target your family and business relationships
http://observer.com/2016/09/mainstream-media-defeat-trump-by-attacking-his-supporters/
the mask is off… if trump was not going to win or is not liked ehnough and that was the truth there would be absolutely no reason to expose ones totalitarian impulses and send armies of useful idiots to in essence act like nazxi brownshirts pushing socialism by attacking those who oppose it or want a candidate not approved by the fascists/communists
you either have communist/fascist rags attacking or their opposition playing fair trying to report everything honestly… I just renewed the daily news for the last time, as cartoon faces, speech bubbles containing snarky comments, and such – makes the news appear much like reading mad magazine in the 1970s
[i would not complement them by comparing them to harvard lampoon]
Jim Rutenberg granted permission to his fellow journalists “to throw out the textbook American journalism has been using for the better part of the past half-century, if not longer, and approach it in a way you’ve never approached anything in your career.”
there can be no freedom with a press like this
[and given the new move over speech, microagressions, micro assaults, and so on. you can be sure that being X will be a crime worthy of a camp, or oven or some more benign but no less onerous. you know. like they told me at the college, no matter how hard i work, what i achieve, or anything, i can never have a raise or promotion for the rest of my life, and they insured i cant leave either, so i have been cheated out of over a quarter million and am trapped doing consultant level work at entry level salary, and dying is my only way out now… 🙁 ]
The Observer and others have detailed the ways in which traditional media companies and even tech companies have colluded to maximize negative coverage of Trump and minimize negative coverage of his opponent, Hillary Clinton.
and so how do you know the world hates trump?
how can he even be in the race if he is hated?
wasnt Cruz loved more than Trump is hated?
you see, you and i have no idea at all what the public actually thinks of trump, other than what we think.
[edited for length by n-n]
Black helicopters don’t like Trump. Trump good. Evil leftists bad. Propaganda is propaganda. you, you, you. The condensed version.
The attacks on Trump supporters extend even beyond Trump relatives to include, bizarrely, the relatives of supporters. Buzzfeed did a whole story on whether Josh Kushner’s business would be hurt by the fact that – can you follow this? – his brother’s wife’s father is the presidential candidate. Is that the standard? Has there been a single article anywhere about the business prospects of Marc Mezvinsky’s siblings?
did you notice this was missing? remember that it was deemed bad to note that Cruz wife was a CFR person, a Goldman Sachs employee, and more… even the left said that was bad, then they went on finding supporters and going after their relatives… did you notice?
we are so used to ignoring this stuff we refuse to vote those out that do it, for them its normal, for their opposition its bad… its bad to note the relationships of people that make things questionable, like a mexican american judge who is part of race based organzations and promotions, is not biased… and its racist to say he might be and he refused to recuse themselves of it… yet, when FBI says we wont go after the criminal, thats ok, and there is no bias, its just homeland security, which acts more and more like a hybrid of the kgb and gru each day going forweards
this is classical blacklisting like the communist subversion stuff from HUAC, but now its the other way around, and you guys think you know the candidate you never met when the whole of the liberal press, and less liberal press are ganging up, their protesters are paid to protest and the candidate is damned if he does and damned if he doesnt.
he goes to mexico, thats bad
he doesnt go to mexico, thats bad too
ie. he is to be painted as bad no matter what he does.. even if what he has done matches what the left wants… racial discrimination stopped in palm beach and jews and blacks allowed at mar a lago… women paid more… paid leave is the norm… they even fault him for following the business practices that are created by the laws and rules they made… ie. he should ignore that they made it uneconomical to not use foreign labor, as a political protest against the laws he doesnt like?
[edited for length by n-n]
before you read about asch, take a look at this headline:
Pollsters fight to figure out Trump phenomenon
now, i do not know how to teach people who dont know this about this in any shorter way
if i assert it without empirical reference, you can ignore it
if i dont blind assert, and give reference, it can be ignored and unread
if i dont blind assert and give the short description, its too long and neo may cut me down
damned no matter how i try given the complexity of the subject and the thesis
[the science of controlling people in groups has lots of stuff and if you dont know its work, you dont know what they use or do… madson avenue relies on this stuff and so do political campaigns!!!!!]
Asch conformity experiments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments
In psychology, the Asch conformity experiments or the Asch Paradigm refers to a series of studies directed by Solomon Asch studying if and how individuals yielded to or defied a majority group and the effect of such influences on beliefs and opinions
this is a major source of the techniques used in dialoguing to consensus and what you learn (without attribution) when you learn how to manipulate groups and get what you want from them as a manager or other corporate entity… guess where i first learned it? in fortune 10 training courses, and before that in my madison avenu short stint’
how do you think it turned out? note that the wrongs were OBVIOUSLY wrong
they were ridiculously wrong…
hows that? now you know why the left lies about this…
its right out of dialoguing to consensus, and it plays on our biology going back to chimps and the idea that those who are not part of the group, end up dead… we are social creatures
Now apply that to the left and how they make you think that the 20% are really the majority, not a loud outsides perception majority, and that you should change your mind to align with them (gliechshaltung)
another study has to do with the perception of avoiding things that have problems
so politiclly they imply problems without evidence… while supressing problems with evidence
so hillary emails are constantly surpressed as to their legality, importance, etc… all minimizing
and trump is so clean they have to imply prolbems with his penis from his hand size, and blame him for that idea, and ignore LBJ and his big daddy and how he whipped it out all the time to intimidate others.
now… if you take the time to know a library of these things and put them together into a tool box of things to exploit and use, you may have a very bright career in poly sci working on candidates elections exploiting the biology of the constituents.
AND whats funny is that they will negate that this works on them… but if you set the study up and such, the people end up falling for it… After all, David Copperfield would not ahve made near a billion dollars doing tricks that only work on a few people.. they work on most people, and only a few it doesnt…
so think of this game and college..
5% are your outspoken republiucans willing to be attacked
20% are the people doing the manipulating (shaming, threatening, calling people names. ALL social biolotical games!!!)
and the rest, the 75%, you have no idea of because they go along to get along, and do so without constistency based on judgements of worth the fight or not, and most cases not… so its easier to lie and present a false image to that 20% than it is to combat them for no gain
this then has the result that others think that the 20% are much larger than they are
because they dont know the numbers of others who would not align, but do align to be included
this is more maginified in a socialist collective game, under the idea that a primate outside the collective dies out slowly and so we are very afraid to be alone like an aspergers person (me)…
(This is why i am usually of the 5% because aspergers value truth over social things… )
learn the game…
or lose the game…
there are no other choices…
which basically is the same with hillary vs trump
this follows one of the three legs of classical logic, and one of the four legs of philosophy
In logic, the law of excluded middle (or the principle of excluded middle) is the third of the three classic laws of thought. It states that for any proposition, either that proposition is true, or its negation is true.
The law is also known as the law (or principle) of the excluded third, in Latin principium tertii exclusi. Another Latin designation for this law is tertium non datur: “no third (possibility) is given”.
and read Marxist sociology… how to know how man functions so you can control man…
the whole iea of communism in the west is the tricking of the polity, while outside that its force without caring what the mules and draught horses think as long as they act..
I find it interesting that Drudge linked to an article today about the pollsters are worried about not capturing a segment of support for Trump. Call it whatever you want the ‘shy Tory’ or the ‘closet Trump supporter.’
I think this is the problem: the pollsters are not capturing the trend in new voter registrations and switched party registrations since the beginning of the year. They are not adjusting their pools to fit that change. And, therefore, are missing a percentage of Trump voters in their polls.
For example, it was in the news just last week that Republican registrations in Florida have been far outpacing Democrat registrations. Why aren’t the pollsters looking at that and thinking, “Gee, maybe I should add a few more Republicans to my sample.”
Instead, they are sticking to 2012 turnout numbers and, in some cases, using huge oversamples of women (I’ve been 60% women/40% men in several of these polls) or big Democrat oversamples.
Now, they could be using some of this based on 2012 turnout models, but I think they are beginning to realize they may be VERY off where the actual electorate will be in November 2016. They are worried their polls will be so wrong as to undermine their integrity as a pollster.
I just know that every speech Trump gives, every appearance he makes, he’s gathering more and more support. He is not losing support. And many polls are indicating that. Hillary has hit her ‘high’ and will not be able to reclaim it. The next 2 months will be more and more people being comfortable with Trump and moving in his direction. All he has to do is show them he is serious and can do the job. And so far, the last few weeks of speeches and appearances in LA and Mexico have shown that.
“Trumpism got shellacked in primary contests this week by two members of The Gang of Eight. Trump’s mini-me’s – aping the crudity, the protectionism, the anti-establishment blather – are all going down in flames, as they did last month in Paul Ryan’s blowout victory.
Which brings me to a question for those who are all in on the idea that this is some kind of political revolution: Why? If Trump’s success is all about these Very Important Issues, why aren’t those issues working for anyone else?
I actually think Rush Limbaugh’s explanation for why Trump’s then-alleged flip-flop on immigration wouldn’t matter: Because Trump is such an outsider in the minds of his supporters, that they don’t judge him by conventional political standards. I think that’s right – but it’s also just another way of saying, they like the entertaining celebrity and the way he flips the bird at politics as usual.” – Jonah G
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/439600/trumpism-not-popular?target=author&tid=897
One thing I noticed when trump said clinton is a “bigot” was the man on the right of the screen having a good laugh. It stood out in a big way when I first saw it on the news, and was not certain why it struck me so.
That it is “entertainment” for some people seems the right explanation, yet even that seems insufficient, as even those other outsider challengers who just lost should be just as entertaining – maybe they are poorer imitators of trump?
Contrast that with the woman on the left side who raised her eyebrows and cringes, and most of the rest who largely just stand and smile.
Check it out at ~0:25…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFuLc3GKuYU
Art: Man, you can write some long comments!
“so now.. how do you know what a poll response is when the people who support a candidate are beaten up, fired from work, followed home, and more?
knowing that you could get killeed supporting trump against the communists and fascists, would you answer some shmuck on the street asking something?”
We have Trump supporters on this blog – including yourselves. Have you been threatened personally, or is there any evidence that anyone has actually been killed, lost their job, etc, for supporting Trump?
Trump likes communists and fascists, by the way. You’ve noticed his admiration for guys like Putin, Saddam, etc.
K_E: “I just know that every speech Trump gives, every appearance he makes, he’s gathering more and more support. He is not losing support. And many polls are indicating that. “
You can’t in the same comment talk about how the polls are wrong and then say that polls are correctly showing his support growing.
Bill:
You write, “You can’t in the same comment talk about how the polls are wrong and then say that polls are correctly showing his support growing.”
Oh, no? Just watch 🙂 .
I know you realize this, but it’s done all the time, constantly, incessantly, with no sense of irony or contradiction or awareness. I see it here, there, and everywhere, and it always startles me but it really really shouldn’t.
It is all too common to be inconsistent in one’s arguments and use whatever works. I try not to do that. I hope I succeed.
K-E:
Could you provide a link to an article about how GOP registrations are outstripping Democratic registrations? I can’t find anything that says that.
“did you notice this was missing? remember that it was deemed bad to note that Cruz wife was a CFR person, a Goldman Sachs employee, and more… even the left said that was bad, then they went on finding supporters and going after their relatives… did you notice?”
And Steven K Bannon worked for Goldman Sachs. Square that circle.
And more and more/jk
I wonder how much progress Om has made on becoming an authority on strawmen arguments.
September 1st, 2016 at 10:14 am
Was what I forgot to add I was reading with my reply in mind.
September 1st, 2016 at 3:30 pm
Is a relatively good argument, although like Vander said, what difference does it make at this point. A play on Clinton’s words, making fun of the system, America, Congress, and CLinton all at once.