American election.

General chit-chat

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 5021
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: American election.

Post by attofishpi »

tillingborn wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 12:37 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:09 ama "journalist" will attempt to be objective and tell the whole truth; a "propagandist" is somebody who has no such intentions
I'm hearing you say that a "journalist" will attempt to be objective and tell the whole truth; a "propagandist" is somebody who has no such intentions, and wonder if that's what you mean.
...and that right there is the strife that US people that live on fried chicken and no actual brain nutrition have. They NO longer have the capacity to discern truth in media from fake in media. (amounts to propaganda)

"Journalists" ...especially in the US are on the payroll of vested interests - MEDIA iS OWNED. $tar$ & $tripe$ = tar and tripe - where it comes to UNBIASED reporting....it ALL ultimately comes back to WHO HAS THE CASH TO INFLUENCE??
Last edited by attofishpi on Wed Jan 20, 2021 2:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11919
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: American election.

Post by Immanuel Can »

tillingborn wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 12:37 am Nor should you deny saying what you demonstrably said.
I see.

Retrenchment. Okay.

Have a good day.
tillingborn
Posts: 1073
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: American election.

Post by tillingborn »

Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 12:50 am
tillingborn wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 12:37 am Nor should you deny saying what you demonstrably said.
I see.

Retrenchment. Okay.
Hardly. I think you missed a bit:
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Jan 19, 2021 11:23 pm
tillingborn wrote: Tue Jan 19, 2021 10:04 pm As for having "to stop rewriting what the other has said"...
Let's have two example, shall we?

One was this:
...so to qualify as a journalist, one is fully honest or not at all.
Has it genuinely escaped your memory that we argued this over 20 pages? More disturbingly, have you forgotten that just this afternoon you wrote:
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:09 ama "journalist" will attempt to be objective and tell the whole truth; a "propagandist" is somebody who has no such intentions
I'm hearing you say that a "journalist" will attempt to be objective and tell the whole truth; a "propagandist" is somebody who has no such intentions, and wonder if that's what you mean.
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Jan 19, 2021 11:23 pmThe previous one was this:
Are we to believe that anything labelled 'organic' is the product either of racketeers or quasi-religious leftist ideologues?
Emphasis mine, to show the case. In the former one, you tired to rewrite me as saying there was no gradient in the matter of journalistic ethics, which was the very opposite of what I had said. In the second one, you actually had to insert the phrase "quasi-religious leftist ideologues" into the context completely.
That's what I'm suggesting you quit doing.
That's from here:
Immanuel Can wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 6:20 pmThat's what makes the difference between "environmental management" (rational, scientific, measured action) and "Environmentalism" (the quasi-religious ideology of the Left).
I shan't labour the point further, but it was your suggestion: I'm hearing you say that there is a quasi-religious ideology of the Left and wonder if that's what you mean.
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Jan 19, 2021 11:23 pm Then you wrote:
Your record in that respect isn't good. The one example you have given:turned out to be false:
"Now, what's wrong with that?" you will no doubt complain.

Quite simply, that you can see from your own example that I used the term 'irrational" to apply to environmentalist ideology, and particularly to its feature of adopting measures that are environmentally-destructive -- which, if true, would absolutely justify the term "irrational," since destroying the environment does not rationalize with saving it.

But when you repeated it back to me, in your next message, it was in the context of suggesting I said environmentalists themselves as persons, were "irrational."
Here's the thing: I get that you are claiming that an ideology can be irrational without anyone adopting it, but I really don't think it is coherent to also attribute "adopting measures that are environmentally-destructive" to an ideology. That is what people do. And yes, I also appreciate that doing something irrational, such as "adopting measures that are environmentally-destructive", doesn't render every other thing done by that actor irrational. That after all, would be ad hominem.
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Jan 19, 2021 11:23 pmThere it is again. :shock:

If you insist on doing that, then talking to you becomes a bit like the famous "So you're saying..." interview between Jordan Peterson and Kathy Newman. You seem to like to say, "So you're saying..." and then turning a well-considered phase into something more extreme, just so you can react.

It's a rather simple stratagem, actually, and one I hope you're adopting accidentally. But I see no reason to accept the specious rewriting of my own words as if they were representative of opinions I actually expressed.
Nor should you.
Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 12:50 amHave a good day.
Thank you. You too.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 5021
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: American election.

Post by attofishpi »

PLEASE allow me to put things into perspective to those that only listen to the dude with the GREATEST flagpole:-


IS THE $TAR$ and $TRIPE$ (TAR and TRIPE) represented enough in these images - or do U think people would rally around a flag waving TWAT more if there were indeed, MORE?




Image

Image


...as an Andrew Seas, i am not just too shore. :mrgreen:
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5594
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: American election.

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

Ginkgo wrote: Tue Nov 10, 2020 3:18 am Time for Trump to put on his big boy trousers and embrace defeat.
Hey Ginkgo! Seriously, do you really believe he owns a pair? :wink:
Nick_A
Posts: 5571
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: American election.

Post by Nick_A »

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... uxbndlbing
SCHUMER: "Senators will have to decide if they believe Donald Trump incited the ERECTION against the United States."
Is this why America is having such a hard time coming to grips with voting irregularities ?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11919
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: American election.

Post by Immanuel Can »

Let's suppose the election wasn't rigged. Let's suppose that.

However, just as a speculation, if an American election were ever rigged, let's see what would follow.

It would follow that somebody discovered they could rig an American election to produce the results they wanted. They could put a candidate of any quality or character up for office, and get him elected, so long as it was in the name of one of the major parties. They would know they could arrange irregularities with ballots and machine tallies that could produce any result they wished...at least within the extremity of plausibility. They could stop an election in process, and reverse results. The press could be counted on to fall into line. The media's oligarchs would support it. Millionaires could be induced to flush resources into the process...

Moreover, they would know that they could avoid any consequences. They would know they didn't have to fear a judicial reaction or a legal investigation of what they had done. And they would also know now that they no longer had any reason to fear even the President of the United States himself objecting to their interventions. And they would know that the reaction from the electorate would be sufficiently tepid, and Americans would continue to accept any results there were dealt. And, of course, the "winners" would immediately come to their aid and cover up any wrongdoing for them.

But those "winners" thereafter would also have real reason to fear them. They would know that the only reason they "won" was because these backstage operators, these manipulators, were on their side. They would know that, thereafter, if any politician gets unruly relative to the goals demanded of them, the operators can present their services to another cause or another candidate, with the same results. So the party thus elected would have to be very cowed, very tame in the hands of the operators.

In short, if somebody could do that, they would be the new masters of the America.

So let's hope that all didn't happen. Let's hope that's all a mirage, a pipe dream, the crying of a few "sore losers."

Because if it did, what are the chances that those backstage operators are now going to fall to obedient heel behind the Democrat Party, or behind anyone else, ever again?
Walker
Posts: 8714
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: American election.

Post by Walker »

Nick_A wrote: Fri Jan 22, 2021 7:18 pm https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... uxbndlbing
SCHUMER: "Senators will have to decide if they believe Donald Trump incited the ERECTION against the United States."
Is this why America is having such a hard time coming to grips with voting irregularities ?
His mind probably wandered to wondering if an assistant had gotten his good-time prescription filled.

Biden's televised inauguration day looked like a funeral.

This news is hot off the internet.
The question is, is it true?

This is one reason why the military and working class appreciate Trump.

Trump Offers to Let National Guard Stay at the Trump Hotel D.C. After Parking Garage Outrage
https://amgreatness.com/2021/01/22/trum ... e-outrage/

“As American Greatness previously reported, some 5,000 Guardsmen were moved to the parking garage after being told that they were no longer allowed to rest in certain designated rest areas of the Capitol complex, including the visitors’ center and the cafeteria.” The soldiers were forced to bunk in an unheated space in 38-degree temperatures with only one small bathroom and one electrical outlet.

“The troops were told to evacuate the Capitol building grounds on Thursday, after a Democrat congressman complained about one National Guard member not wearing a mask at a cafe in the building, according to Breitbart.”
Nick_A
Posts: 5571
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: American election.

Post by Nick_A »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 22, 2021 7:50 pm Let's suppose the election wasn't rigged. Let's suppose that.

However, just as a speculation, if an American election were ever rigged, let's see what would follow.

It would follow that somebody discovered they could rig an American election to produce the results they wanted. They could put a candidate of any quality or character up for office, and get him elected, so long as it was in the name of one of the major parties. They would know they could arrange irregularities with ballots and machine tallies that could produce any result they wished...at least within the extremity of plausibility. They could stop an election in process, and reverse results. The press could be counted on to fall into line. The media's oligarchs would support it. Millionaires could be induced to flush resources into the process...

Moreover, they would know that they could avoid any consequences. They would know they didn't have to fear a judicial reaction or a legal investigation of what they had done. And they would also know now that they no longer had any reason to fear even the President of the United States himself objecting to their interventions. And they would know that the reaction from the electorate would be sufficiently tepid, and Americans would continue to accept any results there were dealt. And, of course, the "winners" would immediately come to their aid and cover up any wrongdoing for them.

But those "winners" thereafter would also have real reason to fear them. They would know that the only reason they "won" was because these backstage operators, these manipulators, were on their side. They would know that, thereafter, if any politician gets unruly relative to the goals demanded of them, the operators can present their services to another cause or another candidate, with the same results. So the party thus elected would have to be very cowed, very tame in the hands of the operators.

In short, if somebody could do that, they would be the new masters of the America.

So let's hope that all didn't happen. Let's hope that's all a mirage, a pipe dream, the crying of a few "sore losers."

Because if it did, what are the chances that those backstage operators are now going to fall to obedient heel behind the Democrat Party, or behind anyone else, ever again?
Since America has abandoned blind justice, and values which sustain it like the integrity of the vote, its natural devolution is into "might makes right" The left will become mightier since in a rat's race, the rats will win.

There is no more American principles and values. Lady Liberty has been mugged and raped and many enjoy it.. Those who speak of them are challenged to throw off traditional values and enter the losing struggle of the rat race.

Somehow the idea of hanging out with the musicians rather than arguing as the Titanic was sinking is not the worst way to go. Good scotch like chicken soup, never hurts.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11919
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: American election.

Post by Immanuel Can »

Nick_A wrote: Fri Jan 22, 2021 8:27 pm The left will become mightier since in a rat's race, the rats will win.
Not in this case, I suspect. Because behind the rats are other, bigger rats who put them there and can take them down.

And for the bigger rats, Leftism is just a meaning to an end that is personal power. The dictators are never many steps behind the Socialists when the revolution takes place; and after it does, it's the dictators that run the show.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 5021
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: American election.

Post by attofishpi »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 22, 2021 7:50 pm Let's suppose the election wasn't rigged. Let's suppose that.

However, just as a speculation, if an American election were ever rigged, let's see what would follow.

It would follow that somebody discovered they could rig an American election to produce the results they wanted. They could put a candidate of any quality or character up for office, and get him elected, so long as it was in the name of one of the major parties. They would know they could arrange irregularities with ballots and machine tallies that could produce any result they wished...at least within the extremity of plausibility. They could stop an election in process, and reverse results. The press could be counted on to fall into line. The media's oligarchs would support it. Millionaires could be induced to flush resources into the process...

Moreover, they would know that they could avoid any consequences. They would know they didn't have to fear a judicial reaction or a legal investigation of what they had done. And they would also know now that they no longer had any reason to fear even the President of the United States himself objecting to their interventions. And they would know that the reaction from the electorate would be sufficiently tepid, and Americans would continue to accept any results there were dealt. And, of course, the "winners" would immediately come to their aid and cover up any wrongdoing for them.

But those "winners" thereafter would also have real reason to fear them. They would know that the only reason they "won" was because these backstage operators, these manipulators, were on their side. They would know that, thereafter, if any politician gets unruly relative to the goals demanded of them, the operators can present their services to another cause or another candidate, with the same results. So the party thus elected would have to be very cowed, very tame in the hands of the operators.

In short, if somebody could do that, they would be the new masters of the America.

So let's hope that all didn't happen.
Mate, not sure where consideration of Occam's Razor is more appropriate. :mrgreen:
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11919
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: American election.

Post by Immanuel Can »

attofishpi wrote: Sat Jan 23, 2021 5:36 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 22, 2021 7:50 pm Let's suppose the election wasn't rigged. Let's suppose that.

However, just as a speculation, if an American election were ever rigged, let's see what would follow.

It would follow that somebody discovered they could rig an American election to produce the results they wanted. They could put a candidate of any quality or character up for office, and get him elected, so long as it was in the name of one of the major parties. They would know they could arrange irregularities with ballots and machine tallies that could produce any result they wished...at least within the extremity of plausibility. They could stop an election in process, and reverse results. The press could be counted on to fall into line. The media's oligarchs would support it. Millionaires could be induced to flush resources into the process...

Moreover, they would know that they could avoid any consequences. They would know they didn't have to fear a judicial reaction or a legal investigation of what they had done. And they would also know now that they no longer had any reason to fear even the President of the United States himself objecting to their interventions. And they would know that the reaction from the electorate would be sufficiently tepid, and Americans would continue to accept any results there were dealt. And, of course, the "winners" would immediately come to their aid and cover up any wrongdoing for them.

But those "winners" thereafter would also have real reason to fear them. They would know that the only reason they "won" was because these backstage operators, these manipulators, were on their side. They would know that, thereafter, if any politician gets unruly relative to the goals demanded of them, the operators can present their services to another cause or another candidate, with the same results. So the party thus elected would have to be very cowed, very tame in the hands of the operators.

In short, if somebody could do that, they would be the new masters of the America.

So let's hope that all didn't happen.
Mate, not sure where consideration of Occam's Razor is more appropriate. :mrgreen:
Well, right. But like all things Occam, the debate goes on over which is the genuinely "simpler" solution.

Is it that Joe Biden was fairly elected by normal procedures, and represents the American choice? Or is it that all the many anomalies -- the vast discrepancies between the early and late results, between the voter roles and the numbers of votes, between the actions of the electoral officers and their duties, between historical precedent and reported result, between the swing states and the bellwether constituencies, and so forth -- are more "simply" and probably explained by saying, "Well, it was obviously a fix."

Both are, from their own perspectives "simple" explanations of a sort. So one could claim Occam to both of them. And if the former explanation turns out to be actually true, then none of the consequences I've suggested above would seem necessary at all. But if the latter explanation is not only the "simpler" but is also the true explanation, then we must ask ourselves what follows from that.

And that's the real point. For I think that the majority of both the Democrats and the Republican supporters know the truth. They couldn't NOT really know, actually, unless they made a very deliberate effort not to know very much at all -- which would be a temptation, particularly for those who really like the immediate result. They are unconcerned, and others, perhaps, remain concerned -- but not so much as to act, it seems. But very serious concern is certainly warranted for both sides, IF it should turn out to be that the election was fixed by outside powers. IF that were ever to happen, the American Republic -- and plausibly the democratic world as well -- would be in very dire circumstances.

And that fact, neither side can really doubt.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 5021
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: American election.

Post by attofishpi »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:44 pm
attofishpi wrote: Sat Jan 23, 2021 5:36 amMate, not sure where consideration of Occam's Razor is more appropriate. :mrgreen:
Well, right. But like all things Occam, the debate goes on over which is the genuinely "simpler" solution.

And that fact, neither side can really doubt.
..that Occam made a reasonable point? (hence Y I scrubbed the less poignant points made in TOTAL consideration - of Occam)
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11919
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: American election.

Post by Immanuel Can »

attofishpi wrote: Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:59 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:44 pm And that fact, neither side can really doubt.
..that Occam made a reasonable point?
No. That if "a fixed election" turns out to be the right explanation (whether "simpler" or not) we're all in hot water. Even the "winners" would have to concede that, as a hypothetical.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11919
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: American election.

Post by Immanuel Can »

attofishpi wrote: Sat Jan 23, 2021 5:36 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 22, 2021 7:50 pm Let's suppose the election wasn't rigged. Let's suppose that.

However, just as a speculation, if an American election were ever rigged, let's see what would follow.

It would follow that somebody discovered they could rig an American election to produce the results they wanted. They could put a candidate of any quality or character up for office, and get him elected, so long as it was in the name of one of the major parties. They would know they could arrange irregularities with ballots and machine tallies that could produce any result they wished...at least within the extremity of plausibility. They could stop an election in process, and reverse results. The press could be counted on to fall into line. The media's oligarchs would support it. Millionaires could be induced to flush resources into the process...

Moreover, they would know that they could avoid any consequences. They would know they didn't have to fear a judicial reaction or a legal investigation of what they had done. And they would also know now that they no longer had any reason to fear even the President of the United States himself objecting to their interventions. And they would know that the reaction from the electorate would be sufficiently tepid, and Americans would continue to accept any results there were dealt. And, of course, the "winners" would immediately come to their aid and cover up any wrongdoing for them.

But those "winners" thereafter would also have real reason to fear them. They would know that the only reason they "won" was because these backstage operators, these manipulators, were on their side. They would know that, thereafter, if any politician gets unruly relative to the goals demanded of them, the operators can present their services to another cause or another candidate, with the same results. So the party thus elected would have to be very cowed, very tame in the hands of the operators.

In short, if somebody could do that, they would be the new masters of the America.

So let's hope that all didn't happen.
Mate, not sure where consideration of Occam's Razor is more appropriate. :mrgreen:
Well, lookee, lookee. What's going on here? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXXctkfMb7k

Did the Democrats think the Leftist extremists they supported would fall tamely into line behind them when they had power?

Perhaps not, eh?
Post Reply