Oh mercy me, I do declare, I have the vapors!
I am detecting fake outrage from far too many people that should know better. The irregularities in Iowa, and the planned convolutions, and deceptions in the upcoming primaries and caucuses are not bugs in the system. They are features of the DNC's desperate attempt to continue its campaign of top down control.
Okay, fake outrage, unless these outraged individuals haven't been part of the electoral process for the long term. Where I was during the last time around the track the Hillary caucus leader insisted there be a recount after she saw some Bernie supporters leave the building. After the overwhelming Sanders vote, this evil manipulator, saw an opportunity to soften the shame of defeat. The workers at the Lincoln, NE caucus were eager to close the doors of the meeting location "on time" to cutoff the participants in line (but outside the doors) so as to not let late arrivals become part of the honest (read: early arriving) crowd of participants.
These attempts to nullify opposition voters, and discourage the participation of the working class are the hallmarks of the fine tradition of both republican and democrat politics in the good ol' USofA. Everyone here already understands this intrinsically.
Of the several contenders to oppose Trump it seems only Sanders fully embodies this fundamental understanding of the system we have yet to repair. I grow more disillusioned every year of ever rallying citizens to actually care enough to fix the system. Apparently, our Founding Fathers could not anticipate We The People simply rejecting the foundational principals of their work. They more so than today's cognoscenti understood they did not know what the future held and anticipated the need for an adaptive algorithm to create an up-dateable law of the land. But those most able, refuse the challenge.
True most of this "hysteria" is from the questionable "press" but this lack historical perspective seems to be seeping into the very fabric of society.
I am so very disappointed by my fellow americans. Indeed, those that don't remember the past are doomed …
RIP
Comments
Right Words
I keep wondering: Will we ever find the proper words to stimulate the proper response in the masses.
Nah, word magic incantations don't really exist.
RIP
The corporate media
still controls the narrative to a large degree.
"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott
And that will continue ...
… until we can break that strangle hold. I detect a catch-22 loop-the-loop, or recursion nightmare death spiral.
The reality is that it is possible but it is difficult because so many, so very many, have been disappointed so very many times. I have had a lot of successes, but for various reasons those don't count, or more importantly those successes actually seem to count toward denigrating my veracity. And, I thought success was supposed to portend success.
RIP
Standing ovation as Nina pushes back at MSM narrative!
You tell them sister!
We need more (Senator Nina Turner)s
and we need to attack the lie that Taxes Fund Spending.
MSNBC and others have bought into a false narrative and as Senator Nina Turner is demonstrating: The answer is to not answer using that false narrative, but rather to answer with a "true" narrative. Hold the bastard's feet to the fire and eventually you get them to pay attention too reality.
RIP
A cure for the vapors?
This does look good but much more needs to be accomplished.
So many Clinton groupies speading bullshit.
Plus were supposed to take advice from disgruntled Republicans. Give me a break!
Media outlets FORBID you to say RIGGED
The utter contempt for democracy and democratic values via Kyle Kalinkski.
[VIDEO:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sn2-P2aUbs]
The media of course is covering up or not reporting on the vote fraud. Instead some pundits are word policing to ensure nobody says the word "rigged".
The cheating and vote fraud will continue, and it will continue out in the open unless Bernie himself steps up and starts making a point of it.
I think there was always a question
Of how far they would go to stop Bernie.
If you think that this isn't different from last time then you aren't paying attention.
Want proof it is different this time?
Last time we found out it was rigged from hacked emails (and later a tell-all book).
This time it's right in your face.
It was right in my face as soon as the NV caucus happened.
You know, the one where the aggressive Bernie supporters threw chairs at frightened Democratic Senators.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I stand by my statement
If you think that this isn't different from last time then you aren't paying attention.
I agree it's different.
I think it's a difference of degree rather than kind, but YMMV.
I wasn't disagreeing with your overall assertion--just the idea that they weren't rubbing our noses in it last time.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
True
Last time it was obvious, but there was a paper-thin veneer of deniability.
This time there is a "what are you going to do about it?" quality.
Different,
and not in a good way.
Although 2016 on the Dem side did not come as any great surprise to those of us who had supported Ron Paul in 2012 - where RNC pulled out all the stops to derail his candidacy.
They really didn't much like where this peace and liberty and getting out of the empire thing was headed.
Even to Berkeley...
Wouldn't surprise me at all if the DNC modeled their program on the RNC's success.
Last time we found out it was rigged from hacked emails (and later a tell-all book).
People could also have found out a lot from Project Veritas - which, back before the 2016 GE was showing, among other things, DNC contractors sending out people (universally described in press reports as "Sanders supporters") to provoke (or incite or initiate) violence at Trump events. Presumably to deter "normal" people from supporting Sanders...
Sounds like the Nevada Caucus disaster would be something right out of their playbook. Shocking, but not all that surprising that no one was ever prosecuted over this stuff:
While the situation re: our fellow citizens
is indeed bleak in the sense that far too many accept the mendacious bullshit of one party or the other, I would hesitate to generalize from those people to the whole.
Gallup does a monthly poll of American party affiliation (with, of course, all the third parties left out, or, I suppose, magically turned into "independents"). While that little finesse is BS, erasing third parties, it doesn't matter for my purposes, which are to show that quite a few American voters are choosing to stay away from both the big parties. And this is measuring the electorate, not those who are unregistered.
"Independents" (who are really independents+third party supporters) are currently at 45% of the electorate, more than either party by a large margin, and only eleven points lower than both parties combined. All the registered Democrats and Republicans in the country, standing together, amount to only 11% more of the electorate than independents.
To be a registered voter and to choose to stand outside the two parties is politically costly and sometimes socially costly as well. There are few benefits. In fact, the only benefit I can come up with is a moral one. Unlike the unregistered, whose motives are less clear, registered independents and third-party voters are signalling that they want to be involved in their country's civic life--but that they are unwilling to co-operate with the duopoly even though the duopoly controls most of the electoral process. (And even though NOT cooperating with the duopoly makes a lot of people look at you funny. Or even become hostile.)
Our percentage of the electorate is almost as high as it has been at any time in the past ten years (it has occasionally, over the past ten years, gone up to 46% or 47%).
Reflect on that fact when you are close to despair over your fellow citizens. 45% of the electorate is a lot of people. A lot of people not buying in. The problem is that the duopoly has the process locked up and the legal system will do nothing other than support them, even when they commit criminal acts.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
My despair
is more with those that think Bernie is not enough of an attack dog, and those that refuse to get out of the toxic wasteland of the DNC.
I am very frustrated to see the lack of progress (on many issues) here in Oregon. Nebraska is supposed to be more repressive than Oregon! However I seem to be living in the "marching moron" part of the Bear Creek Valley and the "progressives" at the other end of the valley have "personal flagellation whips" for sell. So, for better or worse, I vent my frustrations.
The reality is that Bernie knows how to do his thing, and in a similar I have been equally successful for nearly four decades. "Cracking this nut" referring to the national election isn't really that hard, although the image of trying to "herd kittens" comes to mind. We have got to kill the nonsense that neoliberalism and other half measures is an acceptable alternative to a Bernie - Trump showdown.
RIP
polls are trolls
better to think independently
(like the majority of the the populous)
than get suckered into group think
knee jerk reactions
I have the vapors too!
I've been popping into 538 occasionally and watching the primary projections for each state. A couple of days ago, Biden had South Carolina and several other states. Today, BERNIE is projected to win South Carolina and just about every other state.
This has me very nervous.
check it out...
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primary-forecast/
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
Are you being snarky, or
are you nervous b/c Nate Silver is a fucking tool and you wonder why he's releasing such results?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
2nd one.
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
Why?
Please explain the significance of this stream of consciousness.
RIP
Nervous because Nate got things so wrong last time.
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin