Saturday, October 22, 2016

The Utility of a Trump Loss

Posit the following:

1) The voting system in the U.S. is corrupt. Paper ballots are destroyed or falsified, party and extra-party operatives in each state's Secretary of State's/Recorder's office destroy or falsify ballots, non-citizens vote, felons vote, dead people vote, imaginary people vote onsite, imaginary people vote by mailing in ballots, imaginary people vote through computer systems only, the votes of people who actually vote are changed by party or extra-party officials, the votes of people who actually vote are changed by independent and/or foreign and/or corporate computer operatives, the votes of people who actually vote are changed through pre-design and/or accident and/or Microsoft-esque incompetency (which is to say, a combination of deliberate evil and mere stupidity), and the electoral process retroactively adjusts vote totals to its own layered preferences, whether party or extra-party or outsider, among other means of interference. The secret ballot in a roomful of noblemen who all know each other's families and lineages may have some utility, but the secret ballot in a more-universal franchise among a relatively docile and/or low-trust populace is at least as poor a planning vehicle as a more-universal franchise.

2) The media in the U.S. is corrupt. Polls are constructed and reported with egregious violations of statistics, polls are wholly fabricated, insubstantial sensationalism drives distractions in place of substantial news, some journalists are stupid, some journalists are ideological, some journalists think they are ideological, some media conglomerates push specific agenda(s) at any cost, some media is controlled by a self-interested permanent bureaucratic caste that controls its funding and message, some media is controlled by foreign governments that control its funding and message, and even the aspects of media which might otherwise attempt to be at least partly honest are not merely destroyed or deluged by a climate of falsity, they are unable to achieve true information to report due to salary- and socially-based restrictions which prevent the majority of the populace from being able to risk publicly or even privately revealing their true concerns and/or desires.

3) Donald Trump's mildly legalistic, universally-nationalistic (sic) policy platform holds vast popular appeal over a majority of Americans, and over a super-majority of American voters, and over an even higher super-majority of voters who already have or who actually will mail in actual voting forms and/or travel to polling places and cast actual votes. Not only because Hillary Clinton struggles to fill middle-school gymnasiums with paid supporters while Donald Trump's supporters risk life and limb to stand in line outside an overcrowded sports stadium, but because of the erratic flagrancy with which the aforementioned l├╝genpresse reports purported polls and other forms of popular opinion.

Now, granted, if you believe that any of the above three suppositions are incorrect, you will not see any value in what I propose here. If you believe that the United States' political process is sound, or if you trust the United States' and/or the world's major news media sources, or if you inexplicably believe (which can only be wholly due to trusting in aforementioned media's portrayal) that Hillary Clinton enjoys voter support equal to Donald Trump, you will find little use in what I say next. By all means, then, go watch the Electric Yahweh and trust that, although it tells you that Thor and James Bond are Africans, it's surely being honest about polling results.

If you do believe the above three suppositions, though, then you want Donald Trump to lose. Why?

Because, if Donald Trump wins, it means that the l├╝genpresse has been lying all this time in an effort to conceal the fact that Trump is actually their bagman. We know that the voting system and the media and the entire political and social process in the States is an enormous charade, and therefore, if Donald Trump wins, it means that they let him win. It means that they supplied the votes and counted the votes and weighed the outcomes and determined that it was acceptable that Donald Trump could be figurehead president. It means that the entire system of faux-outrage and pro-globalist squawking, begun since the earliest days of his campaign (in a mirror-image of the way the same groups began to exalt Obama for that very purpose), was designed expressly to create a plausibly anti-establishment product just so that you would think a revolution had been won by Trump's victory. His victory would mean that he is theirs, and that he is just another Blankfein-fellating sellout who sold his daughter and his soul in order to create a series of increasingly prominent spirit-draining television circuses, only the latest of which is a presidential campaign.

By contrast, if Donald Trump loses, it leaves intact the possibility that he might actually be a good man. Since we know he has the votes, even after the public phase of the nonsense, his loss means that the system had to engage the private phase of the nonsense--rigging the votes, rather than merely the pre-counting election process--which means that they might actually have been resisting him because some aspects of his platform were genuine.

Our certitude that the American government and media are corrupt means that a Trump victory through the voting ritual means they chose him. That might still be the case if they lose--if his campaign is being used to permit him to create a false resistance in the form of a new TV network, or if his faction is meant to negotiate the surrender to Sino-Russia after Clinton loses World War III--but if they count the votes for Trump, it means he was theirs.

I suppose there's a small saving possibility, in that they might allow voters to elect him, then pull a Hinckley, blame our lack of funding for government mental health ID programs, and use Pence and the anti-assassination backlash to not confiscate guns, but to mandate some kind of mandatory pacifant injection. Hell, they might even use a Muslim this time, to make it all seem more plausible than the last completely random lone white shooters with No Government Assistance Whatsoever, and to bring the new western right on board with the pacifant. Or maybe they'll allow Trump's squishy pseudo-nationalism in order to ensure Israel retains its bodyguard if the plan to take China from the inside (through deploying Sino-Semitic haafu) is identified and scuttled before some noxious little goblin is pretending to be Chinese while conducting the Beijing philharmonic.

All wackier speculation aside, though, you gotta brace yourself for the fact that, if Trump wins, they chose him to win. For better or for worse is not for us to know, not yet. But the entire foundation of everything his supporters are saying rests upon decades, if not generations, of the fraudulence that is American media and politics--and it is sadly telling of our capacity for comprehension and resistance to that very system that we could feel that redeeming a U.S.G.-issued "vote" for something could be a U.S.G.-altering action.

If they engineer Trump's loss, it means that there's a billionaire with some level of international support whom they view as an actual problem. The breadth of the fraud they'd have to engineer might well be exposed in a way comprehensible to people who don't normally care about or understand the way the U.S.G. reports the votes that decorate its elections--it might even be enough to produce change instead of Obamachange. Them crushing him leaves alive the hope that he's a genuine political force who might challenge the unfairness of his rigged loss, and cause an actual restructuring of power. All those rally attendees and discarded vets might become fedgov occupiers under a Trump banner. The Sanhedrin's verdict on the issue might be ignored, the black robes repossessed and sanitized, and the judges deported or tried. If they anoint Trump, though, you don't even have that hope anymore.

7 comments:

  1. This is an ok analysis, but don't assume that the aren't serious conflicts between elites.

    Clinton represents the financial oligarchy, while Trump represents the late-industrial oligarchy. The former are more threatened than the latter, which explains why they fights so far.

    Also, the warring elites are really global, the fight is beyond the us. For example, the Rotshild clan, the british, etc. are also interested in Trump victory.

    Do you really think WikiLeaks is a scrappy garage-run operation? The level of facilities and security they operate with is IMPOSSIBLE to attain and maintain without some form of covert intelligence assistance (most likely MI6).

    So, I would say that there is no hope. As usual, it is about the lesser evil, and this time around Trump is it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are certainly conflicts between elites, but in the U.S. and Europe they're not yet close enough, or serious enough, to cause one side to concede the depth of the other side's corruption. The Pentagon, for example, might have some level of disagreement with the CIA, but it's not sufficient disagreement to cause them to storm Langley, arrest everyone in the place, and tell the American masses the truth about covert operations since, say, 1945. Ergo whoever has control of reporting so-called vote totals will choose the acting president, and that decision will be made by the same entity/faction that chose Hussein, Dumbya, Rapey Bill, et cetera.

      When you consider what an embarrassing plutocratic wiener Al Gore was, and how much more sadistic and horrible Eastern European and Iraqi jobs could've been under the avowed Democrats, it's arguable that Dumbya might've actually been the "lesser evil," humanitarianly speaking.

      Also, the lesser evil actually is the greater evil, as I've argued before.

      Delete
  2. Also, another reason for the elites to chose Trump - many bad crises are possible in the near turn. If they happen on Trump's watch, it will be a great opportunity for the Hillary elites to "wash their hands", and to both avoid being held responsible about what will happen, and to teach the unwashed a lesson - "see what happens when you don't do as we say?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True, but if Trump is actually a good goy, think about the terrible risk of allowing him to solve crises as President in the public eye. There'd surely be some satisfaction in blaming the problems on him, but if he sent the military to pacify Ferguson, signed a Russo-American deal to revitalize industry, and liquidated Microsoft and Goldman Sachs to pay for rebuilding national infrastructure, even most people who still watch TV would be forced to admit it was great. The only reason to elect him to take the fall is if either (1) he's actually their puppet and he's willing to take the dive, or (2) they're going to systematically (or directly) neuter him somehow so that he can't do anything to fix whatever imaginary problems they'll have created with which to tarnish him.

      Seriously, think about it--put a sensible person in absolute control of the U.S. military and police, and things could be solved really fast. There's a base of one branch or another near almost every city, and SWAT teams 30 minutes away from most citizens (10 minutes away from most of the citizens who are both powerful and malfeasant). Raid the Clinton compound, flush Langley clean and tar/feather its every university and media asset, turn the U.N. into public housing, freeze all Israeli assets (to the cheers of the entire rest of the world), put Bill Gates and Dianne Feinstein on garbage duty, cut off the inner-city preacher programs, and everything's sparkling.

      They can't let anyone decent get that kind of actual power. Ergo if they let Trump have it...

      Delete
  3. OK, that's solid enough.
    One curious bit that makes me believe that Trump victory will not be allowed is the presentation of the situation in the polls. Even fox news wistfuly is asking if Trump can overcome hillary's 6 point lead in the "real clear politics" polls average.

    If one actually looks at the polls from the last week (during which the above Kelly segment was aired), it is glaringly obvious that clinton leads in the minority of the latest polls, with the rest either tied or Trump in the lead.

    So basically the populace is being softly threatened to stay home. Not that polls are really that valuable, but the ones that exist directly contradict the story of substantial Clinton lead.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well, the latest news about the FBI reopening the email investigation seems like a clear sign that elites have decided to cut their losses, and back a Trump win. The win would have happened anyways, but it would have been to embarrassing if HRC wasn't taken down preemptively...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope we at least get lower taxes in exchange for the new land war in Asia.

      Delete