The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Projection 101
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The Machine Media are rigging the election and they feel ashamed about it, so they are lashing out in fury at their victim.

 
Hide 153 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Almost. I think at least subliminally (maybe even consciously) they’re guilty as hell about forcing Hillary on us. Hillary might not be the worst criminal ever in the history of the world, but with each passing day the nature of her crimes and the clarity of the evidence becomes more and more undeniable, and they bloody well know it.

    “But Trump doesn’t respect the foundation of the democratic process!!!”

  2. No, no, no. They don’t feel ashamed. Really, they don’t.

    • Agree: 415 reasons, L Woods, Lord Jeff Sessions, Hail, dfordoom
    • Replies: @jake
    @Chrisnonymous

    Of course they feel no shame. We are the Deplorables. If not for us, all their Leftist schemes would have produced paradise long ago.

    , @Bill
    @Chrisnonymous

    Yeah. It's fear, not shame.

    , @verylongaccountname
    @Chrisnonymous

    Exactly so. They don't feel guilty, they are sanctimonious. In their minds, their support of Hillary makes them good people and they are chastising the bad people who support Trump. Simple as that.

    Replies: @sayless

    , @Jack Highlands
    @Chrisnonymous

    You're right - Steve is misunderstanding the aggressive purpose of projection. They are projecting but not from shame, unless one wants to hypothesize some ineffable 'secret shame' as the cause of all projection. In reality, it's more a kindergarten stunt: 'I know you are, but what am I?'

    If this WikiLeaks cycle should teach us anything, it's that our enemies are not nearly as innocent as many on the Alt Right think: 'they're just acting out their genetic program' or 'they're just stupid and they really think Somalis are the new Irish and Gautemalans the new Italians' or 'they are projecting out of shame.'

    No, Podesta and crew know exactly what they are doing.

    Replies: @Opinionator, @Jack Hanson

  3. Trump is not only bigoted against Latinos, his new position against election fraud makes him bigoted against Latino political tradition. Disgusting.

    • LOL: Kylie, Clyde
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Yak-15

    Election fraud is part of the American political tradition going back 2 centuries to Tammany Hall.

    Ironically, it's Trump's caudillo like histrionics about election fraud that is part of the Latin American political tradition.

    , @Connecticut Famer
    @Yak-15

    We don' nee' no steenkin bodges!

  4. I think there will (continue to) be huge election fraud this time. The Ds are scared.

    • Replies: @Barnard
    @Jim Don Bob

    They are pretty confident, I don't think the fraud will be any more than usual and will probably be more focused on the Senate.

    , @anon
    @Jim Don Bob

    Why would Dems need to steal an election against someone so far behind in the polls?

    Replies: @guest

    , @Anonymous
    @Jim Don Bob


    I think there will (continue to) be huge election fraud this time. The Ds are scared.
     
    And the establishment R's are scared, and the globalist cabal is scared, et al.
  5. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Even the BB effing C, here in England are unabashedly anti Trump and pro Clinton. Absolutely no sense of balance and impartiality is present. It’s full on anti Trump.
    An inordinate amount of time on BBC TV news bulletins is being given to cover the US election, which is strange as no Briton can vote in it.
    Contrast to the absolute paucity of coverage given to this autumn’s British political party conferences.

  6. Yeah, Mickey Kaus has been doing pretty good media analysis on his twitter. I was glad to see on a bloggingheads episode Robert Wright also agreed with him, and so did Michael Kinsley. I like his hashtag to describe what’s going on: #allhandsondeck.

  7. @Jim Don Bob
    I think there will (continue to) be huge election fraud this time. The Ds are scared.

    Replies: @Barnard, @anon, @Anonymous

    They are pretty confident, I don’t think the fraud will be any more than usual and will probably be more focused on the Senate.

  8. @Chrisnonymous
    No, no, no. They don't feel ashamed. Really, they don't.

    Replies: @jake, @Bill, @verylongaccountname, @Jack Highlands

    Of course they feel no shame. We are the Deplorables. If not for us, all their Leftist schemes would have produced paradise long ago.

  9. Liberal journalists can forgive Trump for the stupid things he said.

    They cannot forgive him for the stupid things they’ve had to say.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @Jimi

    Such as...?

    Replies: @guest

  10. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    As I said previously, the MSM is trying very very hard – and succeeding for that matter, into trying to paint Donald Trump as a nasty unpleasant misogynistic bully in order to subliminally repulse white female voters.

    In my opinion the particular monster that they are shaping Trump into is Albert Spica. In case you don’t know, Albert Spica is the villain so ably played by Michael Gambon in Peter Greenaway’s very excellent 1989 drama ‘The Cook, the Thief, his Wife and her Lover’.

    Why this classic film, and Peter Greenaway, have never received the respect that they deserve by the increasingly childish Hollywood, I do not know.

    • Replies: @guest
    @Anonymous

    That is one of the most unwatchable movies I've ever tried to watch.

    , @okie
    @Anonymous

    You don't have to get so artsy fartsy, i said yesterday that he is being put in the Tommy from Goodfellas role of the impulsive hothead who shot the drinks boy. The never Trumpers play into this as he wasn't killed as a crook but put down by his own side.

    The only hope he has is to flip the script and be Vinny from my cousin Vinny. Sadly Melania isn't a Marisa Tomei.

    Replies: @guest

  11. This is an interesting test of the Megaphone’s ability to successfully conduct a gaslight operation. The 2000 election was not that long ago. Can they induce a mass hallucination to suggest that it never happened? So far, it seems to be working.

    • Replies: @guest
    @O'really

    I think the term you're looking for is memory hole, not gaslighting. Of course, it's possible they're trying to make those of us who remember 2000 doubt our sanity for doing so. But the other term is more to the point.

    What is it with the internet and willy-nilly use of "gaslighting" these days?

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Harry Baldwin, @Antonymous

  12. If they had a bit more historical sense they’d realise that Trump is merely riding objective material and social forces; he did not create the hundred millions of dispossessed Americans. And I have to say that a lot of these New York media types may come to regret sabotaging the relatively harmless Trump, when some real “Reaction” comes bubbling up from the heartland.

    • Agree: BenKenobi, sayless
  13. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    People who were raised in good, respectable families are at a disadvantage when it comes to wallowing in the sty that is politics. Bush the second, for all his faults, never descended to the level of his lampooners despite the despicable things they said about him.

    Donald too is hamstrung against the Clintons by his upper class sense of propriety. Hillary’s meanness in the first debate stung him and he responded by taking off the gloves, but his heart isn’t in it. To be sure, developing real estate in NYC takes sharp elbows, but to have to get down and mud wrestle with the hillbilly Clintons is beneath any normal person’s dignity.

    • Replies: @pepperinmono
    @Anonymous

    Agree totally.
    Trump actually thought Clinton would play fair.
    It goes to his fundamental goodness as a man.
    I am sure real estate is tough.
    However, he has never literally killed anyone as HRC has in her capacity as SOS.
    He seemed angry or more determined than ever last night , possibly because he finally realizes how serious these people are.

  14. White voters with college education 48/37 for Clinton

    Romney won this group by 14 points against a more popular incumbent

    Maybe Trump is just repugnant to too many

    • Agree: NOTA
  15. @Jim Don Bob
    I think there will (continue to) be huge election fraud this time. The Ds are scared.

    Replies: @Barnard, @anon, @Anonymous

    Why would Dems need to steal an election against someone so far behind in the polls?

    • Replies: @guest
    @anon

    To make assurance doubly sure, like old Macbeth.

  16. It’d be interesting if you could post more on rigging from a statistical perspective. What margin do you think would be necessary to obviate rigging claims?

    • Replies: @Brian Reilly
    @Anonymous

    I think that a 3 % margin will suffice. There are not that many places that stealing votes can work, maybe 100 precincts nationwide. If (unlikely) Trump can win by 3 or more in enough states, he will win in spite of fraud.

    On the other hand, if he LOSES a few states by a handful of votes in each, with uncommon distributions (which will not be evident until the counting is done) we will know he was snookered.

    Last comment is that it does not matter much. Trump will be a lot more fun to watch, but the old American Republic is doomed regardless of who wins. Bring on the entertainment, I say!

    , @NOTA
    @Anonymous

    In general, fraud that isn't blatant and obvious to everyone can only change the outcome of very close elections.

    Tampering with the election to change a Trump landslide into a Clinton landslide would require massive operations in many different states (to get enough electoral votes), each with different voting systems, election officials, procedures, etc.

    In a given state or county, tampering with paper ballots (opscan or VVPAT) is possible, but is also a manpower-intensive operation that's hard to keep secret. Tampering with electronic counts is possible (the machines are not very secure and the election officials don't really understand computer security), but if you change the vote totals by very much, it will be obvious wrt both polls and the expected distribution of votes. It's not clear that those would automatically lead anywhere in all-electronic voting machines (aka DREs), since there's not a meaningful way to audit the results. But DREs with paper trails can have their paper totals checked against electronic totals.

    There's a long history of low level fraud involving trucking in homeless people and giving them an ID to vote under. Again, this can affect close races, but it is blatant and very visible. There's also fraud in mail-in ballots, voter intimidation at the polls, disinformation campaigns (like robocalls to likely voters on the other side telling them the wrong day to vote), "cleaning" the registration database of the other side's voters, etc. All that happens in every election, but it's probably not moving the results all that much. Similarly, maybe a few people who aren't supposed to vote will cast votes, but it won't change anything unless the state is balanced on a knife edge.

    The model for practical vote fraud is probably the 2000 election--most fraud is like screwing up the ballot design in some county so older voters get the wrong guy, or nitpicking the counting rules for dimpled chads--stuff that can move a few thousand votes around, but not more than that.

    Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Discard

    , @ben tillman
    @Anonymous


    It’d be interesting if you could post more on rigging from a statistical perspective. What margin do you think would be necessary to obviate rigging claims?
     
    The rigging from media manipulation and the importation of ringers is so great that no margin could obviate rigging claims.
  17. They cry out in pain as they strike him…

  18. Zerohedge parades this morning’s headlines. They are all remarkably similar for some reason.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-20/morning-after-what-all-newspapers-are-leading-after-last-nights-debate

  19. @Yak-15
    Trump is not only bigoted against Latinos, his new position against election fraud makes him bigoted against Latino political tradition. Disgusting.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Connecticut Famer

    Election fraud is part of the American political tradition going back 2 centuries to Tammany Hall.

    Ironically, it’s Trump’s caudillo like histrionics about election fraud that is part of the Latin American political tradition.

  20. Discredit, Disqualify, De-platform.

    SJW 101.

  21. Someone once mentioned to fight as Sean Connery said in the Untouchables. The Chicago way.

    “Wanna get Capone? Here’s how you get him. He pulls a knife, you pull a gun, he sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That’s the Chicago way, and that’s how you get Capone.

    Just insert Democrats for Capone. Playing by Cuck rules won’t get.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @DWright

    Someone once mentioned

    That was Obama.

  22. @Jim Don Bob
    I think there will (continue to) be huge election fraud this time. The Ds are scared.

    Replies: @Barnard, @anon, @Anonymous

    I think there will (continue to) be huge election fraud this time. The Ds are scared.

    And the establishment R’s are scared, and the globalist cabal is scared, et al.

  23. @Chrisnonymous
    No, no, no. They don't feel ashamed. Really, they don't.

    Replies: @jake, @Bill, @verylongaccountname, @Jack Highlands

    Yeah. It’s fear, not shame.

  24. @Chrisnonymous
    No, no, no. They don't feel ashamed. Really, they don't.

    Replies: @jake, @Bill, @verylongaccountname, @Jack Highlands

    Exactly so. They don’t feel guilty, they are sanctimonious. In their minds, their support of Hillary makes them good people and they are chastising the bad people who support Trump. Simple as that.

    • Replies: @sayless
    @verylongaccountname

    Stop me if I've already said this.

    Leftists tend to feel that their leftist opinions guarantee their virtue as persons, at least in my experience. SJWs are a contemporary example of this intrapsychic dynamic. And conservatives tend to feel that their right-wing opinions are a sign of greater intelligence, while not necessarily guaranteeing that they have greater virtue. I think this is why leftists can be so nasty, even to one another, over little differences in opinion on political matters. Look at how many death threats Trump has received, while as far as I know none have been reported against Hillary.

  25. The (((media))) cries out in pain as it strikes Trump.

    • Agree: 27 year old
  26. Interesting polls today.

    USC – Trump + 0.6
    IBD – Trump + 1
    Rasmussen – Trump + 3
    YouGov post debate poll – HRC + 4
    Suffolk (Ohio) – tied

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @Johnnywalker123

    I think Trump will lose, since everything is stacked against him, but there could still be a Brexit-sized surprise.

    Since I'm not an American citizen, I cannot legally send money to Trump's campaign, nor vote for him, so I just placed a bet for his win. I don't think it's very likely, but the odds are really bad for him, so I can more than quintuple my money. I'll have reasons to celebrate. Should he lose, I'll have other worries, like nuclear war or the implosion of our civilization.

    Replies: @415 reasons, @dsgntd_plyr, @Alfa158, @FKA Max, @JimboHarambe

    , @celt darnell
    @Johnnywalker123

    On the subject of polls, I came across some interesting information:

    https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/19/the-perils-of-polling-in-a-brexit-and-donald-trump-world/

    One quote struck out: "survey results show that candidate Donald Trump performs nearly six percentage points better in online polls than in telephone ones."

    This is important, because as the writer observes about Brexit, "While polls conducted online suggested the race was very close, telephone poll results projected a comfortable 18-point victory for those voting to “Stay”.

    During the referendum campaign, we Brexiteers were constantly trolled by Remainders who pointed to the difference in the telephone polls and who repeatedly and confidently asserted that telephone polls were always more accurate than online polls.

    We now know that the telephone polls were wildly off and that the online polls, while more accurate, nonetheless underestimated the Brexit vote.

    Also, Hillary's numbers are starting to trend downwards and we've still over two weeks to go.

    This race is far from finished.

    , @Johnnywalker123
    @Johnnywalker123

    PPD Poll - Trump +1.6
    Times/Picayune - HRC +12

    Replies: @Johnnywalker123

  27. Trump has cooties. The anti White demographic tidal wave was supposed to destroy the west without anyone who matters noticing or complaining. This is the “I can’t even go there” point and sputter election.

  28. No, Steve, you’re projecting. Leftists have no sense of shame.

    The left sees itself rigging the election, yes. But then they think, “If we have to take such extreme measures to defeat Trump, then he really IS evil!” And their righteous indignation increases and they lash out even more.

    You’re just too darned nice.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @Kylie

    Would any means not be justified in order to prevent jews and people of color from being beaten and murdered by mobs during a Trump presidency?

    Replies: @Wally, @Kylie

  29. The media have shame in the sense that they wield it. They themselves are immune to it. They are the last Western cultural institution with the will to power.

  30. @Kylie
    No, Steve, you're projecting. Leftists have no sense of shame.

    The left sees itself rigging the election, yes. But then they think, "If we have to take such extreme measures to defeat Trump, then he really IS evil!" And their righteous indignation increases and they lash out even more.

    You're just too darned nice.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    Would any means not be justified in order to prevent jews and people of color from being beaten and murdered by mobs during a Trump presidency?

    • Replies: @Wally
    @Opinionator

    The hasbarists are here.

    Nonetheless, the facts are:

    Dr. Tony Martin - The Jewish Role in the African Slave Trade
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut7I75Q_-zA

    http://wethoughttheywerewhite.weebly.com/jews--the-slave-trade.html

    http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2009/Mar/Week3/118790/default/v0/15245789-522x293.jpg
    Pregnant women and children being targeted by Jews

    and:
    Two teenage Israeli Jew girls carrying a placard in Hebrew reading: "Hating Arabs is not racism, it's values."
    http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02962/jewish-girls_2962213c.jpg

    Jews in US admit "Israel First"
    http://mondoweiss.net/2016/07/bluntly-firsters-politics/

    , @Kylie
    @Opinionator

    "Would any means not be justified in order to prevent jews and people of color from being beaten and murdered by mobs during a Trump presidency?"

    Any means? No.

    But in any case, it's rage not fear that's motivating the left. The left doesn't fear the possibility of right-wing violence resulting from a Trump presidency. But it is enraged by the possibility of a Trump victory denying it the presidency it believes it is entitled to. "It's our turn" isn't just a political slogan, it's a bedrock belief.

    Replies: @Opinionator

  31. @Johnnywalker123
    Interesting polls today.

    USC - Trump + 0.6
    IBD - Trump + 1
    Rasmussen - Trump + 3
    YouGov post debate poll - HRC + 4
    Suffolk (Ohio) - tied

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @celt darnell, @Johnnywalker123

    I think Trump will lose, since everything is stacked against him, but there could still be a Brexit-sized surprise.

    Since I’m not an American citizen, I cannot legally send money to Trump’s campaign, nor vote for him, so I just placed a bet for his win. I don’t think it’s very likely, but the odds are really bad for him, so I can more than quintuple my money. I’ll have reasons to celebrate. Should he lose, I’ll have other worries, like nuclear war or the implosion of our civilization.

    • Replies: @415 reasons
    @reiner Tor

    I wish it were more like 50/50 odds I'd bet the farm on Clinton. Then if she lost I wouldn't even care about the money I'd be so happy. Psychic insurance.

    , @dsgntd_plyr
    @reiner Tor


    Since I’m not an American citizen, I cannot legally send money to Trump’s campaign, nor vote for him, so I just placed a bet for his win.
     
    two things
    1. state governments, not the feds run our elections. just go to a state that doesn't require voter id. in some places a poll official that "knows you" can attest that you're legally allowed to vote.

    in maryland, where i live, you can register without photo id, but with a "government document that shows the voter’s name and address." so just show them which welfare program you're enrolled in, and that's equal to a passport that says you're a citizen.


    2. "[William Hill] has cut the odds on a Trump victory from 11-2 to 4-1 over the past two days in response to a surge in bets for the reality TV star and businessman turned politician."
    more bets are placed on trump, but clinton gets bigger bets. that's the brexit pattern http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/punters-rush-to-back-trump-despite-disastrous-week-of-campaigning-a7368196.html
    , @Alfa158
    @reiner Tor

    If you want to contribute to American campaigns then you need to support the Democrats. The Bill Clinton and Obama campaigns both set up their electronic contribution systems to disable the ability to identify non-US credit card donations. In Bill's campaign the Chinese government also sent cash to a Buddhist convent in the US and had the impoverished nuns each contribute the maximum permitted amount. I would be surprised if Hillary hasn't done the same thing.
    If you would like to actually vote, Hillary would also be more than happy to have her people fill out an absentee ballot for you and mail in to the polling station of your choice.

    , @FKA Max
    @reiner Tor


    I think Trump will lose, since everything is stacked against him, but there could still be a Brexit-sized surprise.
     
    This is a bit esoteric... but since Benjamin Franklin was apparently an avid astrologer, I might as well share it here:

    Richard Saunders — Of all of Franklin's noms de plume, Mr. Saunders became the best known. Richard Saunders was the "Richard" of Poor Richard's Almanack. First published late in 1732, Poor Richard's Almanack is probably Franklin's best-known publication. Richard Saunders' humorous sayings and advice filled the pages of the almanac's twenty-six editions.
     
    - http://www.pbs.org/benfranklin/l3_wit_name.html

    The quote comes from the 1751 preface to the Poor Richard’s Almanac that you can find on Google Books. He writes

    Courteous Reader

    Astrology is one of the most ancient Sciences, had in high Esteem of old, by the Wise and Great. Formerly, no Prince would make War or Peace, nor any General fight a Battle, in short, no important Affair was taken without first consulting an Astrologer, who examined the Aspects and Configurations of the heavenly bodies, and mark’d the lucky hour. Now the noble Art (more Shame to the Age we live in!) is dwindled into contempt; the Great neglect us, Empires make Leagues, and Parliaments Laws, without advising with us; and scarce any other Use is made of our learned Labors, than to find the best time cutting Corns, or gelding Pigs, – this Mischief we owe in a great Measure to ourselves: The ignorant Herd of Mankind: had they not been encourag’d to it by some of us, would never have dared to deprecate our sacred Dictates; but Urania has been betray’d by her own Sons: those whom she had favored with the greatest skill in her divine art, the most eminent astronomers among the Moderns, the Newtons, Helleys, and Whistons have wantonly condem’d and abus’d her, contrary to the Light of their own Consciouses.

     
    - http://horoscopicastrologyblog.com/2007/06/17/ben-franklin-and-astrology/

    This astrologer, like you, is betting her money on Trump, and she was one of the few astrologers, who predicted BREXIT, because according to her most astrologers are politically liberal, and therefore their political predictions are often biased in favor of more liberal/socialist candidates and policies, and thus often inaccurate:

    I think only 2 of us astrologers predicted Brexit, with the others all saying Remain would win. My guess is that astrologers lean left and probably naturally are democrats and want to see DT lose. I am in the UK and so I started out with an open mind, I even presumed HC would win, but after long looks at the charts I decided that DT has a 90% chance. Did you hear what Soros was saying - he said DT would win the popular vote and that Hilary would still become president. I will keep that statement in mind when I hear the results. Also the way the polls were going and popular perception and also the odds; Hilary looked a dead cert (until now), so to predict her to win was hardly sticking their necks out was it. My honest thought is that the stars are with DT.

    US 2016 Election Donald Trump


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

    Published on Aug 7, 2016

    US Presidential Election - What chance does Donald Trump have of winning? Lisa Lazuli looks at the astrology for The Donald.

    The Machine Media are rigging the election and they feel ashamed about it, so they are lashing out in fury at their victim.
     
    To me, what The Machine Media is doing is even more sinister than just Projection. To me it is more akin to Gaslighting than Projection:

    Gaslighting or gas-lighting is a form of psychological abuse in which a victim is manipulated into doubting their own memory, perception, and sanity.[1][2] Instances may range from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim.
     
    - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

    These types of tactics by the media don't surprise me in the least, taking into consideration the following:

    According to Dutton, the ten careers that have the highest proportion of psychopaths are:[11]

    1. CEO
    2. Lawyer
    3. Media (TV/radio)
    4. Salesperson
    5. Surgeon
    6. Journalist
    7. Police officer
    8. Clergy
    9. Chef
    10. Civil servant
     
    - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy_in_the_workplace#Careers_with_highest_proportion_of_psychopaths


    Robert D. Hare reports that about 1 per cent of the general population meets the clinical criteria for psychopathy.[4] Hare further claims that the prevalence of corporate psychopaths is higher in the business world than in the general population. Figures of around 3–4% have been cited for more senior positions in business.[5] However, even with this small percentage, corporate psychopaths can do enormous damage when they are positioned in senior management roles.[6]
     
    , @JimboHarambe
    @reiner Tor

    Don't let little things like the law stop you from voting for Trump, it doesn't stop the Democrats.

  32. Speaking as a non-American, I believe that the fact that literally millions of people have been red-pilled by the Trump vs. the Media election is more valuable than what Trump could have achieved in 4/8 years had the media given him a “fair” (i.e. only normally biased) crack and he won.

    But I can see that were I an American anyway near the Mexican border I would feel differently.

    Either way, though, he probably won’t win so you might as well make the best of it. People need to understand: this isn’t a bug in the system, this is the system: and if it looks like it’s in a state of chronic dysfunction that’s because it is. Read Gentle Introduction and encourage anyone you know with a +115 IQ to do so as well, right after a James O Keefe video. There’s never been a better time.

    • Replies: @NOTA
    @Gabriel M

    Goldwater:Reagan::Trump:??

    It will be interesting to see if someone comes along in another few years who is more palatable than Trump but is still part of the same intellectual movement.

    Replies: @guest, @Discard

    , @dfordoom
    @Gabriel M


    this isn’t a bug in the system, this is the system: and if it looks like it’s in a state of chronic dysfunction that’s because it is.
     
    From the point of view of the globalist Democrats and the globalist Republicans (Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum) the system is functioning beautifully. Anyone who isn't a globalist Democrat or a globalist Republican has no chance of winning. That's the whole purpose of the system. It's designed to protect the elites from the mortal threat of democracy, democracy being what they fear more than anything else. Fortunately (from their point of view) the US has no tradition of democracy so they're pretty safe.
  33. These people just live in a world separated from the rest of us. Most of them lack self-awareness. Immerse them in a hive culture like the mass media and they begin to look like ants in an ant farm.

    The weird thing about the post-debate coverage is that is feels subdued. I was sure they would find something to be hysterical about, but its like they have run out of steam all of a sudden. I suspect they were sure that round three of Cankles versus Trump would result in the knockout. When that did not happen, they are deflated.

    Polls are interesting today. Trump is ahead or tied in the big national polls. Dig into the internals of some of them and there are a shift into undecided away from Clinton and the third party options. The better markets are even more strange. Majority of the bets are on Trump, but the majority of money is bet on Clinton.

    I can’t help but wonder if the media has not so overplayed their hand that a general sense of disgust is starting to show up in the polling.

  34. The (((media))) has been attacking Trump in vicious and instinctual ways. The logic seems to be since David Duke likes Trump, if Trump is right then David Duke is right. If David Duke is right, then Hitler is right. It makes no sense, but you can see it from political twitter and the constant MSM freak outs over the latest Trump nothing-burger controversy that the (((media))) has dangerous prejudices.

  35. Nazi Germany had a freer press (not Soviet Russia though).

  36. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The MSM believes this latest “outrage” is another nail Trump’s coffin, much like the judge Curiel event.

    But after reading a rare interview with Breibart’s Stephen Bannon, now of the Trump campaign, who said that Trump was the “master of the head fake,” I believe this whole brouhaha was teed up by Trump to talk about ALL the rigging: WikiLeaks, deleted emails, media bias, illegal aliens voting, and Democratic thugs.

    And these fit into his larger narrative that it’s a rigged system of the elites against the American people.

    absolutely brilliant closing argument

  37. How is the onus on the wronged party, Trump,to not speak up rather than on the criminal Hillary Clinton to not commit voter fraud and dirty tricks in the first place? You lock up the robber, not the victim.

    As to the nonsense that nobody ever contests the outcomes of elections, almost every election in the early 1800s was contested, to say nothing of 1860, as well as the popular/electoral splits of 1876 and 2000.

  38. alt righters are searching the tweet history of democrats and media members, and turning up examples of them talking about rigged elections, and a rigged political/economic system from earlier this year.

    what a time to be alive

  39. I think the same thing applies to WikiLeaks. The media is desperately trying to discredit Wikileaks and Julian Assagne because it’s the only source that actually tells the truth about Hillary’s corruption. That has to be embarrassing for supposed “journalists.”

    • Replies: @NOTA
    @JohnnyD

    There's also an establishment / fringes split wrt both Trump and Wikileaks--establishment types on both sides dislike both.

  40. @Johnnywalker123
    Interesting polls today.

    USC - Trump + 0.6
    IBD - Trump + 1
    Rasmussen - Trump + 3
    YouGov post debate poll - HRC + 4
    Suffolk (Ohio) - tied

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @celt darnell, @Johnnywalker123

    On the subject of polls, I came across some interesting information:

    https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/19/the-perils-of-polling-in-a-brexit-and-donald-trump-world/

    One quote struck out: “survey results show that candidate Donald Trump performs nearly six percentage points better in online polls than in telephone ones.”

    This is important, because as the writer observes about Brexit, “While polls conducted online suggested the race was very close, telephone poll results projected a comfortable 18-point victory for those voting to “Stay”.

    During the referendum campaign, we Brexiteers were constantly trolled by Remainders who pointed to the difference in the telephone polls and who repeatedly and confidently asserted that telephone polls were always more accurate than online polls.

    We now know that the telephone polls were wildly off and that the online polls, while more accurate, nonetheless underestimated the Brexit vote.

    Also, Hillary’s numbers are starting to trend downwards and we’ve still over two weeks to go.

    This race is far from finished.

  41. @reiner Tor
    @Johnnywalker123

    I think Trump will lose, since everything is stacked against him, but there could still be a Brexit-sized surprise.

    Since I'm not an American citizen, I cannot legally send money to Trump's campaign, nor vote for him, so I just placed a bet for his win. I don't think it's very likely, but the odds are really bad for him, so I can more than quintuple my money. I'll have reasons to celebrate. Should he lose, I'll have other worries, like nuclear war or the implosion of our civilization.

    Replies: @415 reasons, @dsgntd_plyr, @Alfa158, @FKA Max, @JimboHarambe

    I wish it were more like 50/50 odds I’d bet the farm on Clinton. Then if she lost I wouldn’t even care about the money I’d be so happy. Psychic insurance.

  42. @reiner Tor
    @Johnnywalker123

    I think Trump will lose, since everything is stacked against him, but there could still be a Brexit-sized surprise.

    Since I'm not an American citizen, I cannot legally send money to Trump's campaign, nor vote for him, so I just placed a bet for his win. I don't think it's very likely, but the odds are really bad for him, so I can more than quintuple my money. I'll have reasons to celebrate. Should he lose, I'll have other worries, like nuclear war or the implosion of our civilization.

    Replies: @415 reasons, @dsgntd_plyr, @Alfa158, @FKA Max, @JimboHarambe

    Since I’m not an American citizen, I cannot legally send money to Trump’s campaign, nor vote for him, so I just placed a bet for his win.

    two things
    1. state governments, not the feds run our elections. just go to a state that doesn’t require voter id. in some places a poll official that “knows you” can attest that you’re legally allowed to vote.

    in maryland, where i live, you can register without photo id, but with a “government document that shows the voter’s name and address.” so just show them which welfare program you’re enrolled in, and that’s equal to a passport that says you’re a citizen.

    2. “[William Hill] has cut the odds on a Trump victory from 11-2 to 4-1 over the past two days in response to a surge in bets for the reality TV star and businessman turned politician.”
    more bets are placed on trump, but clinton gets bigger bets. that’s the brexit pattern http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/punters-rush-to-back-trump-despite-disastrous-week-of-campaigning-a7368196.html

  43. @Yak-15
    Trump is not only bigoted against Latinos, his new position against election fraud makes him bigoted against Latino political tradition. Disgusting.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Connecticut Famer

    We don’ nee’ no steenkin bodges!

  44. Off-topic,

    A very fine quote from Frauke Petry on the current situation in Germany

    “It’s so moral to allow these attacks to happen,” she said sarcastically. “It’s so moral to promise to people around the world that they can come to Germany and find paradise. … Reducing the entire Enlightenment and all of the successes of European history down to this need to be morally good: I find that extremely dangerous. There’s this saying of Nietzsche”—she took out her phone and pulled up the quote almost instantly. …“In ‘Zarathustra’: ‘The good have always been the beginning of the end.’ ”

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @syonredux


    The good have always been the beginning of the end
     
    https://books.google.com/books?id=gpqy_DqmyioC&pg=PA132&lpg=PA132&dq=we+are+none+of+us+good&source=bl&ots=pZsGn1Y6vZ&sig=g0bPepTtHveB5NCt_wLiLNOrYfk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiTvt72h-rPAhUGaz4KHbdaCVgQ6AEITDAI#v=onepage&q=we%20are%20none%20of%20us%20good&f=false

    from The Perpetual Curate, oddly enough.

    as it is written:

    “There is no one who is righteous, not even one;
    there is no one who has understanding,
    there is no one who seeks God.
    All have turned aside, together they have become worthless;
    there is no one who shows kindness,
    there is not even one.”
    “Their throats are opened graves;
    they use their tongues to deceive.”
    “The venom of vipers is under their lips.”
    “Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”
    “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
    ruin and misery are in their paths,
    and the way of peace they have not known.”
    “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

    Now we know that whatever the law says, it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For “no human being will be justified in his sight” by deeds prescribed by the law, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.

    But now, apart from law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction, since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the one who has faith in Jesus.
     
    - Romans 3

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    , @415 reasons
    @syonredux

    From that New Yorker article you quoted



    Her manner belies the extremism of the AfD’s views.

    ...

    In April, the Party said that head scarves should be banned in schools and universities, and minarets prohibited.
     
    So it's an extremist position that there should not be minarets in Germany? What about muezzin issuing a call to prayer? Is it an extremist position that Germany should not be converted to an Islamic society?
    , @Trumpenproleteriat
    @syonredux

    This would have been an excellent response to hillary's "america is great because it is good shtick"

    , @Chrisnonymous
    @syonredux

    Nice dovetail with Gabriel M's suggestion to read the Gentle Introduction. (That would be UR's... but not Unz Review's...)

  45. @reiner Tor
    @Johnnywalker123

    I think Trump will lose, since everything is stacked against him, but there could still be a Brexit-sized surprise.

    Since I'm not an American citizen, I cannot legally send money to Trump's campaign, nor vote for him, so I just placed a bet for his win. I don't think it's very likely, but the odds are really bad for him, so I can more than quintuple my money. I'll have reasons to celebrate. Should he lose, I'll have other worries, like nuclear war or the implosion of our civilization.

    Replies: @415 reasons, @dsgntd_plyr, @Alfa158, @FKA Max, @JimboHarambe

    If you want to contribute to American campaigns then you need to support the Democrats. The Bill Clinton and Obama campaigns both set up their electronic contribution systems to disable the ability to identify non-US credit card donations. In Bill’s campaign the Chinese government also sent cash to a Buddhist convent in the US and had the impoverished nuns each contribute the maximum permitted amount. I would be surprised if Hillary hasn’t done the same thing.
    If you would like to actually vote, Hillary would also be more than happy to have her people fill out an absentee ballot for you and mail in to the polling station of your choice.

  46. OT: Right now, I’m sitting in a public place, listening to some loud-mouthed asshole with a New York accent talking about how inarticulate Trump is.

    “Obama sounds so educated and classy,” he’s saying. “Trump sounds like a buffoon.”

    Now he’s talking about how incompetent and fear-mongering Trump is.

    Anyone who holds up Obama as the paragon of intelligence, competence, and integrity is not worth arguing with.

    • Replies: @Bugg
    @Stan Adams

    Had similar experience in a Park Slope restaurant earlier this week. Adjoining table was a liberal couple, husband letting it slip he works for the US attorney (not sure if it's Eastern or Southern District,no matter, he is undoubtedly a Dem appointment). The 2 were utterly ga ga over Obama brilliantly chastising Trump about electoral fraud. Yet criminal Mr. Creamer has visited the White House hundreds of times. Why exactly? Here is a lawyer who all day deals with people lying, cheating and stealing, yet this kind of thievery because it inures to his side is okay?

    What they fail to grasp is once real serious vibrant diversity kicks in they and their ilk will be kicked to the curb. They don't get it; the cult of diversity will have no use for any white people. We are all the same to them, the color of your collar and your politics will mean nothing. Pay up and shut up.You are whitey, and that's all that matters. Locally, think Newark Congressman Peter Rodino or Brooklyn DA Charles Hynes; once we have enough votes to get our guy in there, get lost no matter how much you bent over backward to pay fealty. Think Doctor Zhivago coming back to his old home to see it overrun by the rabble.

  47. @reiner Tor
    @Johnnywalker123

    I think Trump will lose, since everything is stacked against him, but there could still be a Brexit-sized surprise.

    Since I'm not an American citizen, I cannot legally send money to Trump's campaign, nor vote for him, so I just placed a bet for his win. I don't think it's very likely, but the odds are really bad for him, so I can more than quintuple my money. I'll have reasons to celebrate. Should he lose, I'll have other worries, like nuclear war or the implosion of our civilization.

    Replies: @415 reasons, @dsgntd_plyr, @Alfa158, @FKA Max, @JimboHarambe

    I think Trump will lose, since everything is stacked against him, but there could still be a Brexit-sized surprise.

    This is a bit esoteric… but since Benjamin Franklin was apparently an avid astrologer, I might as well share it here:

    Richard Saunders — Of all of Franklin’s noms de plume, Mr. Saunders became the best known. Richard Saunders was the “Richard” of Poor Richard’s Almanack. First published late in 1732, Poor Richard’s Almanack is probably Franklin’s best-known publication. Richard Saunders’ humorous sayings and advice filled the pages of the almanac’s twenty-six editions.

    http://www.pbs.org/benfranklin/l3_wit_name.html

    The quote comes from the 1751 preface to the Poor Richard’s Almanac that you can find on Google Books. He writes

    Courteous Reader

    Astrology is one of the most ancient Sciences, had in high Esteem of old, by the Wise and Great. Formerly, no Prince would make War or Peace, nor any General fight a Battle, in short, no important Affair was taken without first consulting an Astrologer, who examined the Aspects and Configurations of the heavenly bodies, and mark’d the lucky hour. Now the noble Art (more Shame to the Age we live in!) is dwindled into contempt; the Great neglect us, Empires make Leagues, and Parliaments Laws, without advising with us; and scarce any other Use is made of our learned Labors, than to find the best time cutting Corns, or gelding Pigs, – this Mischief we owe in a great Measure to ourselves: The ignorant Herd of Mankind: had they not been encourag’d to it by some of us, would never have dared to deprecate our sacred Dictates; but Urania has been betray’d by her own Sons: those whom she had favored with the greatest skill in her divine art, the most eminent astronomers among the Moderns, the Newtons, Helleys, and Whistons have wantonly condem’d and abus’d her, contrary to the Light of their own Consciouses.

    http://horoscopicastrologyblog.com/2007/06/17/ben-franklin-and-astrology/

    This astrologer, like you, is betting her money on Trump, and she was one of the few astrologers, who predicted BREXIT, because according to her most astrologers are politically liberal, and therefore their political predictions are often biased in favor of more liberal/socialist candidates and policies, and thus often inaccurate:

    I think only 2 of us astrologers predicted Brexit, with the others all saying Remain would win. My guess is that astrologers lean left and probably naturally are democrats and want to see DT lose. I am in the UK and so I started out with an open mind, I even presumed HC would win, but after long looks at the charts I decided that DT has a 90% chance. Did you hear what Soros was saying – he said DT would win the popular vote and that Hilary would still become president. I will keep that statement in mind when I hear the results. Also the way the polls were going and popular perception and also the odds; Hilary looked a dead cert (until now), so to predict her to win was hardly sticking their necks out was it. My honest thought is that the stars are with DT.

    US 2016 Election Donald Trump

    Published on Aug 7, 2016

    US Presidential Election – What chance does Donald Trump have of winning? Lisa Lazuli looks at the astrology for The Donald.

    The Machine Media are rigging the election and they feel ashamed about it, so they are lashing out in fury at their victim.

    To me, what The Machine Media is doing is even more sinister than just Projection. To me it is more akin to Gaslighting than Projection:

    Gaslighting or gas-lighting is a form of psychological abuse in which a victim is manipulated into doubting their own memory, perception, and sanity.[1][2] Instances may range from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

    These types of tactics by the media don’t surprise me in the least, taking into consideration the following:

    According to Dutton, the ten careers that have the highest proportion of psychopaths are:[11]

    1. CEO
    2. Lawyer
    3. Media (TV/radio)
    4. Salesperson
    5. Surgeon
    6. Journalist
    7. Police officer
    8. Clergy
    9. Chef
    10. Civil servant

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy_in_the_workplace#Careers_with_highest_proportion_of_psychopaths

    Robert D. Hare reports that about 1 per cent of the general population meets the clinical criteria for psychopathy.[4] Hare further claims that the prevalence of corporate psychopaths is higher in the business world than in the general population. Figures of around 3–4% have been cited for more senior positions in business.[5] However, even with this small percentage, corporate psychopaths can do enormous damage when they are positioned in senior management roles.[6]

  48. Was Hillary dressed like an ice cream vendor from the future?

    • Replies: @guest
    @Richard S

    No, it was her usual Chairwoman Mao ensemble.

  49. Not ashamed; just angered and saddened by the knowledge that throwing the election her way will hasten their ultimate demise.

  50. D-Mock-Rats and their Enemedia-Pravda Ministry of Propaganda make a big hypocritical show of clutching their pearls at Mr. Trump’s well-founded declaration of a rigged election.

    These are the same Dems and their same Enemedia-Pravda Propagandists and their same legion of useful idiots who have never stopped harping that the 2000 election was rigged against and stolen from Al Gore.

    Pot calls kettle black – just more Ruling Class $ellout Hypocrisy.

    • Replies: @Peripatetic commenter
    @Auntie Analogue

    But, if he wins, will he withhold his assent to the result as well?

  51. @reiner Tor
    @Johnnywalker123

    I think Trump will lose, since everything is stacked against him, but there could still be a Brexit-sized surprise.

    Since I'm not an American citizen, I cannot legally send money to Trump's campaign, nor vote for him, so I just placed a bet for his win. I don't think it's very likely, but the odds are really bad for him, so I can more than quintuple my money. I'll have reasons to celebrate. Should he lose, I'll have other worries, like nuclear war or the implosion of our civilization.

    Replies: @415 reasons, @dsgntd_plyr, @Alfa158, @FKA Max, @JimboHarambe

    Don’t let little things like the law stop you from voting for Trump, it doesn’t stop the Democrats.

  52. @syonredux
    Off-topic,

    A very fine quote from Frauke Petry on the current situation in Germany

    “It’s so moral to allow these attacks to happen,” she said sarcastically. “It’s so moral to promise to people around the world that they can come to Germany and find paradise. … Reducing the entire Enlightenment and all of the successes of European history down to this need to be morally good: I find that extremely dangerous. There’s this saying of Nietzsche”—she took out her phone and pulled up the quote almost instantly. …“In ‘Zarathustra’: ‘The good have always been the beginning of the end.’ ”
     

    Replies: @Desiderius, @415 reasons, @Trumpenproleteriat, @Chrisnonymous

    The good have always been the beginning of the end

    https://books.google.com/books?id=gpqy_DqmyioC&pg=PA132&lpg=PA132&dq=we+are+none+of+us+good&source=bl&ots=pZsGn1Y6vZ&sig=g0bPepTtHveB5NCt_wLiLNOrYfk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiTvt72h-rPAhUGaz4KHbdaCVgQ6AEITDAI#v=onepage&q=we%20are%20none%20of%20us%20good&f=false

    from The Perpetual Curate, oddly enough.

    as it is written:

    “There is no one who is righteous, not even one;
    there is no one who has understanding,
    there is no one who seeks God.
    All have turned aside, together they have become worthless;
    there is no one who shows kindness,
    there is not even one.”
    “Their throats are opened graves;
    they use their tongues to deceive.”
    “The venom of vipers is under their lips.”
    “Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”
    “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
    ruin and misery are in their paths,
    and the way of peace they have not known.”
    “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

    Now we know that whatever the law says, it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For “no human being will be justified in his sight” by deeds prescribed by the law, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.

    But now, apart from law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction, since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the one who has faith in Jesus.

    – Romans 3

    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Desiderius

    The Last Real Calvinist is not going to argue with Romans 3!

  53. and they feel ashamed…

    I disagree that they feel shame. I agree that they understand that they are transgressing against a social norm and have to justify their action, but instead of shame they are proud.

    The left feels it has the moral high ground because they stand for the “Oppressed of the World.” Since those who suffer are suffering from the fault of “society” and not from blind chance or their own lack of skills/character/whatever, then they are not only morally justified in any actions they take on the behalf of the “Oppressed”, they feel, in fact, proud.

    As Jacques Roux says (in Marat/De Sade) “What are a few looted mansions in comparison to their looted lives?”

    One might question yet whether or not they are merely justifying the desire to tear things down, but that is another argument.

  54. another thought of Nietzsche (who had a species in mind, clearly)

    I call an animal, a species, an individual corrupt, when it loses its instincts, when it prefers what is injurious to it.”

  55. @syonredux
    Off-topic,

    A very fine quote from Frauke Petry on the current situation in Germany

    “It’s so moral to allow these attacks to happen,” she said sarcastically. “It’s so moral to promise to people around the world that they can come to Germany and find paradise. … Reducing the entire Enlightenment and all of the successes of European history down to this need to be morally good: I find that extremely dangerous. There’s this saying of Nietzsche”—she took out her phone and pulled up the quote almost instantly. …“In ‘Zarathustra’: ‘The good have always been the beginning of the end.’ ”
     

    Replies: @Desiderius, @415 reasons, @Trumpenproleteriat, @Chrisnonymous

    From that New Yorker article you quoted

    Her manner belies the extremism of the AfD’s views.

    In April, the Party said that head scarves should be banned in schools and universities, and minarets prohibited.

    So it’s an extremist position that there should not be minarets in Germany? What about muezzin issuing a call to prayer? Is it an extremist position that Germany should not be converted to an Islamic society?

  56. If Trump has a path to victory, it’s still probably a narrow one, and it’s a path which would probably require even little Utah’s 6 electoral votes. Well those votes are now in doubt as a third party Chamber of Commerce buttboy is outpolling both Hillary and Trump. That could mean an election where neither major party candidate gets an electoral college majority and the vote is thrown into the House.

    It would be interesting to see what sort of shenanigans occur in the electoral college (including potentially outright bribery and/or blackmail) and what the (presumably Republican-controlled) House will do if it winds up being up to them. I fear that there are enough disloyal electors and Republican House members that the race could still go to Hillary even if she emerges from the election without an electoral majority.

    • Replies: @Connecticut Famer
    @Wilkey

    Your fears are legitimate. The Clinton Agitprop Machine --the Clintons one indisputable (if dubious) contribution to political discourse in this once- great republic--probably has a dossier on every one of the electors as well as the Republicans in the House.

    , @pyrrhus
    @Wilkey

    There is even speculation that the Mormon buttboy could become President as a "compromise" candidate...

    , @Clyde
    @Wilkey


    It would be interesting to see what sort of shenanigans occur in the electoral college (including potentially outright bribery and/or blackmail) and what the (presumably Republican-controlled) House will do if it winds up being up to them. I fear that there are enough disloyal electors and Republican House members that the race could still go to Hillary even if she emerges from the election without an electoral majority.
     
    Now this is some advanced gaming. In this era of "Money Changes Everything" and plata o plomo—silver or lead threats to you and family, anything can happen. The Latinization of the Anglo founded United States of America.

    Billions upon billions are at stake so..........anything can happen in the next three weeks and in the weeks after the election if this is close. Think Democrap *lawyers*....like I said tens of billions are at stake.

    , @Paul Mendez
    @Wilkey


    That could mean an election where neither major party candidate gets an electoral college majority and the vote is thrown into the House.
     
    Such an event would be unequivocal proof we are living in the End Times.
  57. My favorite is that the dissing of Trumps accusations of rigging and media conspiracies is always immediately followed by factual assertions that the “Russians” are “interfering” in our election.

    • Replies: @sayless
    @Ben H

    Trumps accusations of rigging and media conspiracies is always immediately followed by factual assertions that the “Russians” are “interfering” in our election.

    Maybe it's Russia that's the indispensable nation?

  58. Maybe most of you have seen this on Twitter, but here’s another facet of the media’s hyperventillation over the word ‘rigged’: duplicity and double standards.

    View post on imgur.com

  59. OT, but here’s a report with a little bit of detail on the hack of Podesta’s email.

    http://motherboard.vice.com/read/how-hackers-broke-into-john-podesta-and-colin-powells-gmail-accounts

    Taking it at face value (it never makes clear, at least that I saw, the source of their info), it says that the hack was enabled by link in a phishing email which Podesta clicked on, which seems to have its origins in Russian hackers.

    But of course it never addresses the question of why these hackers would have to have been connected to the government, rather than just a rogue group, like so many other Russian hackers (more often interested in money, I think).

    It doesn’t even seem that the attack was particularly sophisticated:

    Inside that long URL [in the phishing email], there’s a 30-character string that looks like gibberish but is actually the encoded Gmail address of John Podesta. According to Bitly’s own statistics, that link, which has never been published, was clicked two times in March.

    That’s the link that opened Podesta’s account to the hackers, a source close to the investigation into the hack confirmed to Motherboard.

    That link is only one of almost 9,000 links Fancy Bear used to target almost 4,000 individuals from October 2015 to May 2016. Each one of these URLs contained the email and name of the actual target. The hackers created them with with two Bitly accounts in their control, but forgot to set those accounts to private, according to SecureWorks, a security firm that’s been tracking Fancy Bear for the last year.

    Is this what hackers trained by a major government would do?

    Isn’t this sort of rather primitive phishing attack more like what you’d expect from a bunch of Russians living in their mothers’ basements — phishing then drinking, drinking then phishing?

    And it isn’t obvious from the article when the capture of Podesta’s email ended. For all I can make out, it might have continued until Oct 9, when the first batch of Podesta’s emails were released by WikiLeaks.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @candid_observer

    I thought even amateur hackers could easily make it appear that they work from Russia, even if they are in reality working from New Zealand or Iceland. Is there any evidence this was not the case here?

    But of course there are many Russian hackers who have no connection whatsoever to the Kremlin.


    Is this what hackers trained by a major government would do?
     
    I think hackers trained by a major government could also make major screw-ups. Just as I wouldn't have expected a professional like Podesta to have such an unsecured email, or Hillary to have basically zero security on her private server, etc. (If I were Hillary, I'd have had a private server in order to escape scrutiny - which includes scrutiny by hackers, i.e. I'd have hired a team of experts to secure my private server.)

    Replies: @sayless

    , @ussr andy
    @candid_observer


    phishing then drinking, drinking then phishing
     
    And umpin' and bumpin' and thumpin' and bumpin'
    , @Lot
    @candid_observer

    Cybercriminals in Russia are given freedom to rip off and hack Americans, e.g. ransomware, as long as they pay off the right people and do as ordered.

    , @NOTA
    @candid_observer

    If simple attacks get the job done, why wouldn't a pro use them?

  60. @Wilkey
    If Trump has a path to victory, it's still probably a narrow one, and it's a path which would probably require even little Utah's 6 electoral votes. Well those votes are now in doubt as a third party Chamber of Commerce buttboy is outpolling both Hillary and Trump. That could mean an election where neither major party candidate gets an electoral college majority and the vote is thrown into the House.

    It would be interesting to see what sort of shenanigans occur in the electoral college (including potentially outright bribery and/or blackmail) and what the (presumably Republican-controlled) House will do if it winds up being up to them. I fear that there are enough disloyal electors and Republican House members that the race could still go to Hillary even if she emerges from the election without an electoral majority.

    Replies: @Connecticut Famer, @pyrrhus, @Clyde, @Paul Mendez

    Your fears are legitimate. The Clinton Agitprop Machine –the Clintons one indisputable (if dubious) contribution to political discourse in this once- great republic–probably has a dossier on every one of the electors as well as the Republicans in the House.

  61. Why would the media feel the slightest bit of shame? #allhandsondeck

  62. Chutzpah loosely translates as shamelessness.

  63. You know when you got your opponent by the cajones when they scream like a stuck pig. The establishment is terrified of the public becoming fully aware that the parties rig elections, because if they did, the political class would lose their legitimacy and wealth in a heart beat.

    One other thing: During the debate Hillary released some more SAP level classified information. If you paid attention you know what it is. You can bet those men who handle the nukes must have dumped a grumpy when they heard her say it. She is a complete idiot.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @rod1963

    This?


    “But here’s the deal. The bottom line on nuclear weapons is that when the president gives the order, it must be followed. There’s about four minutes between the order being given and the people responsible for launching nuclear weapons to do so.” –Hillary Clinton, National TV Appearance

    “Secretary Clinton proved tonight she is unfit to be commander-in-chief,” a top-ranking DOD intelligence source said. “What she did compromises our national security. She is cavalier and reckless and in my opinion should be detained and questioned so we can unravel why she did what she did.”

    According to Pentagon sources, the information Clinton disseminated publicly is Top Secret intelligence governed under the U.S. Special Access Program (SAP) which dictates safeguards and protocols for accessing and discussing highly classified and Top Secret intelligence. The specific details of the country’s nuclear response time discussed by Clinton, sources said, are only known by a handful of individuals outside top military brass, including the following “need-to-know” (NTK) officials...
     

    Replies: @SPMoore8

  64. “Rigging” the election means interfering with the vote counts, throwing out ballots, making the machines record the votes wrong, etc. The Media is not doing that, nor is anyone else.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @biz

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/york-when-1099-felons-vote-in-race-won-by-312-ballots/article/2504163

    , @Chrisnonymous
    @biz

    Naif.

    , @Charles Erwin Wilson
    @biz


    The Media is not doing that, nor is anyone else.
     
    Right, because in close, contested elections we never see a Democrat show up with a trunk loaded with 'ballots' that are included without scrutiny, and ensuring that once again (with the help of a 'non-partisan' judge) that the Democrat candidate wins.

    Why does your political philosophy's implementation require perpetual aggression and relentless deceit?

    You think your besties won't string you up and leave you twisting in the wind. You don't know history.
  65. @Chrisnonymous
    No, no, no. They don't feel ashamed. Really, they don't.

    Replies: @jake, @Bill, @verylongaccountname, @Jack Highlands

    You’re right – Steve is misunderstanding the aggressive purpose of projection. They are projecting but not from shame, unless one wants to hypothesize some ineffable ‘secret shame’ as the cause of all projection. In reality, it’s more a kindergarten stunt: ‘I know you are, but what am I?’

    If this WikiLeaks cycle should teach us anything, it’s that our enemies are not nearly as innocent as many on the Alt Right think: ‘they’re just acting out their genetic program’ or ‘they’re just stupid and they really think Somalis are the new Irish and Gautemalans the new Italians’ or ‘they are projecting out of shame.’

    No, Podesta and crew know exactly what they are doing.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @Jack Highlands

    No, Podesta and crew know exactly what they are doing.

    Which is what?

    Replies: @guest

    , @Jack Hanson
    @Jack Highlands

    Who's this "we', kemosabe?

    Many of the AR are quite aware that our opponents aren't engaging in 3D chess (as Steve insists when he talks about the Left and gun control), but are legitimately evil and want to see everyone who disagrees with them stuffed into gulags.

    Steve, Derbyshire, and a few others insist that if they just repeat the same points over and over the Left will "understand" how silly they are and everything will be okay. I'm pretty sure its impossible for them to imagine being hucked into prison for bad think. Ridiculous Boomer "everyone thinks like me" mindsets aren't limited to the Left.

  66. OT

    This didn’t occur to me before, as I listened to the gung-ho BBC coverage of the Mosul attack (Aleppo coverage is very muted now, someone obviously realised the contrast was just too obvious) – but Mosul is pretty close to the Syrian border.

    I wonder if the plan is for ISIS to leave Mosul relatively unscathed, and to allow them to cross into Syria intact, rather than subjecting them to the sort of treatment Saddam’s armour got in 1990 as it left Kuwait?

    (Meanwhile in northern Syria the Kurdish YPG (officially allies of the US) are being absolutely hammered by the Turks (fellow NATO members with the US). This is a very dirty war, in every sense.)

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @Anonymous Nephew

    I think we should all be thankful that in Mosul there are absolutely no civilians, especially no children, or even if there are, none of them get injured or killed in the siege. There is also no organization that rescues people from under the ruins (there's nobody to be rescued to begin with), so fortunately we can conscientiously support the attack on Mosul.

    How very, very different it is from the truly barbaric siege of Aleppo, where only the heroic White Helmets bring some relief to the horrendous suffering of the civilian population imposed by the evil Assad regime and their murderous Russian allies.

    , @TheJester
    @Anonymous Nephew

    Yes, it's hard to sort things out when families, clans, and tribes ... and the shaky alliances among families, clans, and tribes in the Middle East try to sort things out. Things gets messy and dirty.

    And we're welcoming these families, clans, and tribes ... and their shaky alliances and alien cultures into our country where they will immediately undergo a transformation into model citizens on the model of the rule-following British and Germany immigrants of times past.

    Either that or they will retain their shaky alliances of families, clans, and tribes and their alien cultures and the body-politic and rule of law will suffer as a result.

    Which is more likely?

  67. @Johnnywalker123
    Interesting polls today.

    USC - Trump + 0.6
    IBD - Trump + 1
    Rasmussen - Trump + 3
    YouGov post debate poll - HRC + 4
    Suffolk (Ohio) - tied

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @celt darnell, @Johnnywalker123

    PPD Poll – Trump +1.6
    Times/Picayune – HRC +12

    • Replies: @Johnnywalker123
    @Johnnywalker123

    UPI Poll - HRC +5

  68. @Auntie Analogue
    D-Mock-Rats and their Enemedia-Pravda Ministry of Propaganda make a big hypocritical show of clutching their pearls at Mr. Trump's well-founded declaration of a rigged election.

    These are the same Dems and their same Enemedia-Pravda Propagandists and their same legion of useful idiots who have never stopped harping that the 2000 election was rigged against and stolen from Al Gore.

    Pot calls kettle black - just more Ruling Class $ellout Hypocrisy.

    Replies: @Peripatetic commenter

    But, if he wins, will he withhold his assent to the result as well?

  69. @Anonymous Nephew
    OT

    This didn't occur to me before, as I listened to the gung-ho BBC coverage of the Mosul attack (Aleppo coverage is very muted now, someone obviously realised the contrast was just too obvious) - but Mosul is pretty close to the Syrian border.

    I wonder if the plan is for ISIS to leave Mosul relatively unscathed, and to allow them to cross into Syria intact, rather than subjecting them to the sort of treatment Saddam's armour got in 1990 as it left Kuwait?

    (Meanwhile in northern Syria the Kurdish YPG (officially allies of the US) are being absolutely hammered by the Turks (fellow NATO members with the US). This is a very dirty war, in every sense.)

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @TheJester

    I think we should all be thankful that in Mosul there are absolutely no civilians, especially no children, or even if there are, none of them get injured or killed in the siege. There is also no organization that rescues people from under the ruins (there’s nobody to be rescued to begin with), so fortunately we can conscientiously support the attack on Mosul.

    How very, very different it is from the truly barbaric siege of Aleppo, where only the heroic White Helmets bring some relief to the horrendous suffering of the civilian population imposed by the evil Assad regime and their murderous Russian allies.

  70. @Wilkey
    If Trump has a path to victory, it's still probably a narrow one, and it's a path which would probably require even little Utah's 6 electoral votes. Well those votes are now in doubt as a third party Chamber of Commerce buttboy is outpolling both Hillary and Trump. That could mean an election where neither major party candidate gets an electoral college majority and the vote is thrown into the House.

    It would be interesting to see what sort of shenanigans occur in the electoral college (including potentially outright bribery and/or blackmail) and what the (presumably Republican-controlled) House will do if it winds up being up to them. I fear that there are enough disloyal electors and Republican House members that the race could still go to Hillary even if she emerges from the election without an electoral majority.

    Replies: @Connecticut Famer, @pyrrhus, @Clyde, @Paul Mendez

    There is even speculation that the Mormon buttboy could become President as a “compromise” candidate…

  71. @candid_observer
    OT, but here's a report with a little bit of detail on the hack of Podesta's email.

    http://motherboard.vice.com/read/how-hackers-broke-into-john-podesta-and-colin-powells-gmail-accounts

    Taking it at face value (it never makes clear, at least that I saw, the source of their info), it says that the hack was enabled by link in a phishing email which Podesta clicked on, which seems to have its origins in Russian hackers.

    But of course it never addresses the question of why these hackers would have to have been connected to the government, rather than just a rogue group, like so many other Russian hackers (more often interested in money, I think).

    It doesn't even seem that the attack was particularly sophisticated:


    Inside that long URL [in the phishing email], there’s a 30-character string that looks like gibberish but is actually the encoded Gmail address of John Podesta. According to Bitly’s own statistics, that link, which has never been published, was clicked two times in March.

    That’s the link that opened Podesta’s account to the hackers, a source close to the investigation into the hack confirmed to Motherboard.

    That link is only one of almost 9,000 links Fancy Bear used to target almost 4,000 individuals from October 2015 to May 2016. Each one of these URLs contained the email and name of the actual target. The hackers created them with with two Bitly accounts in their control, but forgot to set those accounts to private, according to SecureWorks, a security firm that’s been tracking Fancy Bear for the last year.
     

    Is this what hackers trained by a major government would do?

    Isn't this sort of rather primitive phishing attack more like what you'd expect from a bunch of Russians living in their mothers' basements -- phishing then drinking, drinking then phishing?

    And it isn't obvious from the article when the capture of Podesta's email ended. For all I can make out, it might have continued until Oct 9, when the first batch of Podesta's emails were released by WikiLeaks.

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @ussr andy, @Lot, @NOTA

    I thought even amateur hackers could easily make it appear that they work from Russia, even if they are in reality working from New Zealand or Iceland. Is there any evidence this was not the case here?

    But of course there are many Russian hackers who have no connection whatsoever to the Kremlin.

    Is this what hackers trained by a major government would do?

    I think hackers trained by a major government could also make major screw-ups. Just as I wouldn’t have expected a professional like Podesta to have such an unsecured email, or Hillary to have basically zero security on her private server, etc. (If I were Hillary, I’d have had a private server in order to escape scrutiny – which includes scrutiny by hackers, i.e. I’d have hired a team of experts to secure my private server.)

    • Replies: @sayless
    @reiner Tor

    hackers trained by a major government could also make major screw-ups.

    Agree. But would a Russian government hacker use the word Bear in his handle?

  72. @Wilkey
    If Trump has a path to victory, it's still probably a narrow one, and it's a path which would probably require even little Utah's 6 electoral votes. Well those votes are now in doubt as a third party Chamber of Commerce buttboy is outpolling both Hillary and Trump. That could mean an election where neither major party candidate gets an electoral college majority and the vote is thrown into the House.

    It would be interesting to see what sort of shenanigans occur in the electoral college (including potentially outright bribery and/or blackmail) and what the (presumably Republican-controlled) House will do if it winds up being up to them. I fear that there are enough disloyal electors and Republican House members that the race could still go to Hillary even if she emerges from the election without an electoral majority.

    Replies: @Connecticut Famer, @pyrrhus, @Clyde, @Paul Mendez

    It would be interesting to see what sort of shenanigans occur in the electoral college (including potentially outright bribery and/or blackmail) and what the (presumably Republican-controlled) House will do if it winds up being up to them. I fear that there are enough disloyal electors and Republican House members that the race could still go to Hillary even if she emerges from the election without an electoral majority.

    Now this is some advanced gaming. In this era of “Money Changes Everything” and plata o plomo—silver or lead threats to you and family, anything can happen. The Latinization of the Anglo founded United States of America.

    Billions upon billions are at stake so……….anything can happen in the next three weeks and in the weeks after the election if this is close. Think Democrap *lawyers*….like I said tens of billions are at stake.

  73. What’s a little vote rigging in service of Holocaust prevention?

  74. The (trans)national police state cuckservatives are getting all hot and bothered that Trump might fight electoral fraud:

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @Lugash

    I have had a thought for a while. Is it not possible that our multiculturalist utopias' slide towards totalitarianism will happen the same way financial crises happen: slowly, and then all at once? I mean, we know well the slow phase, it's been going on for decades now. But maybe it will now happen all of a sudden? As the frogs try to jump out of the hot water everywhere (in the US, in several European countries, etc.), maybe the cooks will finally use force on them?

    I don't know who this guy is, but I can imagine he's not the only one thinking like this. I'm also sure most leftists, even if they disagree with him, aren't incensed by this tweet. So if they finally do that, there won't be many leftists protesting against it. Or will there be?

    Replies: @sayless

    , @guest
    @Lugash

    "This is sedition." I'm laughing.

    Mostly, though, I'm yawning. None of them believe any of this. They're just emoting.

    Replies: @Unladen Swallow

  75. I’m beginning to think a Hillary win isn’t the end, but the beginning. She’ll be the most compromised president going in ever. The Press will have openly shed its constitutional role in electioneering and covering-up for her, having calumniated half the nation to do it. Things have been said which can’t be taken back. The Democrats have been exposed in all their corruption. The election results will be suspect, to say the least. If this doesn’t red pill America…

    • Replies: @Bugg
    @Dennis Dale

    After at least 12 and may be 16 years of Obama and Hillary, it will be over.

    Or secession is around the corner.

    , @dfordoom
    @Dennis Dale


    The election results will be suspect, to say the least. If this doesn’t red pill America…
     
    It won't. The vast majority of the population won't even know the results are suspect. And establishment Republicans won't make a song and dance about it because they'll be delighted by a HIllary win.
  76. Anonymous [AKA "GreatestGenerationLOL"] says:

    Is this the election where White men realize they will never have any real political power again?

    Great gift to leave your sons, guys.

  77. @Jack Highlands
    @Chrisnonymous

    You're right - Steve is misunderstanding the aggressive purpose of projection. They are projecting but not from shame, unless one wants to hypothesize some ineffable 'secret shame' as the cause of all projection. In reality, it's more a kindergarten stunt: 'I know you are, but what am I?'

    If this WikiLeaks cycle should teach us anything, it's that our enemies are not nearly as innocent as many on the Alt Right think: 'they're just acting out their genetic program' or 'they're just stupid and they really think Somalis are the new Irish and Gautemalans the new Italians' or 'they are projecting out of shame.'

    No, Podesta and crew know exactly what they are doing.

    Replies: @Opinionator, @Jack Hanson

    No, Podesta and crew know exactly what they are doing.

    Which is what?

    • Replies: @guest
    @Opinionator

    Staying the "who" in "who/whom."

  78. @Lugash
    The (trans)national police state cuckservatives are getting all hot and bothered that Trump might fight electoral fraud:

    https://twitter.com/20committee/status/788940675664474112

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @guest

    I have had a thought for a while. Is it not possible that our multiculturalist utopias’ slide towards totalitarianism will happen the same way financial crises happen: slowly, and then all at once? I mean, we know well the slow phase, it’s been going on for decades now. But maybe it will now happen all of a sudden? As the frogs try to jump out of the hot water everywhere (in the US, in several European countries, etc.), maybe the cooks will finally use force on them?

    I don’t know who this guy is, but I can imagine he’s not the only one thinking like this. I’m also sure most leftists, even if they disagree with him, aren’t incensed by this tweet. So if they finally do that, there won’t be many leftists protesting against it. Or will there be?

    • Replies: @sayless
    @reiner Tor

    Is it not possible that our multiculturalist utopias’ slide towards totalitarianism will happen the same way financial crises happen: slowly, and then all at once? I mean, we know well the slow phase, it’s been going on for decades now. But maybe it will now happen all of a sudden? As the frogs try to jump out of the hot water everywhere (in the US, in several European countries, etc.), maybe the cooks will finally use force on them?

    I've thought that for a long time too. Since 2012 I've had a foreboding that the 2016 presidential elections would be canceled, or their results canceled. Even have a bet on it.

    Replies: @NOTA

  79. @syonredux
    Off-topic,

    A very fine quote from Frauke Petry on the current situation in Germany

    “It’s so moral to allow these attacks to happen,” she said sarcastically. “It’s so moral to promise to people around the world that they can come to Germany and find paradise. … Reducing the entire Enlightenment and all of the successes of European history down to this need to be morally good: I find that extremely dangerous. There’s this saying of Nietzsche”—she took out her phone and pulled up the quote almost instantly. …“In ‘Zarathustra’: ‘The good have always been the beginning of the end.’ ”
     

    Replies: @Desiderius, @415 reasons, @Trumpenproleteriat, @Chrisnonymous

    This would have been an excellent response to hillary’s “america is great because it is good shtick”

  80. @candid_observer
    OT, but here's a report with a little bit of detail on the hack of Podesta's email.

    http://motherboard.vice.com/read/how-hackers-broke-into-john-podesta-and-colin-powells-gmail-accounts

    Taking it at face value (it never makes clear, at least that I saw, the source of their info), it says that the hack was enabled by link in a phishing email which Podesta clicked on, which seems to have its origins in Russian hackers.

    But of course it never addresses the question of why these hackers would have to have been connected to the government, rather than just a rogue group, like so many other Russian hackers (more often interested in money, I think).

    It doesn't even seem that the attack was particularly sophisticated:


    Inside that long URL [in the phishing email], there’s a 30-character string that looks like gibberish but is actually the encoded Gmail address of John Podesta. According to Bitly’s own statistics, that link, which has never been published, was clicked two times in March.

    That’s the link that opened Podesta’s account to the hackers, a source close to the investigation into the hack confirmed to Motherboard.

    That link is only one of almost 9,000 links Fancy Bear used to target almost 4,000 individuals from October 2015 to May 2016. Each one of these URLs contained the email and name of the actual target. The hackers created them with with two Bitly accounts in their control, but forgot to set those accounts to private, according to SecureWorks, a security firm that’s been tracking Fancy Bear for the last year.
     

    Is this what hackers trained by a major government would do?

    Isn't this sort of rather primitive phishing attack more like what you'd expect from a bunch of Russians living in their mothers' basements -- phishing then drinking, drinking then phishing?

    And it isn't obvious from the article when the capture of Podesta's email ended. For all I can make out, it might have continued until Oct 9, when the first batch of Podesta's emails were released by WikiLeaks.

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @ussr andy, @Lot, @NOTA

    phishing then drinking, drinking then phishing

    And umpin’ and bumpin’ and thumpin’ and bumpin’

  81. @biz
    "Rigging" the election means interfering with the vote counts, throwing out ballots, making the machines record the votes wrong, etc. The Media is not doing that, nor is anyone else.

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @Chrisnonymous, @Charles Erwin Wilson

  82. @DWright
    Someone once mentioned to fight as Sean Connery said in the Untouchables. The Chicago way.

    "Wanna get Capone? Here's how you get him. He pulls a knife, you pull a gun, he sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That's the Chicago way, and that's how you get Capone.

    Just insert Democrats for Capone. Playing by Cuck rules won't get.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    Someone once mentioned

    That was Obama.

  83. @reiner

    I think a sudden snap is highly probable. The system is rotten, and a lot of Americans would just as well see it collapse, even if Wikileaks and the Russians are working hand in glove. It’s hilarious watching those still invested in the system throw out charges of sedition, treason and being unpatriotic. Once people quit caring about being called racist they were out of ammo.

    I follow quite a few natsec people, and they live in their own little bubble. There’s a whole bunch of government pork they’ve been living fat on for 15 years.

    Schindler’s an odd duck who made redpill real talk noises when Trump was ascendant, but in the end he’s a cuck.

    Leftists will cheer any prosecution on, should Trump lose.

  84. @Anonymous
    As I said previously, the MSM is trying very very hard - and succeeding for that matter, into trying to paint Donald Trump as a nasty unpleasant misogynistic bully in order to subliminally repulse white female voters.

    In my opinion the particular monster that they are shaping Trump into is Albert Spica. In case you don't know, Albert Spica is the villain so ably played by Michael Gambon in Peter Greenaway's very excellent 1989 drama 'The Cook, the Thief, his Wife and her Lover'.

    Why this classic film, and Peter Greenaway, have never received the respect that they deserve by the increasingly childish Hollywood, I do not know.

    Replies: @guest, @okie

    That is one of the most unwatchable movies I’ve ever tried to watch.

    • Agree: Auntie Analogue
  85. @O'really
    This is an interesting test of the Megaphone's ability to successfully conduct a gaslight operation. The 2000 election was not that long ago. Can they induce a mass hallucination to suggest that it never happened? So far, it seems to be working.

    Replies: @guest

    I think the term you’re looking for is memory hole, not gaslighting. Of course, it’s possible they’re trying to make those of us who remember 2000 doubt our sanity for doing so. But the other term is more to the point.

    What is it with the internet and willy-nilly use of “gaslighting” these days?

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    @guest


    What is it with the internet and willy-nilly use of “gaslighting” these days?
     
    Whenever people become newly acquainted with a thinky new concept, the use of which they believe will show off their intellectual chops, they tend to over-apply it prodigiously. It's been an unhappily acquired hobby of mine to track these ripples in thought-space, as a once obscure term starts showing up in one columnist's repertoire after another with increasing frequency before fading off again.

    Way back in 1999, the overuse of the term "kowtow" in nationally syndicated op-eds became so obvious as to be annoying. The very height of absurdity was reached when I saw the prominently mustachioed Thomas L. Friedman employ it in conjunction with a near-synonym, dashing out the awkward phrase "grovelling and kowtowing," or something like that. The point of this un-poetic pleonasm was obviously just to shoehorn "kowtow" into the column somewhere, since that seemed to be the thing to do back then. And these people are supposed to be our skilled wordsmiths and intellectual leading lights?

    Sometime circa 2006 we were treated to a proliferation of "drilling down," which started in the financial media (i.e. CNBC) and eventually spread to the nightly talking head shows. In the course of this run the term rapidly prescinded from its technical definition and became just a hip way of saying "let's talk about this some more." (It is the fate of every technical term, once it enters the vernacular, to be dumbed down to the level of the speakers. Thus, any word that once designated a particular or nuanced idea eventually becomes a fashionable idiomatic for a plain-vanilla concept for which a whole host of perfectly adequate synonyms already exists.)

    You may recall that just a few months ago there was a brief efflorescence of Snagglepuss' signature "Heavens to Murgatroyd" that even made its way into the iSteve comments. I believe that one was sparked by a single caller to the Rush Limbaugh show who employed the phrase, causing Rush to take notice of it and repeat it.

    "Gaslighting" is a very useful concept to have once you get your head around it, but because of its inherently sophisticated subject, it is prone to being either misunderstood by the general population or overused by the intellectually vain. In this respect, I believe, it is similar to the hackneyed cliche or quotation.

    The literary use of the quotation contains an ironic subtextual element. By the mere fact that it is a quotation, its employ is supposed to suggest both that the original material issues from some unquestionably authoritative Realm of the Archons, as well as lend some cachet to the present author, who must affect that he first stumbled across it in the midst of some deeply personal and wrenching quest for truth.Without this implied drama, quotation-dropping would have no literary value. But fickle man, ever attentive to the pathways of power and personal vainglory, is quick to grasp at the means, the ostentatious display of the symbols of power, without understanding the ends, or the essence that the symbols symbolize. By a sort of hypostatic synecdoche, the symbols are held to be the thing itself. It's like a young man who blows all of his disposable income on sports car leases and bling, trying to look like a high roller while actually having nothing.

    Suffice it to say that a real writer must make every reasonable effort to avoid these temptations. The written word is accorded a high degree of respect precisely because it is supposed to represent condensed, crystalized, thoroughly vetted thought. But as with anything else of value, there will be many who try to counterfeit this particular coin. Try to avoid them and try not to be one yourself.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @The Last Real Calvinist, @Harry Baldwin, @guest, @guest, @PiltdownMan

    , @Harry Baldwin
    @guest

    Also, why does everyone say "optics" now when they mean "appearances," as in, "It's not illegal, but the optics aren't good."

    Replies: @guest

    , @Antonymous
    @guest

    True, it's become a social justice buzzword for deceit. But I do think the media gaslights with respect to Islam (and to a lesser extent, black crime). A muslim can allahu-akbar while shooting 50 gays, proclaim loyalty to ISIS in a 9-11 call, and the media talks about gun control, mental illness, and islamophobia. Ditto most other muslim mass shootings/bombings -- as Trump points out, the president can't bring himself to say radical Islam. This does strike me as psychological in its intent.

  86. @anon
    @Jim Don Bob

    Why would Dems need to steal an election against someone so far behind in the polls?

    Replies: @guest

    To make assurance doubly sure, like old Macbeth.

  87. @Richard S
    Was Hillary dressed like an ice cream vendor from the future?

    Replies: @guest

    No, it was her usual Chairwoman Mao ensemble.

  88. @Opinionator
    @Jack Highlands

    No, Podesta and crew know exactly what they are doing.

    Which is what?

    Replies: @guest

    Staying the “who” in “who/whom.”

  89. @Jimi
    Liberal journalists can forgive Trump for the stupid things he said.

    They cannot forgive him for the stupid things they've had to say.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    Such as…?

    • Replies: @guest
    @Opinionator

    "Donald Trump is a domestic insurrectionist."

  90. @Lugash
    The (trans)national police state cuckservatives are getting all hot and bothered that Trump might fight electoral fraud:

    https://twitter.com/20committee/status/788940675664474112

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @guest

    “This is sedition.” I’m laughing.

    Mostly, though, I’m yawning. None of them believe any of this. They’re just emoting.

    • Replies: @Unladen Swallow
    @guest

    They ( The US govt ) have through diplomatic pressure already cut the Internet access to Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy in the UK in order to stem the leaks, because you know the Russians are behind it all.

  91. @Opinionator
    @Jimi

    Such as...?

    Replies: @guest

    “Donald Trump is a domestic insurrectionist.”

  92. @Anonymous
    As I said previously, the MSM is trying very very hard - and succeeding for that matter, into trying to paint Donald Trump as a nasty unpleasant misogynistic bully in order to subliminally repulse white female voters.

    In my opinion the particular monster that they are shaping Trump into is Albert Spica. In case you don't know, Albert Spica is the villain so ably played by Michael Gambon in Peter Greenaway's very excellent 1989 drama 'The Cook, the Thief, his Wife and her Lover'.

    Why this classic film, and Peter Greenaway, have never received the respect that they deserve by the increasingly childish Hollywood, I do not know.

    Replies: @guest, @okie

    You don’t have to get so artsy fartsy, i said yesterday that he is being put in the Tommy from Goodfellas role of the impulsive hothead who shot the drinks boy. The never Trumpers play into this as he wasn’t killed as a crook but put down by his own side.

    The only hope he has is to flip the script and be Vinny from my cousin Vinny. Sadly Melania isn’t a Marisa Tomei.

    • Replies: @guest
    @okie

    I like the part where Vinny keeps stalling on fighting a giant guy who promised to put up two hundred dollars against Vinny's ability to kick his ass. When the guy finally flashes enough cash, Vinny waves him off, looks like he's going to pass by, then launches himself through the air and levels the guy with one hit. Hopefully something like that happens on election day.

  93. @Anonymous
    It'd be interesting if you could post more on rigging from a statistical perspective. What margin do you think would be necessary to obviate rigging claims?

    Replies: @Brian Reilly, @NOTA, @ben tillman

    I think that a 3 % margin will suffice. There are not that many places that stealing votes can work, maybe 100 precincts nationwide. If (unlikely) Trump can win by 3 or more in enough states, he will win in spite of fraud.

    On the other hand, if he LOSES a few states by a handful of votes in each, with uncommon distributions (which will not be evident until the counting is done) we will know he was snookered.

    Last comment is that it does not matter much. Trump will be a lot more fun to watch, but the old American Republic is doomed regardless of who wins. Bring on the entertainment, I say!

  94. @Wilkey
    If Trump has a path to victory, it's still probably a narrow one, and it's a path which would probably require even little Utah's 6 electoral votes. Well those votes are now in doubt as a third party Chamber of Commerce buttboy is outpolling both Hillary and Trump. That could mean an election where neither major party candidate gets an electoral college majority and the vote is thrown into the House.

    It would be interesting to see what sort of shenanigans occur in the electoral college (including potentially outright bribery and/or blackmail) and what the (presumably Republican-controlled) House will do if it winds up being up to them. I fear that there are enough disloyal electors and Republican House members that the race could still go to Hillary even if she emerges from the election without an electoral majority.

    Replies: @Connecticut Famer, @pyrrhus, @Clyde, @Paul Mendez

    That could mean an election where neither major party candidate gets an electoral college majority and the vote is thrown into the House.

    Such an event would be unequivocal proof we are living in the End Times.

  95. @verylongaccountname
    @Chrisnonymous

    Exactly so. They don't feel guilty, they are sanctimonious. In their minds, their support of Hillary makes them good people and they are chastising the bad people who support Trump. Simple as that.

    Replies: @sayless

    Stop me if I’ve already said this.

    Leftists tend to feel that their leftist opinions guarantee their virtue as persons, at least in my experience. SJWs are a contemporary example of this intrapsychic dynamic. And conservatives tend to feel that their right-wing opinions are a sign of greater intelligence, while not necessarily guaranteeing that they have greater virtue. I think this is why leftists can be so nasty, even to one another, over little differences in opinion on political matters. Look at how many death threats Trump has received, while as far as I know none have been reported against Hillary.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
  96. @okie
    @Anonymous

    You don't have to get so artsy fartsy, i said yesterday that he is being put in the Tommy from Goodfellas role of the impulsive hothead who shot the drinks boy. The never Trumpers play into this as he wasn't killed as a crook but put down by his own side.

    The only hope he has is to flip the script and be Vinny from my cousin Vinny. Sadly Melania isn't a Marisa Tomei.

    Replies: @guest

    I like the part where Vinny keeps stalling on fighting a giant guy who promised to put up two hundred dollars against Vinny’s ability to kick his ass. When the guy finally flashes enough cash, Vinny waves him off, looks like he’s going to pass by, then launches himself through the air and levels the guy with one hit. Hopefully something like that happens on election day.

  97. @guest
    @Lugash

    "This is sedition." I'm laughing.

    Mostly, though, I'm yawning. None of them believe any of this. They're just emoting.

    Replies: @Unladen Swallow

    They ( The US govt ) have through diplomatic pressure already cut the Internet access to Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy in the UK in order to stem the leaks, because you know the Russians are behind it all.

  98. @syonredux
    Off-topic,

    A very fine quote from Frauke Petry on the current situation in Germany

    “It’s so moral to allow these attacks to happen,” she said sarcastically. “It’s so moral to promise to people around the world that they can come to Germany and find paradise. … Reducing the entire Enlightenment and all of the successes of European history down to this need to be morally good: I find that extremely dangerous. There’s this saying of Nietzsche”—she took out her phone and pulled up the quote almost instantly. …“In ‘Zarathustra’: ‘The good have always been the beginning of the end.’ ”
     

    Replies: @Desiderius, @415 reasons, @Trumpenproleteriat, @Chrisnonymous

    Nice dovetail with Gabriel M’s suggestion to read the Gentle Introduction. (That would be UR’s… but not Unz Review’s…)

  99. @Ben H
    My favorite is that the dissing of Trumps accusations of rigging and media conspiracies is always immediately followed by factual assertions that the "Russians" are "interfering" in our election.

    Replies: @sayless

    Trumps accusations of rigging and media conspiracies is always immediately followed by factual assertions that the “Russians” are “interfering” in our election.

    Maybe it’s Russia that’s the indispensable nation?

  100. @Opinionator
    @Kylie

    Would any means not be justified in order to prevent jews and people of color from being beaten and murdered by mobs during a Trump presidency?

    Replies: @Wally, @Kylie

    The hasbarists are here.

    Nonetheless, the facts are:

    Dr. Tony Martin – The Jewish Role in the African Slave Trade

    http://wethoughttheywerewhite.weebly.com/jews–the-slave-trade.html
    Pregnant women and children being targeted by Jews

    and:
    Two teenage Israeli Jew girls carrying a placard in Hebrew reading: “Hating Arabs is not racism, it’s values.”
    Jews in US admit “Israel First”
    http://mondoweiss.net/2016/07/bluntly-firsters-politics/

  101. Jack Hanson says:
    @Jack Highlands
    @Chrisnonymous

    You're right - Steve is misunderstanding the aggressive purpose of projection. They are projecting but not from shame, unless one wants to hypothesize some ineffable 'secret shame' as the cause of all projection. In reality, it's more a kindergarten stunt: 'I know you are, but what am I?'

    If this WikiLeaks cycle should teach us anything, it's that our enemies are not nearly as innocent as many on the Alt Right think: 'they're just acting out their genetic program' or 'they're just stupid and they really think Somalis are the new Irish and Gautemalans the new Italians' or 'they are projecting out of shame.'

    No, Podesta and crew know exactly what they are doing.

    Replies: @Opinionator, @Jack Hanson

    Who’s this “we’, kemosabe?

    Many of the AR are quite aware that our opponents aren’t engaging in 3D chess (as Steve insists when he talks about the Left and gun control), but are legitimately evil and want to see everyone who disagrees with them stuffed into gulags.

    Steve, Derbyshire, and a few others insist that if they just repeat the same points over and over the Left will “understand” how silly they are and everything will be okay. I’m pretty sure its impossible for them to imagine being hucked into prison for bad think. Ridiculous Boomer “everyone thinks like me” mindsets aren’t limited to the Left.

  102. @biz
    "Rigging" the election means interfering with the vote counts, throwing out ballots, making the machines record the votes wrong, etc. The Media is not doing that, nor is anyone else.

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @Chrisnonymous, @Charles Erwin Wilson

    Naif.

  103. @reiner Tor
    @candid_observer

    I thought even amateur hackers could easily make it appear that they work from Russia, even if they are in reality working from New Zealand or Iceland. Is there any evidence this was not the case here?

    But of course there are many Russian hackers who have no connection whatsoever to the Kremlin.


    Is this what hackers trained by a major government would do?
     
    I think hackers trained by a major government could also make major screw-ups. Just as I wouldn't have expected a professional like Podesta to have such an unsecured email, or Hillary to have basically zero security on her private server, etc. (If I were Hillary, I'd have had a private server in order to escape scrutiny - which includes scrutiny by hackers, i.e. I'd have hired a team of experts to secure my private server.)

    Replies: @sayless

    hackers trained by a major government could also make major screw-ups.

    Agree. But would a Russian government hacker use the word Bear in his handle?

  104. @Anonymous
    It'd be interesting if you could post more on rigging from a statistical perspective. What margin do you think would be necessary to obviate rigging claims?

    Replies: @Brian Reilly, @NOTA, @ben tillman

    In general, fraud that isn’t blatant and obvious to everyone can only change the outcome of very close elections.

    Tampering with the election to change a Trump landslide into a Clinton landslide would require massive operations in many different states (to get enough electoral votes), each with different voting systems, election officials, procedures, etc.

    In a given state or county, tampering with paper ballots (opscan or VVPAT) is possible, but is also a manpower-intensive operation that’s hard to keep secret. Tampering with electronic counts is possible (the machines are not very secure and the election officials don’t really understand computer security), but if you change the vote totals by very much, it will be obvious wrt both polls and the expected distribution of votes. It’s not clear that those would automatically lead anywhere in all-electronic voting machines (aka DREs), since there’s not a meaningful way to audit the results. But DREs with paper trails can have their paper totals checked against electronic totals.

    There’s a long history of low level fraud involving trucking in homeless people and giving them an ID to vote under. Again, this can affect close races, but it is blatant and very visible. There’s also fraud in mail-in ballots, voter intimidation at the polls, disinformation campaigns (like robocalls to likely voters on the other side telling them the wrong day to vote), “cleaning” the registration database of the other side’s voters, etc. All that happens in every election, but it’s probably not moving the results all that much. Similarly, maybe a few people who aren’t supposed to vote will cast votes, but it won’t change anything unless the state is balanced on a knife edge.

    The model for practical vote fraud is probably the 2000 election–most fraud is like screwing up the ballot design in some county so older voters get the wrong guy, or nitpicking the counting rules for dimpled chads–stuff that can move a few thousand votes around, but not more than that.

    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson
    @NOTA


    stuff that can move a few thousand votes around, but not more than that.
     
    Ever heard of the 1960 election? And how are you defining 'few' and 'close' for evaluation purposes?

    Mail-in ballots, motor-voter, electronic voting - you cannot seriously believe that the scope of corruption is just a few thousand votes nationwide. And if it is a few thousand in every state, given the electoral college, the election can be stolen.

    The notion that to be worthy of contesting the result you have to win by a landslide is absurd. We have a corrupt system, with undocumented voters, undocumented votes and undocumented victors decided by documented enemies of the United States.
    , @Discard
    @NOTA

    Dimpled or hanging chads are the result of sticking more than one ballot at a time in the voting machine, that is, vote fraud. Just try sticking a few too many pieces of paper in a paper punch to see how it works.

  105. @reiner Tor
    @Lugash

    I have had a thought for a while. Is it not possible that our multiculturalist utopias' slide towards totalitarianism will happen the same way financial crises happen: slowly, and then all at once? I mean, we know well the slow phase, it's been going on for decades now. But maybe it will now happen all of a sudden? As the frogs try to jump out of the hot water everywhere (in the US, in several European countries, etc.), maybe the cooks will finally use force on them?

    I don't know who this guy is, but I can imagine he's not the only one thinking like this. I'm also sure most leftists, even if they disagree with him, aren't incensed by this tweet. So if they finally do that, there won't be many leftists protesting against it. Or will there be?

    Replies: @sayless

    Is it not possible that our multiculturalist utopias’ slide towards totalitarianism will happen the same way financial crises happen: slowly, and then all at once? I mean, we know well the slow phase, it’s been going on for decades now. But maybe it will now happen all of a sudden? As the frogs try to jump out of the hot water everywhere (in the US, in several European countries, etc.), maybe the cooks will finally use force on them?

    I’ve thought that for a long time too. Since 2012 I’ve had a foreboding that the 2016 presidential elections would be canceled, or their results canceled. Even have a bet on it.

    • Replies: @NOTA
    @sayless

    I would be shocked if elections were cancelled in my lifetime. I would be much less surprised if they stopped mattering, but we will continue having elections even when it's little more than ceremony, the way European countries with monarchies still make a big deal of coronations and royal weddings and such.

    Replies: @reiner Tor

  106. @Gabriel M
    Speaking as a non-American, I believe that the fact that literally millions of people have been red-pilled by the Trump vs. the Media election is more valuable than what Trump could have achieved in 4/8 years had the media given him a "fair" (i.e. only normally biased) crack and he won.

    But I can see that were I an American anyway near the Mexican border I would feel differently.

    Either way, though, he probably won't win so you might as well make the best of it. People need to understand: this isn't a bug in the system, this is the system: and if it looks like it's in a state of chronic dysfunction that's because it is. Read Gentle Introduction and encourage anyone you know with a +115 IQ to do so as well, right after a James O Keefe video. There's never been a better time.

    Replies: @NOTA, @dfordoom

    Goldwater:Reagan::Trump:??

    It will be interesting to see if someone comes along in another few years who is more palatable than Trump but is still part of the same intellectual movement.

    • Replies: @guest
    @NOTA

    Going by the actor motif, how about Shia Lebeouf?

    , @Discard
    @NOTA

    In four years, another ten million freebee-loving foreigners will have been added to the voting rolls. The only elections that will matter will be the Democrat primaries.

  107. @candid_observer
    OT, but here's a report with a little bit of detail on the hack of Podesta's email.

    http://motherboard.vice.com/read/how-hackers-broke-into-john-podesta-and-colin-powells-gmail-accounts

    Taking it at face value (it never makes clear, at least that I saw, the source of their info), it says that the hack was enabled by link in a phishing email which Podesta clicked on, which seems to have its origins in Russian hackers.

    But of course it never addresses the question of why these hackers would have to have been connected to the government, rather than just a rogue group, like so many other Russian hackers (more often interested in money, I think).

    It doesn't even seem that the attack was particularly sophisticated:


    Inside that long URL [in the phishing email], there’s a 30-character string that looks like gibberish but is actually the encoded Gmail address of John Podesta. According to Bitly’s own statistics, that link, which has never been published, was clicked two times in March.

    That’s the link that opened Podesta’s account to the hackers, a source close to the investigation into the hack confirmed to Motherboard.

    That link is only one of almost 9,000 links Fancy Bear used to target almost 4,000 individuals from October 2015 to May 2016. Each one of these URLs contained the email and name of the actual target. The hackers created them with with two Bitly accounts in their control, but forgot to set those accounts to private, according to SecureWorks, a security firm that’s been tracking Fancy Bear for the last year.
     

    Is this what hackers trained by a major government would do?

    Isn't this sort of rather primitive phishing attack more like what you'd expect from a bunch of Russians living in their mothers' basements -- phishing then drinking, drinking then phishing?

    And it isn't obvious from the article when the capture of Podesta's email ended. For all I can make out, it might have continued until Oct 9, when the first batch of Podesta's emails were released by WikiLeaks.

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @ussr andy, @Lot, @NOTA

    Cybercriminals in Russia are given freedom to rip off and hack Americans, e.g. ransomware, as long as they pay off the right people and do as ordered.

  108. @JohnnyD
    I think the same thing applies to WikiLeaks. The media is desperately trying to discredit Wikileaks and Julian Assagne because it's the only source that actually tells the truth about Hillary's corruption. That has to be embarrassing for supposed "journalists."

    Replies: @NOTA

    There’s also an establishment / fringes split wrt both Trump and Wikileaks–establishment types on both sides dislike both.

  109. @Anonymous
    People who were raised in good, respectable families are at a disadvantage when it comes to wallowing in the sty that is politics. Bush the second, for all his faults, never descended to the level of his lampooners despite the despicable things they said about him.

    Donald too is hamstrung against the Clintons by his upper class sense of propriety. Hillary's meanness in the first debate stung him and he responded by taking off the gloves, but his heart isn't in it. To be sure, developing real estate in NYC takes sharp elbows, but to have to get down and mud wrestle with the hillbilly Clintons is beneath any normal person's dignity.

    Replies: @pepperinmono

    Agree totally.
    Trump actually thought Clinton would play fair.
    It goes to his fundamental goodness as a man.
    I am sure real estate is tough.
    However, he has never literally killed anyone as HRC has in her capacity as SOS.
    He seemed angry or more determined than ever last night , possibly because he finally realizes how serious these people are.

  110. @candid_observer
    OT, but here's a report with a little bit of detail on the hack of Podesta's email.

    http://motherboard.vice.com/read/how-hackers-broke-into-john-podesta-and-colin-powells-gmail-accounts

    Taking it at face value (it never makes clear, at least that I saw, the source of their info), it says that the hack was enabled by link in a phishing email which Podesta clicked on, which seems to have its origins in Russian hackers.

    But of course it never addresses the question of why these hackers would have to have been connected to the government, rather than just a rogue group, like so many other Russian hackers (more often interested in money, I think).

    It doesn't even seem that the attack was particularly sophisticated:


    Inside that long URL [in the phishing email], there’s a 30-character string that looks like gibberish but is actually the encoded Gmail address of John Podesta. According to Bitly’s own statistics, that link, which has never been published, was clicked two times in March.

    That’s the link that opened Podesta’s account to the hackers, a source close to the investigation into the hack confirmed to Motherboard.

    That link is only one of almost 9,000 links Fancy Bear used to target almost 4,000 individuals from October 2015 to May 2016. Each one of these URLs contained the email and name of the actual target. The hackers created them with with two Bitly accounts in their control, but forgot to set those accounts to private, according to SecureWorks, a security firm that’s been tracking Fancy Bear for the last year.
     

    Is this what hackers trained by a major government would do?

    Isn't this sort of rather primitive phishing attack more like what you'd expect from a bunch of Russians living in their mothers' basements -- phishing then drinking, drinking then phishing?

    And it isn't obvious from the article when the capture of Podesta's email ended. For all I can make out, it might have continued until Oct 9, when the first batch of Podesta's emails were released by WikiLeaks.

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @ussr andy, @Lot, @NOTA

    If simple attacks get the job done, why wouldn’t a pro use them?

  111. @Stan Adams
    OT: Right now, I'm sitting in a public place, listening to some loud-mouthed asshole with a New York accent talking about how inarticulate Trump is.

    "Obama sounds so educated and classy," he's saying. "Trump sounds like a buffoon."

    Now he's talking about how incompetent and fear-mongering Trump is.

    Anyone who holds up Obama as the paragon of intelligence, competence, and integrity is not worth arguing with.

    Replies: @Bugg

    Had similar experience in a Park Slope restaurant earlier this week. Adjoining table was a liberal couple, husband letting it slip he works for the US attorney (not sure if it’s Eastern or Southern District,no matter, he is undoubtedly a Dem appointment). The 2 were utterly ga ga over Obama brilliantly chastising Trump about electoral fraud. Yet criminal Mr. Creamer has visited the White House hundreds of times. Why exactly? Here is a lawyer who all day deals with people lying, cheating and stealing, yet this kind of thievery because it inures to his side is okay?

    What they fail to grasp is once real serious vibrant diversity kicks in they and their ilk will be kicked to the curb. They don’t get it; the cult of diversity will have no use for any white people. We are all the same to them, the color of your collar and your politics will mean nothing. Pay up and shut up.You are whitey, and that’s all that matters. Locally, think Newark Congressman Peter Rodino or Brooklyn DA Charles Hynes; once we have enough votes to get our guy in there, get lost no matter how much you bent over backward to pay fealty. Think Doctor Zhivago coming back to his old home to see it overrun by the rabble.

  112. @sayless
    @reiner Tor

    Is it not possible that our multiculturalist utopias’ slide towards totalitarianism will happen the same way financial crises happen: slowly, and then all at once? I mean, we know well the slow phase, it’s been going on for decades now. But maybe it will now happen all of a sudden? As the frogs try to jump out of the hot water everywhere (in the US, in several European countries, etc.), maybe the cooks will finally use force on them?

    I've thought that for a long time too. Since 2012 I've had a foreboding that the 2016 presidential elections would be canceled, or their results canceled. Even have a bet on it.

    Replies: @NOTA

    I would be shocked if elections were cancelled in my lifetime. I would be much less surprised if they stopped mattering, but we will continue having elections even when it’s little more than ceremony, the way European countries with monarchies still make a big deal of coronations and royal weddings and such.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @NOTA

    Elections are/were regularly held in all totalitarian regimes (maybe Pol Pot was an exception, I can't think of any other), so obviously they won't be cancelled. Some totalitarian regimes even allowed nominal opposition parties.

    Liberals usually think that democracy should be about tax rates and nothing else (coincidentally cuckservatives have the exact same concept), but they are not very tolerant about that either. So we might end up with regimes where there's a nominal opposition demanding lower corporate tax rates, but they will totally agree with persecution of enemies of the people of color, so despite the nominal presence of a legal and tolerated opposition the regime could be very violent.

    Replies: @NOTA

  113. @Dennis Dale
    I'm beginning to think a Hillary win isn't the end, but the beginning. She'll be the most compromised president going in ever. The Press will have openly shed its constitutional role in electioneering and covering-up for her, having calumniated half the nation to do it. Things have been said which can't be taken back. The Democrats have been exposed in all their corruption. The election results will be suspect, to say the least. If this doesn't red pill America...

    Replies: @Bugg, @dfordoom

    After at least 12 and may be 16 years of Obama and Hillary, it will be over.

    Or secession is around the corner.

  114. @guest
    @O'really

    I think the term you're looking for is memory hole, not gaslighting. Of course, it's possible they're trying to make those of us who remember 2000 doubt our sanity for doing so. But the other term is more to the point.

    What is it with the internet and willy-nilly use of "gaslighting" these days?

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Harry Baldwin, @Antonymous

    What is it with the internet and willy-nilly use of “gaslighting” these days?

    Whenever people become newly acquainted with a thinky new concept, the use of which they believe will show off their intellectual chops, they tend to over-apply it prodigiously. It’s been an unhappily acquired hobby of mine to track these ripples in thought-space, as a once obscure term starts showing up in one columnist’s repertoire after another with increasing frequency before fading off again.

    Way back in 1999, the overuse of the term “kowtow” in nationally syndicated op-eds became so obvious as to be annoying. The very height of absurdity was reached when I saw the prominently mustachioed Thomas L. Friedman employ it in conjunction with a near-synonym, dashing out the awkward phrase “grovelling and kowtowing,” or something like that. The point of this un-poetic pleonasm was obviously just to shoehorn “kowtow” into the column somewhere, since that seemed to be the thing to do back then. And these people are supposed to be our skilled wordsmiths and intellectual leading lights?

    Sometime circa 2006 we were treated to a proliferation of “drilling down,” which started in the financial media (i.e. CNBC) and eventually spread to the nightly talking head shows. In the course of this run the term rapidly prescinded from its technical definition and became just a hip way of saying “let’s talk about this some more.” (It is the fate of every technical term, once it enters the vernacular, to be dumbed down to the level of the speakers. Thus, any word that once designated a particular or nuanced idea eventually becomes a fashionable idiomatic for a plain-vanilla concept for which a whole host of perfectly adequate synonyms already exists.)

    You may recall that just a few months ago there was a brief efflorescence of Snagglepuss’ signature “Heavens to Murgatroyd” that even made its way into the iSteve comments. I believe that one was sparked by a single caller to the Rush Limbaugh show who employed the phrase, causing Rush to take notice of it and repeat it.

    “Gaslighting” is a very useful concept to have once you get your head around it, but because of its inherently sophisticated subject, it is prone to being either misunderstood by the general population or overused by the intellectually vain. In this respect, I believe, it is similar to the hackneyed cliche or quotation.

    The literary use of the quotation contains an ironic subtextual element. By the mere fact that it is a quotation, its employ is supposed to suggest both that the original material issues from some unquestionably authoritative Realm of the Archons, as well as lend some cachet to the present author, who must affect that he first stumbled across it in the midst of some deeply personal and wrenching quest for truth.Without this implied drama, quotation-dropping would have no literary value. But fickle man, ever attentive to the pathways of power and personal vainglory, is quick to grasp at the means, the ostentatious display of the symbols of power, without understanding the ends, or the essence that the symbols symbolize. By a sort of hypostatic synecdoche, the symbols are held to be the thing itself. It’s like a young man who blows all of his disposable income on sports car leases and bling, trying to look like a high roller while actually having nothing.

    Suffice it to say that a real writer must make every reasonable effort to avoid these temptations. The written word is accorded a high degree of respect precisely because it is supposed to represent condensed, crystalized, thoroughly vetted thought. But as with anything else of value, there will be many who try to counterfeit this particular coin. Try to avoid them and try not to be one yourself.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Enjoyed this comment, it reminds me of how relativity and quantum physics were both fashionable buzzwords for describing any form of relativism or subjectivity decades ago.

    I'm not sure "gaslighting" is such a useful term, for one thing it calls to mind "fartlighting" which as far I know has yet to be linked to any sophisticated thought patterns. Derived from the story and/or the movie(s), "gaslighting" describes a man trying to drive a woman crazy by altering her environment so that she doubts her sanity (along the lines of, "Did you hear that?!" "Why, no, dear, drink your milk."). I don't think many people actually do that. On the other hand, people on the verge of a persecution mania think exactly like that; everyone is plotting against them, and all of reality is part of the plot. If that means discussions of "patriarchy" and "implicit racism" are signs of mental illness, that is not my fault.

    Aside from any nuances of that original meaning, which are small, gaslighting has come to be synonymous with anyone attempting to deceive anyone else, about anything. At this point then "gaslighting" is simply a cliche, and therefore to be avoided.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @guest

    , @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Excellent comment; really enjoyed reading it.

    , @Harry Baldwin
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Good compendium. Another stock phrase I hear constantly is "Not to get too far into the weeds on this..."

    Back in the 1980s, I recall Sam Donaldson always talking about things being "outside the curve." I never understood what he meant by that and I suspect he didn't either. It just sounded impressive.

    , @guest
    @Intelligent Dasein

    I didn't expect a response as informative as this, thanks. One internet catch phrase which doesn't annoy me is "virtue-signalling." Because mankind's capacity for signalling virtue is bottomless, he can endlessly be found doing so. Therefore, it's hard to go wrong employing the phrase. Use of "gaslighting" may be termed intelligence-signalling, or perhaps with-it signalling.

    Word fashion is fickle.

    Replies: @res

    , @guest
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Oh, I noticed Wallace said something like "drill down" last night, more than once. That prompted a crack from me about Deepwater Horizon, to the amusement of no one in the room.

    , @PiltdownMan
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Good comment. Granular— a word with a precise meaning in computer science—was popular for a while. Speaking of which, I'm glad crunchy is on its way out.

    I remember that when pundit began to be commonly used Wolf Blitzer would annoyingly mispronounce it as "pundint."

  115. @Intelligent Dasein
    @guest


    What is it with the internet and willy-nilly use of “gaslighting” these days?
     
    Whenever people become newly acquainted with a thinky new concept, the use of which they believe will show off their intellectual chops, they tend to over-apply it prodigiously. It's been an unhappily acquired hobby of mine to track these ripples in thought-space, as a once obscure term starts showing up in one columnist's repertoire after another with increasing frequency before fading off again.

    Way back in 1999, the overuse of the term "kowtow" in nationally syndicated op-eds became so obvious as to be annoying. The very height of absurdity was reached when I saw the prominently mustachioed Thomas L. Friedman employ it in conjunction with a near-synonym, dashing out the awkward phrase "grovelling and kowtowing," or something like that. The point of this un-poetic pleonasm was obviously just to shoehorn "kowtow" into the column somewhere, since that seemed to be the thing to do back then. And these people are supposed to be our skilled wordsmiths and intellectual leading lights?

    Sometime circa 2006 we were treated to a proliferation of "drilling down," which started in the financial media (i.e. CNBC) and eventually spread to the nightly talking head shows. In the course of this run the term rapidly prescinded from its technical definition and became just a hip way of saying "let's talk about this some more." (It is the fate of every technical term, once it enters the vernacular, to be dumbed down to the level of the speakers. Thus, any word that once designated a particular or nuanced idea eventually becomes a fashionable idiomatic for a plain-vanilla concept for which a whole host of perfectly adequate synonyms already exists.)

    You may recall that just a few months ago there was a brief efflorescence of Snagglepuss' signature "Heavens to Murgatroyd" that even made its way into the iSteve comments. I believe that one was sparked by a single caller to the Rush Limbaugh show who employed the phrase, causing Rush to take notice of it and repeat it.

    "Gaslighting" is a very useful concept to have once you get your head around it, but because of its inherently sophisticated subject, it is prone to being either misunderstood by the general population or overused by the intellectually vain. In this respect, I believe, it is similar to the hackneyed cliche or quotation.

    The literary use of the quotation contains an ironic subtextual element. By the mere fact that it is a quotation, its employ is supposed to suggest both that the original material issues from some unquestionably authoritative Realm of the Archons, as well as lend some cachet to the present author, who must affect that he first stumbled across it in the midst of some deeply personal and wrenching quest for truth.Without this implied drama, quotation-dropping would have no literary value. But fickle man, ever attentive to the pathways of power and personal vainglory, is quick to grasp at the means, the ostentatious display of the symbols of power, without understanding the ends, or the essence that the symbols symbolize. By a sort of hypostatic synecdoche, the symbols are held to be the thing itself. It's like a young man who blows all of his disposable income on sports car leases and bling, trying to look like a high roller while actually having nothing.

    Suffice it to say that a real writer must make every reasonable effort to avoid these temptations. The written word is accorded a high degree of respect precisely because it is supposed to represent condensed, crystalized, thoroughly vetted thought. But as with anything else of value, there will be many who try to counterfeit this particular coin. Try to avoid them and try not to be one yourself.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @The Last Real Calvinist, @Harry Baldwin, @guest, @guest, @PiltdownMan

    Enjoyed this comment, it reminds me of how relativity and quantum physics were both fashionable buzzwords for describing any form of relativism or subjectivity decades ago.

    I’m not sure “gaslighting” is such a useful term, for one thing it calls to mind “fartlighting” which as far I know has yet to be linked to any sophisticated thought patterns. Derived from the story and/or the movie(s), “gaslighting” describes a man trying to drive a woman crazy by altering her environment so that she doubts her sanity (along the lines of, “Did you hear that?!” “Why, no, dear, drink your milk.”). I don’t think many people actually do that. On the other hand, people on the verge of a persecution mania think exactly like that; everyone is plotting against them, and all of reality is part of the plot. If that means discussions of “patriarchy” and “implicit racism” are signs of mental illness, that is not my fault.

    Aside from any nuances of that original meaning, which are small, gaslighting has come to be synonymous with anyone attempting to deceive anyone else, about anything. At this point then “gaslighting” is simply a cliche, and therefore to be avoided.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @SPMoore8

    Gaslighting is an Internet meme, and it will be picked up as a shorthand by lazy journos any day now. Remember in Dubya's time when they all started talking about gravitas wrt Dick Cheney? Or how they twisted Swift boating into a synonym for lying?

    Replies: @guest

    , @guest
    @SPMoore8

    "synonymous with anyone attempting to deceive anyone else, about anything"

    Yes, I've come to mentally replace the word with "trick" anytime I see it, which usually doesn't alter the meaning at all.

  116. @rod1963
    You know when you got your opponent by the cajones when they scream like a stuck pig. The establishment is terrified of the public becoming fully aware that the parties rig elections, because if they did, the political class would lose their legitimacy and wealth in a heart beat.

    One other thing: During the debate Hillary released some more SAP level classified information. If you paid attention you know what it is. You can bet those men who handle the nukes must have dumped a grumpy when they heard her say it. She is a complete idiot.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin

    This?

    “But here’s the deal. The bottom line on nuclear weapons is that when the president gives the order, it must be followed. There’s about four minutes between the order being given and the people responsible for launching nuclear weapons to do so.” –Hillary Clinton, National TV Appearance

    “Secretary Clinton proved tonight she is unfit to be commander-in-chief,” a top-ranking DOD intelligence source said. “What she did compromises our national security. She is cavalier and reckless and in my opinion should be detained and questioned so we can unravel why she did what she did.”

    According to Pentagon sources, the information Clinton disseminated publicly is Top Secret intelligence governed under the U.S. Special Access Program (SAP) which dictates safeguards and protocols for accessing and discussing highly classified and Top Secret intelligence. The specific details of the country’s nuclear response time discussed by Clinton, sources said, are only known by a handful of individuals outside top military brass, including the following “need-to-know” (NTK) officials…

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @Harry Baldwin

    I'm setting my alarm to 3.04 AM from now on.

  117. @Harry Baldwin
    @rod1963

    This?


    “But here’s the deal. The bottom line on nuclear weapons is that when the president gives the order, it must be followed. There’s about four minutes between the order being given and the people responsible for launching nuclear weapons to do so.” –Hillary Clinton, National TV Appearance

    “Secretary Clinton proved tonight she is unfit to be commander-in-chief,” a top-ranking DOD intelligence source said. “What she did compromises our national security. She is cavalier and reckless and in my opinion should be detained and questioned so we can unravel why she did what she did.”

    According to Pentagon sources, the information Clinton disseminated publicly is Top Secret intelligence governed under the U.S. Special Access Program (SAP) which dictates safeguards and protocols for accessing and discussing highly classified and Top Secret intelligence. The specific details of the country’s nuclear response time discussed by Clinton, sources said, are only known by a handful of individuals outside top military brass, including the following “need-to-know” (NTK) officials...
     

    Replies: @SPMoore8

    I’m setting my alarm to 3.04 AM from now on.

  118. @Johnnywalker123
    @Johnnywalker123

    PPD Poll - Trump +1.6
    Times/Picayune - HRC +12

    Replies: @Johnnywalker123

    UPI Poll – HRC +5

  119. @Desiderius
    @syonredux


    The good have always been the beginning of the end
     
    https://books.google.com/books?id=gpqy_DqmyioC&pg=PA132&lpg=PA132&dq=we+are+none+of+us+good&source=bl&ots=pZsGn1Y6vZ&sig=g0bPepTtHveB5NCt_wLiLNOrYfk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiTvt72h-rPAhUGaz4KHbdaCVgQ6AEITDAI#v=onepage&q=we%20are%20none%20of%20us%20good&f=false

    from The Perpetual Curate, oddly enough.

    as it is written:

    “There is no one who is righteous, not even one;
    there is no one who has understanding,
    there is no one who seeks God.
    All have turned aside, together they have become worthless;
    there is no one who shows kindness,
    there is not even one.”
    “Their throats are opened graves;
    they use their tongues to deceive.”
    “The venom of vipers is under their lips.”
    “Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”
    “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
    ruin and misery are in their paths,
    and the way of peace they have not known.”
    “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

    Now we know that whatever the law says, it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For “no human being will be justified in his sight” by deeds prescribed by the law, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.

    But now, apart from law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction, since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the one who has faith in Jesus.
     
    - Romans 3

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    The Last Real Calvinist is not going to argue with Romans 3!

  120. @guest
    @O'really

    I think the term you're looking for is memory hole, not gaslighting. Of course, it's possible they're trying to make those of us who remember 2000 doubt our sanity for doing so. But the other term is more to the point.

    What is it with the internet and willy-nilly use of "gaslighting" these days?

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Harry Baldwin, @Antonymous

    Also, why does everyone say “optics” now when they mean “appearances,” as in, “It’s not illegal, but the optics aren’t good.”

    • Replies: @guest
    @Harry Baldwin

    Yeah, that is a weird one. Probably people think it sounds science-y.

    I often wonder why people say "narrative" when "story" would do just as well, although I like Steve's use of the capitalized Narrative. Or how people use "paradigm" instead of "model." So much confuses me.

    Replies: @Opinionator

  121. @Intelligent Dasein
    @guest


    What is it with the internet and willy-nilly use of “gaslighting” these days?
     
    Whenever people become newly acquainted with a thinky new concept, the use of which they believe will show off their intellectual chops, they tend to over-apply it prodigiously. It's been an unhappily acquired hobby of mine to track these ripples in thought-space, as a once obscure term starts showing up in one columnist's repertoire after another with increasing frequency before fading off again.

    Way back in 1999, the overuse of the term "kowtow" in nationally syndicated op-eds became so obvious as to be annoying. The very height of absurdity was reached when I saw the prominently mustachioed Thomas L. Friedman employ it in conjunction with a near-synonym, dashing out the awkward phrase "grovelling and kowtowing," or something like that. The point of this un-poetic pleonasm was obviously just to shoehorn "kowtow" into the column somewhere, since that seemed to be the thing to do back then. And these people are supposed to be our skilled wordsmiths and intellectual leading lights?

    Sometime circa 2006 we were treated to a proliferation of "drilling down," which started in the financial media (i.e. CNBC) and eventually spread to the nightly talking head shows. In the course of this run the term rapidly prescinded from its technical definition and became just a hip way of saying "let's talk about this some more." (It is the fate of every technical term, once it enters the vernacular, to be dumbed down to the level of the speakers. Thus, any word that once designated a particular or nuanced idea eventually becomes a fashionable idiomatic for a plain-vanilla concept for which a whole host of perfectly adequate synonyms already exists.)

    You may recall that just a few months ago there was a brief efflorescence of Snagglepuss' signature "Heavens to Murgatroyd" that even made its way into the iSteve comments. I believe that one was sparked by a single caller to the Rush Limbaugh show who employed the phrase, causing Rush to take notice of it and repeat it.

    "Gaslighting" is a very useful concept to have once you get your head around it, but because of its inherently sophisticated subject, it is prone to being either misunderstood by the general population or overused by the intellectually vain. In this respect, I believe, it is similar to the hackneyed cliche or quotation.

    The literary use of the quotation contains an ironic subtextual element. By the mere fact that it is a quotation, its employ is supposed to suggest both that the original material issues from some unquestionably authoritative Realm of the Archons, as well as lend some cachet to the present author, who must affect that he first stumbled across it in the midst of some deeply personal and wrenching quest for truth.Without this implied drama, quotation-dropping would have no literary value. But fickle man, ever attentive to the pathways of power and personal vainglory, is quick to grasp at the means, the ostentatious display of the symbols of power, without understanding the ends, or the essence that the symbols symbolize. By a sort of hypostatic synecdoche, the symbols are held to be the thing itself. It's like a young man who blows all of his disposable income on sports car leases and bling, trying to look like a high roller while actually having nothing.

    Suffice it to say that a real writer must make every reasonable effort to avoid these temptations. The written word is accorded a high degree of respect precisely because it is supposed to represent condensed, crystalized, thoroughly vetted thought. But as with anything else of value, there will be many who try to counterfeit this particular coin. Try to avoid them and try not to be one yourself.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @The Last Real Calvinist, @Harry Baldwin, @guest, @guest, @PiltdownMan

    Excellent comment; really enjoyed reading it.

  122. @SPMoore8
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Enjoyed this comment, it reminds me of how relativity and quantum physics were both fashionable buzzwords for describing any form of relativism or subjectivity decades ago.

    I'm not sure "gaslighting" is such a useful term, for one thing it calls to mind "fartlighting" which as far I know has yet to be linked to any sophisticated thought patterns. Derived from the story and/or the movie(s), "gaslighting" describes a man trying to drive a woman crazy by altering her environment so that she doubts her sanity (along the lines of, "Did you hear that?!" "Why, no, dear, drink your milk."). I don't think many people actually do that. On the other hand, people on the verge of a persecution mania think exactly like that; everyone is plotting against them, and all of reality is part of the plot. If that means discussions of "patriarchy" and "implicit racism" are signs of mental illness, that is not my fault.

    Aside from any nuances of that original meaning, which are small, gaslighting has come to be synonymous with anyone attempting to deceive anyone else, about anything. At this point then "gaslighting" is simply a cliche, and therefore to be avoided.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @guest

    Gaslighting is an Internet meme, and it will be picked up as a shorthand by lazy journos any day now. Remember in Dubya’s time when they all started talking about gravitas wrt Dick Cheney? Or how they twisted Swift boating into a synonym for lying?

    • Replies: @guest
    @Jim Don Bob

    I remember the invasion of Iraq being prompted by "hubris." With which I happen to agree, but I wonder why the entire media started using an ancient Greek term all of a sudden.

    Replies: @Spmoore8

  123. @biz
    "Rigging" the election means interfering with the vote counts, throwing out ballots, making the machines record the votes wrong, etc. The Media is not doing that, nor is anyone else.

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @Chrisnonymous, @Charles Erwin Wilson

    The Media is not doing that, nor is anyone else.

    Right, because in close, contested elections we never see a Democrat show up with a trunk loaded with ‘ballots’ that are included without scrutiny, and ensuring that once again (with the help of a ‘non-partisan’ judge) that the Democrat candidate wins.

    Why does your political philosophy’s implementation require perpetual aggression and relentless deceit?

    You think your besties won’t string you up and leave you twisting in the wind. You don’t know history.

  124. @Gabriel M
    Speaking as a non-American, I believe that the fact that literally millions of people have been red-pilled by the Trump vs. the Media election is more valuable than what Trump could have achieved in 4/8 years had the media given him a "fair" (i.e. only normally biased) crack and he won.

    But I can see that were I an American anyway near the Mexican border I would feel differently.

    Either way, though, he probably won't win so you might as well make the best of it. People need to understand: this isn't a bug in the system, this is the system: and if it looks like it's in a state of chronic dysfunction that's because it is. Read Gentle Introduction and encourage anyone you know with a +115 IQ to do so as well, right after a James O Keefe video. There's never been a better time.

    Replies: @NOTA, @dfordoom

    this isn’t a bug in the system, this is the system: and if it looks like it’s in a state of chronic dysfunction that’s because it is.

    From the point of view of the globalist Democrats and the globalist Republicans (Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum) the system is functioning beautifully. Anyone who isn’t a globalist Democrat or a globalist Republican has no chance of winning. That’s the whole purpose of the system. It’s designed to protect the elites from the mortal threat of democracy, democracy being what they fear more than anything else. Fortunately (from their point of view) the US has no tradition of democracy so they’re pretty safe.

  125. @Intelligent Dasein
    @guest


    What is it with the internet and willy-nilly use of “gaslighting” these days?
     
    Whenever people become newly acquainted with a thinky new concept, the use of which they believe will show off their intellectual chops, they tend to over-apply it prodigiously. It's been an unhappily acquired hobby of mine to track these ripples in thought-space, as a once obscure term starts showing up in one columnist's repertoire after another with increasing frequency before fading off again.

    Way back in 1999, the overuse of the term "kowtow" in nationally syndicated op-eds became so obvious as to be annoying. The very height of absurdity was reached when I saw the prominently mustachioed Thomas L. Friedman employ it in conjunction with a near-synonym, dashing out the awkward phrase "grovelling and kowtowing," or something like that. The point of this un-poetic pleonasm was obviously just to shoehorn "kowtow" into the column somewhere, since that seemed to be the thing to do back then. And these people are supposed to be our skilled wordsmiths and intellectual leading lights?

    Sometime circa 2006 we were treated to a proliferation of "drilling down," which started in the financial media (i.e. CNBC) and eventually spread to the nightly talking head shows. In the course of this run the term rapidly prescinded from its technical definition and became just a hip way of saying "let's talk about this some more." (It is the fate of every technical term, once it enters the vernacular, to be dumbed down to the level of the speakers. Thus, any word that once designated a particular or nuanced idea eventually becomes a fashionable idiomatic for a plain-vanilla concept for which a whole host of perfectly adequate synonyms already exists.)

    You may recall that just a few months ago there was a brief efflorescence of Snagglepuss' signature "Heavens to Murgatroyd" that even made its way into the iSteve comments. I believe that one was sparked by a single caller to the Rush Limbaugh show who employed the phrase, causing Rush to take notice of it and repeat it.

    "Gaslighting" is a very useful concept to have once you get your head around it, but because of its inherently sophisticated subject, it is prone to being either misunderstood by the general population or overused by the intellectually vain. In this respect, I believe, it is similar to the hackneyed cliche or quotation.

    The literary use of the quotation contains an ironic subtextual element. By the mere fact that it is a quotation, its employ is supposed to suggest both that the original material issues from some unquestionably authoritative Realm of the Archons, as well as lend some cachet to the present author, who must affect that he first stumbled across it in the midst of some deeply personal and wrenching quest for truth.Without this implied drama, quotation-dropping would have no literary value. But fickle man, ever attentive to the pathways of power and personal vainglory, is quick to grasp at the means, the ostentatious display of the symbols of power, without understanding the ends, or the essence that the symbols symbolize. By a sort of hypostatic synecdoche, the symbols are held to be the thing itself. It's like a young man who blows all of his disposable income on sports car leases and bling, trying to look like a high roller while actually having nothing.

    Suffice it to say that a real writer must make every reasonable effort to avoid these temptations. The written word is accorded a high degree of respect precisely because it is supposed to represent condensed, crystalized, thoroughly vetted thought. But as with anything else of value, there will be many who try to counterfeit this particular coin. Try to avoid them and try not to be one yourself.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @The Last Real Calvinist, @Harry Baldwin, @guest, @guest, @PiltdownMan

    Good compendium. Another stock phrase I hear constantly is “Not to get too far into the weeds on this…”

    Back in the 1980s, I recall Sam Donaldson always talking about things being “outside the curve.” I never understood what he meant by that and I suspect he didn’t either. It just sounded impressive.

  126. @Dennis Dale
    I'm beginning to think a Hillary win isn't the end, but the beginning. She'll be the most compromised president going in ever. The Press will have openly shed its constitutional role in electioneering and covering-up for her, having calumniated half the nation to do it. Things have been said which can't be taken back. The Democrats have been exposed in all their corruption. The election results will be suspect, to say the least. If this doesn't red pill America...

    Replies: @Bugg, @dfordoom

    The election results will be suspect, to say the least. If this doesn’t red pill America…

    It won’t. The vast majority of the population won’t even know the results are suspect. And establishment Republicans won’t make a song and dance about it because they’ll be delighted by a HIllary win.

    • Agree: Kylie
  127. @NOTA
    @Anonymous

    In general, fraud that isn't blatant and obvious to everyone can only change the outcome of very close elections.

    Tampering with the election to change a Trump landslide into a Clinton landslide would require massive operations in many different states (to get enough electoral votes), each with different voting systems, election officials, procedures, etc.

    In a given state or county, tampering with paper ballots (opscan or VVPAT) is possible, but is also a manpower-intensive operation that's hard to keep secret. Tampering with electronic counts is possible (the machines are not very secure and the election officials don't really understand computer security), but if you change the vote totals by very much, it will be obvious wrt both polls and the expected distribution of votes. It's not clear that those would automatically lead anywhere in all-electronic voting machines (aka DREs), since there's not a meaningful way to audit the results. But DREs with paper trails can have their paper totals checked against electronic totals.

    There's a long history of low level fraud involving trucking in homeless people and giving them an ID to vote under. Again, this can affect close races, but it is blatant and very visible. There's also fraud in mail-in ballots, voter intimidation at the polls, disinformation campaigns (like robocalls to likely voters on the other side telling them the wrong day to vote), "cleaning" the registration database of the other side's voters, etc. All that happens in every election, but it's probably not moving the results all that much. Similarly, maybe a few people who aren't supposed to vote will cast votes, but it won't change anything unless the state is balanced on a knife edge.

    The model for practical vote fraud is probably the 2000 election--most fraud is like screwing up the ballot design in some county so older voters get the wrong guy, or nitpicking the counting rules for dimpled chads--stuff that can move a few thousand votes around, but not more than that.

    Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Discard

    stuff that can move a few thousand votes around, but not more than that.

    Ever heard of the 1960 election? And how are you defining ‘few’ and ‘close’ for evaluation purposes?

    Mail-in ballots, motor-voter, electronic voting – you cannot seriously believe that the scope of corruption is just a few thousand votes nationwide. And if it is a few thousand in every state, given the electoral college, the election can be stolen.

    The notion that to be worthy of contesting the result you have to win by a landslide is absurd. We have a corrupt system, with undocumented voters, undocumented votes and undocumented victors decided by documented enemies of the United States.

  128. @Opinionator
    @Kylie

    Would any means not be justified in order to prevent jews and people of color from being beaten and murdered by mobs during a Trump presidency?

    Replies: @Wally, @Kylie

    “Would any means not be justified in order to prevent jews and people of color from being beaten and murdered by mobs during a Trump presidency?”

    Any means? No.

    But in any case, it’s rage not fear that’s motivating the left. The left doesn’t fear the possibility of right-wing violence resulting from a Trump presidency. But it is enraged by the possibility of a Trump victory denying it the presidency it believes it is entitled to. “It’s our turn” isn’t just a political slogan, it’s a bedrock belief.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @Kylie

    Not quite. It is greed and fear. Nonwhites covet the physical territory and economy of the United States. And in stealing them from Whites, they fear White resistance. They have guilty consciences.

    Replies: @Kylie

  129. @Anonymous
    It'd be interesting if you could post more on rigging from a statistical perspective. What margin do you think would be necessary to obviate rigging claims?

    Replies: @Brian Reilly, @NOTA, @ben tillman

    It’d be interesting if you could post more on rigging from a statistical perspective. What margin do you think would be necessary to obviate rigging claims?

    The rigging from media manipulation and the importation of ringers is so great that no margin could obviate rigging claims.

  130. @Kylie
    @Opinionator

    "Would any means not be justified in order to prevent jews and people of color from being beaten and murdered by mobs during a Trump presidency?"

    Any means? No.

    But in any case, it's rage not fear that's motivating the left. The left doesn't fear the possibility of right-wing violence resulting from a Trump presidency. But it is enraged by the possibility of a Trump victory denying it the presidency it believes it is entitled to. "It's our turn" isn't just a political slogan, it's a bedrock belief.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    Not quite. It is greed and fear. Nonwhites covet the physical territory and economy of the United States. And in stealing them from Whites, they fear White resistance. They have guilty consciences.

    • Replies: @Kylie
    @Opinionator

    "Nonwhites covet the physical territory and economy of the United States. And in stealing them from Whites, they fear White resistance. They have guilty consciences."

    As far as NAMs go, I think they'd be content to have whites run things and just hand over all the goodies they demand. I'm not sure they fear white resistance.

    And I definitely don't think they have guilty consciences. They don't have much at all in the way of conscience. Guilt is an abstract concept requiring more intelligence to understand than most of them have.

    Replies: @Opinionator

  131. @NOTA
    @Gabriel M

    Goldwater:Reagan::Trump:??

    It will be interesting to see if someone comes along in another few years who is more palatable than Trump but is still part of the same intellectual movement.

    Replies: @guest, @Discard

    Going by the actor motif, how about Shia Lebeouf?

  132. @Intelligent Dasein
    @guest


    What is it with the internet and willy-nilly use of “gaslighting” these days?
     
    Whenever people become newly acquainted with a thinky new concept, the use of which they believe will show off their intellectual chops, they tend to over-apply it prodigiously. It's been an unhappily acquired hobby of mine to track these ripples in thought-space, as a once obscure term starts showing up in one columnist's repertoire after another with increasing frequency before fading off again.

    Way back in 1999, the overuse of the term "kowtow" in nationally syndicated op-eds became so obvious as to be annoying. The very height of absurdity was reached when I saw the prominently mustachioed Thomas L. Friedman employ it in conjunction with a near-synonym, dashing out the awkward phrase "grovelling and kowtowing," or something like that. The point of this un-poetic pleonasm was obviously just to shoehorn "kowtow" into the column somewhere, since that seemed to be the thing to do back then. And these people are supposed to be our skilled wordsmiths and intellectual leading lights?

    Sometime circa 2006 we were treated to a proliferation of "drilling down," which started in the financial media (i.e. CNBC) and eventually spread to the nightly talking head shows. In the course of this run the term rapidly prescinded from its technical definition and became just a hip way of saying "let's talk about this some more." (It is the fate of every technical term, once it enters the vernacular, to be dumbed down to the level of the speakers. Thus, any word that once designated a particular or nuanced idea eventually becomes a fashionable idiomatic for a plain-vanilla concept for which a whole host of perfectly adequate synonyms already exists.)

    You may recall that just a few months ago there was a brief efflorescence of Snagglepuss' signature "Heavens to Murgatroyd" that even made its way into the iSteve comments. I believe that one was sparked by a single caller to the Rush Limbaugh show who employed the phrase, causing Rush to take notice of it and repeat it.

    "Gaslighting" is a very useful concept to have once you get your head around it, but because of its inherently sophisticated subject, it is prone to being either misunderstood by the general population or overused by the intellectually vain. In this respect, I believe, it is similar to the hackneyed cliche or quotation.

    The literary use of the quotation contains an ironic subtextual element. By the mere fact that it is a quotation, its employ is supposed to suggest both that the original material issues from some unquestionably authoritative Realm of the Archons, as well as lend some cachet to the present author, who must affect that he first stumbled across it in the midst of some deeply personal and wrenching quest for truth.Without this implied drama, quotation-dropping would have no literary value. But fickle man, ever attentive to the pathways of power and personal vainglory, is quick to grasp at the means, the ostentatious display of the symbols of power, without understanding the ends, or the essence that the symbols symbolize. By a sort of hypostatic synecdoche, the symbols are held to be the thing itself. It's like a young man who blows all of his disposable income on sports car leases and bling, trying to look like a high roller while actually having nothing.

    Suffice it to say that a real writer must make every reasonable effort to avoid these temptations. The written word is accorded a high degree of respect precisely because it is supposed to represent condensed, crystalized, thoroughly vetted thought. But as with anything else of value, there will be many who try to counterfeit this particular coin. Try to avoid them and try not to be one yourself.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @The Last Real Calvinist, @Harry Baldwin, @guest, @guest, @PiltdownMan

    I didn’t expect a response as informative as this, thanks. One internet catch phrase which doesn’t annoy me is “virtue-signalling.” Because mankind’s capacity for signalling virtue is bottomless, he can endlessly be found doing so. Therefore, it’s hard to go wrong employing the phrase. Use of “gaslighting” may be termed intelligence-signalling, or perhaps with-it signalling.

    Word fashion is fickle.

    • Replies: @res
    @guest


    Use of “gaslighting” may be termed intelligence-signalling, or perhaps with-it signalling.
     
    The funny thing about that is I consider incorrect use of faddish terms like that a useful non-intelligence signal.
  133. @Harry Baldwin
    @guest

    Also, why does everyone say "optics" now when they mean "appearances," as in, "It's not illegal, but the optics aren't good."

    Replies: @guest

    Yeah, that is a weird one. Probably people think it sounds science-y.

    I often wonder why people say “narrative” when “story” would do just as well, although I like Steve’s use of the capitalized Narrative. Or how people use “paradigm” instead of “model.” So much confuses me.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @guest

    Story and narrative mean different things, as we use them here.

    Replies: @guest, @The Last Real Calvinist

  134. @Intelligent Dasein
    @guest


    What is it with the internet and willy-nilly use of “gaslighting” these days?
     
    Whenever people become newly acquainted with a thinky new concept, the use of which they believe will show off their intellectual chops, they tend to over-apply it prodigiously. It's been an unhappily acquired hobby of mine to track these ripples in thought-space, as a once obscure term starts showing up in one columnist's repertoire after another with increasing frequency before fading off again.

    Way back in 1999, the overuse of the term "kowtow" in nationally syndicated op-eds became so obvious as to be annoying. The very height of absurdity was reached when I saw the prominently mustachioed Thomas L. Friedman employ it in conjunction with a near-synonym, dashing out the awkward phrase "grovelling and kowtowing," or something like that. The point of this un-poetic pleonasm was obviously just to shoehorn "kowtow" into the column somewhere, since that seemed to be the thing to do back then. And these people are supposed to be our skilled wordsmiths and intellectual leading lights?

    Sometime circa 2006 we were treated to a proliferation of "drilling down," which started in the financial media (i.e. CNBC) and eventually spread to the nightly talking head shows. In the course of this run the term rapidly prescinded from its technical definition and became just a hip way of saying "let's talk about this some more." (It is the fate of every technical term, once it enters the vernacular, to be dumbed down to the level of the speakers. Thus, any word that once designated a particular or nuanced idea eventually becomes a fashionable idiomatic for a plain-vanilla concept for which a whole host of perfectly adequate synonyms already exists.)

    You may recall that just a few months ago there was a brief efflorescence of Snagglepuss' signature "Heavens to Murgatroyd" that even made its way into the iSteve comments. I believe that one was sparked by a single caller to the Rush Limbaugh show who employed the phrase, causing Rush to take notice of it and repeat it.

    "Gaslighting" is a very useful concept to have once you get your head around it, but because of its inherently sophisticated subject, it is prone to being either misunderstood by the general population or overused by the intellectually vain. In this respect, I believe, it is similar to the hackneyed cliche or quotation.

    The literary use of the quotation contains an ironic subtextual element. By the mere fact that it is a quotation, its employ is supposed to suggest both that the original material issues from some unquestionably authoritative Realm of the Archons, as well as lend some cachet to the present author, who must affect that he first stumbled across it in the midst of some deeply personal and wrenching quest for truth.Without this implied drama, quotation-dropping would have no literary value. But fickle man, ever attentive to the pathways of power and personal vainglory, is quick to grasp at the means, the ostentatious display of the symbols of power, without understanding the ends, or the essence that the symbols symbolize. By a sort of hypostatic synecdoche, the symbols are held to be the thing itself. It's like a young man who blows all of his disposable income on sports car leases and bling, trying to look like a high roller while actually having nothing.

    Suffice it to say that a real writer must make every reasonable effort to avoid these temptations. The written word is accorded a high degree of respect precisely because it is supposed to represent condensed, crystalized, thoroughly vetted thought. But as with anything else of value, there will be many who try to counterfeit this particular coin. Try to avoid them and try not to be one yourself.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @The Last Real Calvinist, @Harry Baldwin, @guest, @guest, @PiltdownMan

    Oh, I noticed Wallace said something like “drill down” last night, more than once. That prompted a crack from me about Deepwater Horizon, to the amusement of no one in the room.

  135. @SPMoore8
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Enjoyed this comment, it reminds me of how relativity and quantum physics were both fashionable buzzwords for describing any form of relativism or subjectivity decades ago.

    I'm not sure "gaslighting" is such a useful term, for one thing it calls to mind "fartlighting" which as far I know has yet to be linked to any sophisticated thought patterns. Derived from the story and/or the movie(s), "gaslighting" describes a man trying to drive a woman crazy by altering her environment so that she doubts her sanity (along the lines of, "Did you hear that?!" "Why, no, dear, drink your milk."). I don't think many people actually do that. On the other hand, people on the verge of a persecution mania think exactly like that; everyone is plotting against them, and all of reality is part of the plot. If that means discussions of "patriarchy" and "implicit racism" are signs of mental illness, that is not my fault.

    Aside from any nuances of that original meaning, which are small, gaslighting has come to be synonymous with anyone attempting to deceive anyone else, about anything. At this point then "gaslighting" is simply a cliche, and therefore to be avoided.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @guest

    “synonymous with anyone attempting to deceive anyone else, about anything”

    Yes, I’ve come to mentally replace the word with “trick” anytime I see it, which usually doesn’t alter the meaning at all.

  136. @Jim Don Bob
    @SPMoore8

    Gaslighting is an Internet meme, and it will be picked up as a shorthand by lazy journos any day now. Remember in Dubya's time when they all started talking about gravitas wrt Dick Cheney? Or how they twisted Swift boating into a synonym for lying?

    Replies: @guest

    I remember the invasion of Iraq being prompted by “hubris.” With which I happen to agree, but I wonder why the entire media started using an ancient Greek term all of a sudden.

    • Replies: @Spmoore8
    @guest

    So many of these, and yet there can be nuance. Thus, hubris is arrogance but implies Greek tragedy, optics is appearances but connotes visual media like paparazzi, paradigm is model but implies a different set of underlying assumptions, narrative is story but implies a metastory (or metaphysics) that determines the shape and content of individual stories, and so on.

    Word fashions exist and the connotations remain, sometimes I will use words like robust and impactful and empowering as a whimsical memory of buzz words of yore.

    Replies: @reiner Tor

  137. @guest
    @Harry Baldwin

    Yeah, that is a weird one. Probably people think it sounds science-y.

    I often wonder why people say "narrative" when "story" would do just as well, although I like Steve's use of the capitalized Narrative. Or how people use "paradigm" instead of "model." So much confuses me.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    Story and narrative mean different things, as we use them here.

    • Replies: @guest
    @Opinionator

    I guess. For one thing, stories are supposed to make sense.

    , @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Opinionator

    'The Narrative' is quite distinct from any discrete story. It's the attempt by members of the media, academia, etc. to produce, through continuous, half-conscious/half-unconscious manipulation of words and images, an account of reality that suits their ideological, emotional, and especially religious goals.

  138. @Intelligent Dasein
    @guest


    What is it with the internet and willy-nilly use of “gaslighting” these days?
     
    Whenever people become newly acquainted with a thinky new concept, the use of which they believe will show off their intellectual chops, they tend to over-apply it prodigiously. It's been an unhappily acquired hobby of mine to track these ripples in thought-space, as a once obscure term starts showing up in one columnist's repertoire after another with increasing frequency before fading off again.

    Way back in 1999, the overuse of the term "kowtow" in nationally syndicated op-eds became so obvious as to be annoying. The very height of absurdity was reached when I saw the prominently mustachioed Thomas L. Friedman employ it in conjunction with a near-synonym, dashing out the awkward phrase "grovelling and kowtowing," or something like that. The point of this un-poetic pleonasm was obviously just to shoehorn "kowtow" into the column somewhere, since that seemed to be the thing to do back then. And these people are supposed to be our skilled wordsmiths and intellectual leading lights?

    Sometime circa 2006 we were treated to a proliferation of "drilling down," which started in the financial media (i.e. CNBC) and eventually spread to the nightly talking head shows. In the course of this run the term rapidly prescinded from its technical definition and became just a hip way of saying "let's talk about this some more." (It is the fate of every technical term, once it enters the vernacular, to be dumbed down to the level of the speakers. Thus, any word that once designated a particular or nuanced idea eventually becomes a fashionable idiomatic for a plain-vanilla concept for which a whole host of perfectly adequate synonyms already exists.)

    You may recall that just a few months ago there was a brief efflorescence of Snagglepuss' signature "Heavens to Murgatroyd" that even made its way into the iSteve comments. I believe that one was sparked by a single caller to the Rush Limbaugh show who employed the phrase, causing Rush to take notice of it and repeat it.

    "Gaslighting" is a very useful concept to have once you get your head around it, but because of its inherently sophisticated subject, it is prone to being either misunderstood by the general population or overused by the intellectually vain. In this respect, I believe, it is similar to the hackneyed cliche or quotation.

    The literary use of the quotation contains an ironic subtextual element. By the mere fact that it is a quotation, its employ is supposed to suggest both that the original material issues from some unquestionably authoritative Realm of the Archons, as well as lend some cachet to the present author, who must affect that he first stumbled across it in the midst of some deeply personal and wrenching quest for truth.Without this implied drama, quotation-dropping would have no literary value. But fickle man, ever attentive to the pathways of power and personal vainglory, is quick to grasp at the means, the ostentatious display of the symbols of power, without understanding the ends, or the essence that the symbols symbolize. By a sort of hypostatic synecdoche, the symbols are held to be the thing itself. It's like a young man who blows all of his disposable income on sports car leases and bling, trying to look like a high roller while actually having nothing.

    Suffice it to say that a real writer must make every reasonable effort to avoid these temptations. The written word is accorded a high degree of respect precisely because it is supposed to represent condensed, crystalized, thoroughly vetted thought. But as with anything else of value, there will be many who try to counterfeit this particular coin. Try to avoid them and try not to be one yourself.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @The Last Real Calvinist, @Harry Baldwin, @guest, @guest, @PiltdownMan

    Good comment. Granular— a word with a precise meaning in computer science—was popular for a while. Speaking of which, I’m glad crunchy is on its way out.

    I remember that when pundit began to be commonly used Wolf Blitzer would annoyingly mispronounce it as “pundint.”

  139. @Opinionator
    @Kylie

    Not quite. It is greed and fear. Nonwhites covet the physical territory and economy of the United States. And in stealing them from Whites, they fear White resistance. They have guilty consciences.

    Replies: @Kylie

    “Nonwhites covet the physical territory and economy of the United States. And in stealing them from Whites, they fear White resistance. They have guilty consciences.”

    As far as NAMs go, I think they’d be content to have whites run things and just hand over all the goodies they demand. I’m not sure they fear white resistance.

    And I definitely don’t think they have guilty consciences. They don’t have much at all in the way of conscience. Guilt is an abstract concept requiring more intelligence to understand than most of them have.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @Kylie

    And I definitely don’t think they have guilty consciences. They don’t have much at all in the way of conscience. Guilt is an abstract concept requiring more intelligence to understand than most of them have.

    At some level, they understand what they are doing is wrong or at least violative, and could have repercussions in the form of blowback.

  140. @Opinionator
    @guest

    Story and narrative mean different things, as we use them here.

    Replies: @guest, @The Last Real Calvinist

    I guess. For one thing, stories are supposed to make sense.

  141. @guest
    @Jim Don Bob

    I remember the invasion of Iraq being prompted by "hubris." With which I happen to agree, but I wonder why the entire media started using an ancient Greek term all of a sudden.

    Replies: @Spmoore8

    So many of these, and yet there can be nuance. Thus, hubris is arrogance but implies Greek tragedy, optics is appearances but connotes visual media like paparazzi, paradigm is model but implies a different set of underlying assumptions, narrative is story but implies a metastory (or metaphysics) that determines the shape and content of individual stories, and so on.

    Word fashions exist and the connotations remain, sometimes I will use words like robust and impactful and empowering as a whimsical memory of buzz words of yore.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @Spmoore8

    Yes, near-synonymes enrich the language and make it possible to express more sophisticated thoughts more easily. The idea of purging them from the dictionary often comes up (to my knowledge in all languages), but is both impossible and undesirable.

  142. @NOTA
    @sayless

    I would be shocked if elections were cancelled in my lifetime. I would be much less surprised if they stopped mattering, but we will continue having elections even when it's little more than ceremony, the way European countries with monarchies still make a big deal of coronations and royal weddings and such.

    Replies: @reiner Tor

    Elections are/were regularly held in all totalitarian regimes (maybe Pol Pot was an exception, I can’t think of any other), so obviously they won’t be cancelled. Some totalitarian regimes even allowed nominal opposition parties.

    Liberals usually think that democracy should be about tax rates and nothing else (coincidentally cuckservatives have the exact same concept), but they are not very tolerant about that either. So we might end up with regimes where there’s a nominal opposition demanding lower corporate tax rates, but they will totally agree with persecution of enemies of the people of color, so despite the nominal presence of a legal and tolerated opposition the regime could be very violent.

    • Replies: @NOTA
    @reiner Tor

    In fact, a major point raised by supporters of Trump and Sanders, and earlier by supporters of Kucinich and Ron Paul, is that we have elections and they decide some matters, but there are a lot of policies that are off the table, because both parties' leadership agrees on them. Invade the world, invite the world, bail out the banks, trust the Fed to keep the economy smooth via monetary policy, free trade via massive treaties stuffed full of goodies to important donors, spy on everyone all the time, impunity for the powerful--in normal years, we simply don't get a vote on any of that.

  143. @Spmoore8
    @guest

    So many of these, and yet there can be nuance. Thus, hubris is arrogance but implies Greek tragedy, optics is appearances but connotes visual media like paparazzi, paradigm is model but implies a different set of underlying assumptions, narrative is story but implies a metastory (or metaphysics) that determines the shape and content of individual stories, and so on.

    Word fashions exist and the connotations remain, sometimes I will use words like robust and impactful and empowering as a whimsical memory of buzz words of yore.

    Replies: @reiner Tor

    Yes, near-synonymes enrich the language and make it possible to express more sophisticated thoughts more easily. The idea of purging them from the dictionary often comes up (to my knowledge in all languages), but is both impossible and undesirable.

  144. @Opinionator
    @guest

    Story and narrative mean different things, as we use them here.

    Replies: @guest, @The Last Real Calvinist

    ‘The Narrative’ is quite distinct from any discrete story. It’s the attempt by members of the media, academia, etc. to produce, through continuous, half-conscious/half-unconscious manipulation of words and images, an account of reality that suits their ideological, emotional, and especially religious goals.

  145. Steve, why do you think they are ashamed of rigging the election? They are virtue signaling about it. Doing anything in their power to stop Trump is something they are bragging about. They are just using Trump’s comments on the system being rigged to divert the plebs from the real issues because Trump is on the popular side of all the real issues.

  146. @Kylie
    @Opinionator

    "Nonwhites covet the physical territory and economy of the United States. And in stealing them from Whites, they fear White resistance. They have guilty consciences."

    As far as NAMs go, I think they'd be content to have whites run things and just hand over all the goodies they demand. I'm not sure they fear white resistance.

    And I definitely don't think they have guilty consciences. They don't have much at all in the way of conscience. Guilt is an abstract concept requiring more intelligence to understand than most of them have.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    And I definitely don’t think they have guilty consciences. They don’t have much at all in the way of conscience. Guilt is an abstract concept requiring more intelligence to understand than most of them have.

    At some level, they understand what they are doing is wrong or at least violative, and could have repercussions in the form of blowback.

    • Disagree: Kylie
  147. @NOTA
    @Anonymous

    In general, fraud that isn't blatant and obvious to everyone can only change the outcome of very close elections.

    Tampering with the election to change a Trump landslide into a Clinton landslide would require massive operations in many different states (to get enough electoral votes), each with different voting systems, election officials, procedures, etc.

    In a given state or county, tampering with paper ballots (opscan or VVPAT) is possible, but is also a manpower-intensive operation that's hard to keep secret. Tampering with electronic counts is possible (the machines are not very secure and the election officials don't really understand computer security), but if you change the vote totals by very much, it will be obvious wrt both polls and the expected distribution of votes. It's not clear that those would automatically lead anywhere in all-electronic voting machines (aka DREs), since there's not a meaningful way to audit the results. But DREs with paper trails can have their paper totals checked against electronic totals.

    There's a long history of low level fraud involving trucking in homeless people and giving them an ID to vote under. Again, this can affect close races, but it is blatant and very visible. There's also fraud in mail-in ballots, voter intimidation at the polls, disinformation campaigns (like robocalls to likely voters on the other side telling them the wrong day to vote), "cleaning" the registration database of the other side's voters, etc. All that happens in every election, but it's probably not moving the results all that much. Similarly, maybe a few people who aren't supposed to vote will cast votes, but it won't change anything unless the state is balanced on a knife edge.

    The model for practical vote fraud is probably the 2000 election--most fraud is like screwing up the ballot design in some county so older voters get the wrong guy, or nitpicking the counting rules for dimpled chads--stuff that can move a few thousand votes around, but not more than that.

    Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Discard

    Dimpled or hanging chads are the result of sticking more than one ballot at a time in the voting machine, that is, vote fraud. Just try sticking a few too many pieces of paper in a paper punch to see how it works.

  148. @NOTA
    @Gabriel M

    Goldwater:Reagan::Trump:??

    It will be interesting to see if someone comes along in another few years who is more palatable than Trump but is still part of the same intellectual movement.

    Replies: @guest, @Discard

    In four years, another ten million freebee-loving foreigners will have been added to the voting rolls. The only elections that will matter will be the Democrat primaries.

    • Agree: reiner Tor
  149. @Anonymous Nephew
    OT

    This didn't occur to me before, as I listened to the gung-ho BBC coverage of the Mosul attack (Aleppo coverage is very muted now, someone obviously realised the contrast was just too obvious) - but Mosul is pretty close to the Syrian border.

    I wonder if the plan is for ISIS to leave Mosul relatively unscathed, and to allow them to cross into Syria intact, rather than subjecting them to the sort of treatment Saddam's armour got in 1990 as it left Kuwait?

    (Meanwhile in northern Syria the Kurdish YPG (officially allies of the US) are being absolutely hammered by the Turks (fellow NATO members with the US). This is a very dirty war, in every sense.)

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @TheJester

    Yes, it’s hard to sort things out when families, clans, and tribes … and the shaky alliances among families, clans, and tribes in the Middle East try to sort things out. Things gets messy and dirty.

    And we’re welcoming these families, clans, and tribes … and their shaky alliances and alien cultures into our country where they will immediately undergo a transformation into model citizens on the model of the rule-following British and Germany immigrants of times past.

    Either that or they will retain their shaky alliances of families, clans, and tribes and their alien cultures and the body-politic and rule of law will suffer as a result.

    Which is more likely?

  150. @guest
    @Intelligent Dasein

    I didn't expect a response as informative as this, thanks. One internet catch phrase which doesn't annoy me is "virtue-signalling." Because mankind's capacity for signalling virtue is bottomless, he can endlessly be found doing so. Therefore, it's hard to go wrong employing the phrase. Use of "gaslighting" may be termed intelligence-signalling, or perhaps with-it signalling.

    Word fashion is fickle.

    Replies: @res

    Use of “gaslighting” may be termed intelligence-signalling, or perhaps with-it signalling.

    The funny thing about that is I consider incorrect use of faddish terms like that a useful non-intelligence signal.

  151. @guest
    @O'really

    I think the term you're looking for is memory hole, not gaslighting. Of course, it's possible they're trying to make those of us who remember 2000 doubt our sanity for doing so. But the other term is more to the point.

    What is it with the internet and willy-nilly use of "gaslighting" these days?

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Harry Baldwin, @Antonymous

    True, it’s become a social justice buzzword for deceit. But I do think the media gaslights with respect to Islam (and to a lesser extent, black crime). A muslim can allahu-akbar while shooting 50 gays, proclaim loyalty to ISIS in a 9-11 call, and the media talks about gun control, mental illness, and islamophobia. Ditto most other muslim mass shootings/bombings — as Trump points out, the president can’t bring himself to say radical Islam. This does strike me as psychological in its intent.

  152. Anonymous [AKA "keleven"] says:

    At least now we have liberals’ answer to the “if you had a time machine, would you kill Hitler?” dilemma. Because liberals are telling us that 1) Trump is the next Hitler, and 2) the idea that we’d even so much as stuff a ballot box to stop him is ABSURD!

  153. @reiner Tor
    @NOTA

    Elections are/were regularly held in all totalitarian regimes (maybe Pol Pot was an exception, I can't think of any other), so obviously they won't be cancelled. Some totalitarian regimes even allowed nominal opposition parties.

    Liberals usually think that democracy should be about tax rates and nothing else (coincidentally cuckservatives have the exact same concept), but they are not very tolerant about that either. So we might end up with regimes where there's a nominal opposition demanding lower corporate tax rates, but they will totally agree with persecution of enemies of the people of color, so despite the nominal presence of a legal and tolerated opposition the regime could be very violent.

    Replies: @NOTA

    In fact, a major point raised by supporters of Trump and Sanders, and earlier by supporters of Kucinich and Ron Paul, is that we have elections and they decide some matters, but there are a lot of policies that are off the table, because both parties’ leadership agrees on them. Invade the world, invite the world, bail out the banks, trust the Fed to keep the economy smooth via monetary policy, free trade via massive treaties stuffed full of goodies to important donors, spy on everyone all the time, impunity for the powerful–in normal years, we simply don’t get a vote on any of that.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS