Tag Archives: Election

BREAKING: Russia hacks Netflix’s House of Cards 5th season 2016 election says Assange, Underwood concedes to Conway in landslide upset

30cards-refresh-slide-TF65-master768.jpg

President Underwood after his massive defeat to opponent Will Conway.  Source

In what turned out to be a shock that could only be something that is not really actually stranger than fiction, while watching Netflix’s House of Card 5th season the world realized that Russia also hacked the election in favor of Will Conway over Francis Underwood in the 2016 election, said Julian Assange.

592dae15c4618894658b465e.jpg

Julian Assange physically in disbelief with his hands spread wide over the Underwood defeat.  RT

In the extremely highly anticipated unbelievable inscrutable 5th season of House of Cards, the intense 2016 election was also hacked by Russia operatives and hackers out to destroy the election hopes of democratic nominee Francis J. Underwood, which is facutally tied to the Trump campaign.

The Will Conway victory came as a utter surprise to even Will Conway himself, as he poured his orange juice, readied for the day, and stretched out for a run he could not believe that he was set to win the hotly debated muchly contested presidential campaign trail, followed up by this closely watched election conclusion.

Ostensibly, when asked for a comment about Netflix’s new season of House of Cards, released May 30th on Netflix, unidentified, potentially high-level Russian informants gave no comment as to if they did have a hand in the election, or if they did not have a hand in the

49c364-20161106-trumprally01

President Trump explaining how he actually didn’t have a part in this.

Underwood/Conway election, unknown and unreliable sources have passionately confirmed.

Accordingly, a proverbial “witch hunt” is in store for the next 4 years, not as a distraction for the entire nation, but as an opportunity to prove that even though Underwood lost, he was and still is the right person for the job, and in some miraculous way there is still hope that a time machine may be invented to go back in time and remedy this err, for all humanities sake.

Underwood is slated to contest the election results for the foreseeable future, taking trips across the nation to subliminally slander and disparage Conway in all of his attempts to run his office proper, this will be a new opportunity for the much beloved Francis Underwood to get his campaign machine geared up for the next election cycle in House of Cards season 8.

Advertisements

Online Petitions (as Pennies in a Wishing Well)

“Everything that is beautiful and noble is a product of reason and calculation.” -Charles Baudelaire

St Paul, MN- In my opinion, petitioning everything we find disagreeable on the internet, that takes place in the United States of America, is like posting a new status on Facebook, or any other social media platform, it becomes useless.  To me, this action does very little, because those forums are monitored and controlled, like throwing a penny into a wishing well–it takes the intention out of the actor’s perception, it takes the accountability out of the petitioner’s (wisher’s) hands and puts the issue in a free fall of liquidity, placing the issue on something larger and misunderstood.  I guess I miss the reason, intention, and calculation of speaking to deaf ears.

Petitioning so visibly against matters on social media creates the same sort of sentiment that one sees when one throws a penny into a wishing well. The shiny object, the cent, goes away from our observation and into certain darkness.  The viewer of this spectacle finds that the actor in this setting has hope, has promise, has a wish with meaning. The penny falls and that is that. There is that nugget of hope left at the bottom of a wishing well. Accordingly, the petition is sent out, put forth, and left on the interwebs away from those with the ability to make change, and there it sits.  (I will attest that these petitions seem a spectacle for the mainstream media to make pennies off of as well, generating a story, while stoking a teasing interest.)

In relation to this metaphor, I aver we do something different for change, instead of a spectacle for others, we create a spectacle for ourselves.  Instead of casting a penny away, as an idea, or as a concern for a concept by writing or signing a petition, that may or may not get seen by eyes with authority and the ability to create change, one must, perhaps, write legislature, or run for office themselves; make the change they desire by becoming this change. Create the change you want by following your wishes or petitions to the top, to the office you aspire to. So often ideas become clouded by group-think and the initial principal becomes diluted, creating very little change.  With an individual seeing this principal through to fruition, those outside forces may be hampered.

The real matter at hand with petitions and pennies, perhaps, may be the level of accountability the person doing the signing, or throwing, or writing cares to do and be responsible for. We sign things all the time, this act is commonplace autonomous. I sign for coffee, I sign for sandwiches, I sign for others, I sign for packages, and I sign for beer. You do too!  How is this any different in a serious way, signing for something that is entirely important or unimportant to me? (Is changing the system important to you?  And how important?)  I find in order for change it must be a step above that kind of signing, a bit more convoluted, this giving up autonomy and comfort for belief.

Signing a petition on the internet for something you believe wholeheartedly may feel good.  You may feel you have done your part, but what part? Does this signing lack fervor though?  And how much will that well-meant signature do? To make change there must be the same amount of initiative or action or motivation as in the thought that caused it. Putting a status update on social media takes a few clicks, signing your signature is a swipe of the wrist–conditioning at this point–perhaps, neither of these actions are revolutionary (singularly alone). With them, there is only a wish and an idea thrown away, as the penny in the wishing well.  So how important is your status update or your signature for petitioning change in comparison to every other one placed in a universe of texts and signatures?

***

On the video at the top of this essay, and the “Faithless Elector” movement (I didn’t watch it, the thumbnail was nice.  So I used it.) Further, we knew about the electoral college and how it worked many years ago, perhaps it is as old as the American republic.  I will cite, as John C. Dvorak of the No Agenda Podcast pointed out, where some of the inspiration for my piece comes, and I paraphrase–I hope I do justice, change the system, change the law!  Again, I paraphrase, but the gist is there.  Change the way we do things, the system, and change the law.  Hear more from him at No Agenda Podcast.  And if you perceive me wrong, I guess I am witnessing the forest for the trees, I am missing their timber.  Change may take more effort than an online trend, spectacle, or people holding well-made signs.

Recount: Clinton’s Double Jeopardy; How Hillary will Win the 2016 Presidential Election

“My analysis is that Trump would not be permitted to win. Why do I say that? Because he has had every establishment off his side. Trump does not have one establishment, maybe with the exception of the Evangelicals, if you can call them an establishment,” said Assange. “Banks, intelligence, arms companies, foreign money, etc. are all united behind Hillary Clinton. And the media as well. Media owners, and the journalists themselves.”

RT

Firstly, I will say that I am obsessed with the recount. I cannot go for a few hours without checking it, the news. This recount affinity is an intriguing part of my life. I enjoy critiquing the news and pundits and both sides of the parties–that never get’s old apparently, to me. Even though it is shit. Nothing changes–and nothing will. It is as if I still have Facebook. Sometimes I can’t escape it. That kind of social media… Those kind of clicks on a website. It is HUGE. Big money for “real” news. This recount thing is going to make history.

I must also say, holy shit. I never thought I would say this, but I think Hillary will actually win this thing. She will enact her magical double jeopardy of a recount; waiting for the blame to be called first, by Trump, having patience, calling in a favor, and then pouncing with limited time to form a proper and meaningful defense by the presumed winner. It seems too obvious now. The long wait (3 weeks have others have said), the third party candidate comes out of nowhere seemingly for innocuous purposes (globalist), and the media says the recount won’t change anything.

(To cover that last part, the media was wrong about the entire election. What makes them so sure that they will be right this time about the recount? I am not so sure, as a matter of fact I am concerned about how many news outlets say a change in votes is “highly unlikely” or “near impossible” or a “long-shot”. To me this talk directly mirrors the rhetoric used by the media to describe the chances of Trump winning the 2016 presidential election. (Which he did.) Pollsters had it wrong, the media bought in; now the media says they have it right, no count change in the recount, and most are buying in. Fuck.)

Aside from the above hypothesizing, the recount is really good for getting people to read the headline of an article only. Just throw in the word: recount. Put whatever shit you want to in the paragraphs below it: hyperbole, emotion, fallacies, etc. They will read. If you are a mainstream site you’ll get hits. If you are a WordPress blogger, yours truly, you may get someone to look harder at your page for a second. From onset of the recount, one thing I do appreciate is that talking about how horrible Trump’s transition team is won’t hold traction for long, for news sources, this is obvious. I won’t be the person to regurgitate this prediction. Thank you, No Agenda Show.

I posit, with celerity: Trump lost footing from the start by saying in the debates that he would challenge the election results. (No shit. I would too if it were warranted.) His opponent only needed him to say it once before they started pulling it apart; they are lawyers, these are words. Hillary conceded: she plays the victim now–people sympathize–and who couldn’t, only standing up again because others stood up for her. And of course no one will have the energy or time before inauguration to say, hey let’s recount the recount. This is after Hillary is ready to take office. Ready to play the role she has practiced for her whole life.

It sounds stupid, and easy. I know it’s a short theory, half-concocted, ridiculous, and thick with what a regular person would call a conspiracy theory. Yet, as my stepfather said over the phone the other night nothing would surprise him about this election. Certainly the media is making out great with these scatalogical themed stories. They come out ahead, ironically, seldom behind. If by chance something crazy happens in the recount–new votes are found, mysteriously, or if the numbers just don’t add up–don’t be surprised. No one has the right to be. We live in a world where losers no longer lose.

I’ll be straightforward with you, I got nervous the second people started discussing the date of December 19th, when the electoral college places their actual vote. I didn’t even know that was the date. And I have written more on the electoral college than most of my ex-progressive liberal alt-left friends have, the ones who came about and told me I was stupid for thinking that the electoral college would vote for us all, so don’t vote. Well, they did. And I did. Oops. Probably should have read that history. Now they want to change the rules of the game they played so hard to win. What do you do tho?

So, on December 20th, when you wake up to find Hillary Clinton has been elected president, don’t be surprised. It’s Clinton’s Double Jeopardy, she can’t lose the recount, even though she already lost the election; it was set in motion at the debates–when no one would accept the results, really. I mean, it is entirely possible. Don’t for one second skim through the headlines and think, oh, it couldn’t happen, because that happened to the majority of the popular voting people of America. They thought they had it. Don’t be like them. Don’t be sad.

Contested: 2000 Presidential Election

 

al_gore_vice_president_of_the_united_states_official_portrait_1994

Al Gore, former Vice President of the United States. Wikipedia.

“On November 26, the state canvassing board certified Bush the winner of Florida’s electors by 537 votes. Gore formally contested the certified results.”

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2000

“Who Was Vince Foster and Was He Killed? Cover-Up, Hillary Clinton (1997)”

Why I am not Voting

Henry_David_Thoreau

Recently, surprisingly (in lieu of what I’ve learned from American Literature 1, Henry David Thoreau, and Ralph Waldo Emerson), I have decided to take the opportunity (Nov. 4th , 2014) to not vote. I won’t be out on that blistery Tuesday eve checking boxes and rallying support, and wasting my fucking time. I will be sitting at home and reading books, or out-and-about gathering experience; smoking cigarettes, mindful of where I ash, in light of the fallen leaves, while enjoying an ice cold locally micro-brewed bier.

Everyone is telling me to vote, I won’t listen to their peer pressure anymore. Now I have Thoreau and Emerson on my side, let’s not forget Noam Chomsky. I will avoid being a statistic, a generalized agree-er. Example of not doing what everyone tells me to do: If everyone was telling me to jump off a bridge, likewise, I wouldn’t. So, I will do the same when it comes to voting, and I just won’t.

Reason for this change of heart, I present you with: Resistance to Civil Government (1849), Henry David Thoreau

The reason I will not be voting is simple. Because I notice things, I will not vote. Daily, while on campus, I notice people walking around. There are many people, but some stick out. They seem of a different ilk. They carry clipboards, propaganda, and they look occupied, busy (and slightly worried). They ask introductory questions with brevity, -and then they get right to the point. Their mind’s look in control, but not. They look poised, but it appears as though for someone else, besides themselves. They seem to be toiling in other people’s business. A business not so simple, a business sedimented in ideology, hope, change, and money; a façade of which the American public buys into. Tangible things, apparently; things we see on TV. Yet, we must take their word for it… Those pundits, politicians, and bi-pedal volunteers. Why study the facts when we can count on someone’s good name to guide our hand in voting… I know Al, I know the other guy; they seem nice, their ads are great; they have my vote… But what do we, as voters, understand?

Do we know where the money goes? Overseas, possibly? Do they know why the local public is withheld the opportunity to vote with its dollar? We can’t buy certain things on Sunday… I’ll give two examples:
1. Wars vs. Local Education; Al Franken, as the Senate Votes
2. Letter to the Government: Jerry Hertaus-What is your stance on Sunday Liquor Sales in Minnesota?

Has anyone discussed the importance of these minimally researched topics?
A few years back, I noticed an anomaly within my group of friends; a very close friend of mine, and confidant, chose not to vote. I’m not talking lazy-forget-to-vote, I’m talking just straight not voting. I didn’t understand. I badgered her for some time. I couldn’t believe it! I wanted her to get out and vote, as cliché as it sounds, I really did. That shit fucking counts: EVERY VOTE… I was lost and didn’t get it. Now I sort of do.

Read this: Wikipedia- Civil Disobedience (Thoreau)

Now watch this:

If one views the news, reads any local or national paper, delves into any media, one will notice a trend: people want you to vote for them. As if one person is better to lead, as if one person is actually leading, and not an organization, or worse a corporation; money. They want you to get out and tell them it is okay to do whatever they choose to do, even if those who voted for them don’t believe in what those politicians do after the vote.

Some local and national politicians just want to be talking faces, specifically noticed. They represent you, they are “good” people, probably born and breed in Minnesota, or wherever your hometown is, the similarities in locale. They want to be the next door neighbor who everyone knows, -but really doesn’t. Nothing gets changed, there is a need for necessary confusion, for necessary problems, to provide necessary solutions, with necessary money. Without these we wouldn’t need those, or them. They create a need. They need us to vote.

It is easy to vote for someone, even if you disagree with their beliefs, when everyone else does. But do you have the courage to not play their game?
Asch Conformity Test:

Primary Election Results; Remembering that I voted for the candidate with the best name

SONY DSCMPR News: Primary 2014 Results

Not unlike every single election I have ever taken part in, I voted for the candidate with the best name.  A name that stood out this primary was Tom Books.  If Tom Books is your name you are definitely going to get the intellectual vote. 

Aside from that, I knew not the stance of the candidate I was voting for, nor what they thought about high tuition, Sunday Sales Laws, and or equality.  On a whim I voted for Doug Mann, and surprisingly against Phyllis Khan.  I took the opportunity to vote Independent party all the way down because Republicans just fund wars and Democrats pretend to be against wars and fund them as well.  It felt good to vote against an incumbent that hadn’t done much for me (noticeably). 

Candidates should be more transparent, and have better names. 

All in all my vote was cast and counted, and it felt good!  Go Vote!