Tag Archives: recount

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.

Advertisements

Jill Stein and the Green Party’s Petition to Recount; Money, Promises and Politics as Usual

It’s hard to imagine that still, nearly two weeks out, people are contesting the 2016 presidential election as if it never happened.  The electoral college spoke.  And we cannot be satisfied with losing, we must challenge the game we banked so much on, emotion and passion.  We must recount.  To be right!  All that I can think of after hearing about a recount, one donated by the people to a political leader is, too little, too late, and if you can’t beat them join the.

This week, Black Friday–eh, surprising deal(!), a Green Party petition to recount the 2016 presidential elections results within Wisconsin has been submitted at the ever-exciting deadline.  (The media lucked out.)  Jill Stein has been the outlier, the iconoclast, the pariah throughout this election, as one half of the Green Party, now she perhaps has turned Democrat on the idea of a recount, and with your money.  Asking for funds to prove an accurate count through a serious recount.  She is contesting for change, to be certain because of said foreign “hacks”–of course by Russia.

This hacking revelation is no shocker–the more you talk about something–the idea of Russia being puppet-master– the more it is true.  The real shocker here, I posit, is that Stein cannot guarantee if the money will actually go towards a recount, or if it will go towards something more self-fulfilling.  Pundits have suggested the funds will go to the Green Party itself as it may lack future federal funding due to less votes in the 2016 Presidential election.  So, let me get this straight, you want money for something, but it might not go to that purpose, but you want more money?  Ok… I don’t know what that’s called.

After this election, again, as the dust settles, again, and again, we can all take a count, or a recount, ourselves, of politics as usual.  Those on a soapbox telling us they will create change for the masses, especially if the money is there to be had, shame.  The more donations and shares and inquiries on social media, through crowdfunding, surely the higher chance that will we sway the results, I mean, maybe.  It makes sense.  We will have to see, and see where that spending happens to make change.

Throughout the 2016 election, I felt that Jill Stein stood for something other than what the two main parties stood for, something other than big corporations and self-gain; I felt the Democrats and Republicans stood for money, power, and capitalistic influence, this last-ditch effort from the sidelines has suggested more of the same from a different party.

For intrigue of what most likely won’t happen, I am not that confused or conflicted about Stein’s decision to act, but rather how she chose to go about this challenge: raising money.  This situation has played out before in 2000, it was just less focused and by one of the two main parties, and the money came from elsewhere I imagine.  Either way, if the money goes to a recount or to the posterity of the Green Party, it serves a purpose, it keeps a mindset going, one that can not, and will not, accept a reality set forth by the framework of reality setters in America that a reality was set within.

If this petition to recount goes through and the 2016 presidential election results are actually changed it will set an incredible precedent for big government, one that won’t be opposed, presumably, until the recount of those results.  It will show that no matter how we think our national system is set up, it can be changed to our liking, no matter how fickle, diluted, or biased they may be.  Which perhaps, I assume, may be a good thing?  And that is why I never bet more than I can afford to lose, thank you Darrrin.

***

Keep in mind, if you like what you have read here on my blog, donate.  This kind of writing is unimpeded by corporate ideologies and mindsets.  All of the money, I can guarantee will go towards upkeep and future materials on my wonderful blog.  Hit the button in the corner.  Much thanks for the read, the share, the donation, and the love.  TS_