Sorry but this is just too good not to share.
Lauren Southern is just too perfect for this world 😀
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
The terrifying truth about the US electionDecember 25th, 2016 |
 26 comments to The terrifying truth about the US election |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
OMG joining them all up like that is hilarious! It really shows how loony things get on teh interwebs.
Wow, that was impressive. Now let’s have a peek at (ie)Ms. Clinton’s ACTUAL resume. Beginning with her very first job at Rosewater Law Firm(Available throughout the web)
Truth is stranger than fiction.
Seems legit to me … Now, where did I leave the tin foil that I used to cook the Christmas turkey? It should make a decent hat…
The one theory of these that does attract me a bit is the first one, that Trump encouraged the Democrats to back him as “their” Republican, when he was at the nomination-winning stage. They surely did pick him as their favourite. Is it much of a stretch to say that he encouraged them to do this? And was careful not to discourage them, until he had the nomination wrapped up and the gloves came off? I remember fearing that the gloves never would be discarded, and then being delighted when they later were, like Trump was some kind of Democrat or something. Which he kind of is.
Comments on that from anyone who was actually paying proper attention at the time, in America, would be appreciated, by me anyway.
Pretty to watch.
She’s awesome 😀
Revelations of this sort deserve the widest possible circulation before the alien lizard people reveal themselves on Jan 20 and we discover that we are all to be shipped to another planet to serve as TV snacks.
Yes Brian – I think on these lines also (I actually do).
Of course I am paranoid – so perhaps it is not good to think like me.
Paul has long had concerns that the Donald might have been running as a favour to this old friends the Clintons, and I can see the logic of him wanting a challenge, to run for what is seen as the greatest prize, and bulldoze the GOP establishment out of the way. If he loses, he ‘wins’ the challenge, but if he wins, he wins big.
When the gloves came off, perhaps he had seen the prize in his sights, and not being an ideological man, he simply picked up and ran with the run of the mill political ideas and attitudes of the man in the street.
Paul Marks: It’s not that you’re paranoid, it’s just that’s the way it is.
Mr Ed: I think that it’s easy to overthink this. I may be naive, but I’m choosing to view Trump as a normal bloke, who wants what normal blokes want, just like most of the rest of us.
Yes, he’s a billionaire, but as I’ve mentioned before, my experience growing up in England demonstrated that the genuine upper classes had more in common with and were better friends to the working classes than any of the new-fangled managerial classes.
I never doubted that Trump ran for himself, intending to win and believing he could; the theory he ever thought of himself as a decoy is as absurd as all the others.
– If the Democrats believed one thing even more than all their other absurdities, it was that in the post-Obama US, someone as far out as Trump could never win the nomination, let alone the election. After all, they’d “won the culture wars”. In late 2015, this was something everyone who was anyone “knew”. No-one makes a “cunning plan” they’re sure will fail at the first hurdle.
– The idea is also psychologically absurd. A man who was, in a pathological rather than moral sense, selfless (desiring subordination) might choose to play such a role; doesn’t sound like Donald to me. He is obviously too rich to be bought to play such an unnatural (especially to him) role. And if they’d had something on him sufficient to compel such bizarreness, we’d have heard all about it towards the end of the campaign.
(Full disclosure: up to the point where Sarah Palin endorsed Trump, I expected Cruz, not Trump, to win the nomination. Thereafter I was a bit more cautions. Once Trump won the nomination, I was always ready to bet on his winning the election. Whenever it was discussed, I suggested £1 or £5 or £10, always adding “but not my life savings”.)
“Is it much of a stretch to say that he encouraged them to do this?”
I think Trump always pictured his candidacy as appealing not so much to Republicans or to Democrats, but to people willing to look outside such designations for a new way.
He ran on the Republican ticket because that’s where the opening was. Hillary had clearly locked up the Democrat nomination (so we all thought) but the Republican field was huge and was not so clearly dominated by any one personality or faction.
The number of R candidates was imposing, but I think he knew that, one on one, he had the more compelling personality for what people wanted. He knew that, one on one, he could dominate every other candidate. (Thus, “Little Marco”, “Lyin’ Ted”, “Low Energy Jeb”, “Crooked Hillary”, etc. He gained huge mileage by emasculating every other candidate one-on-one.) He entered on the Republican side knowing that he couldn’t beat “Republicans”, but that he could beat each individual other candidate.
The Dems were thrilled. At that point, they knew it would be Hillary, or maybe, worst-case, Bernie. They thought Trump would alienate Republicans, and that he had no shot whatsoever with their own Dem voters.
Trump saw his votes as coming from people of all political stripes who were no longer enchanted with some party identity and wanted, instead, common-sense populist thinking, free from ideological constraint. (Having no real ideology, he was free to make one up as he went along.)
Everyone else tried to run on issues, and thus were captive to their party’s stances on issues. Trump ran on “Trump!”, and thus could ignore issues, and pick positions from both sides.
What a marketer he is.
bobby b:
Living in the Union of Californian Soviets, as I do, I paid little attention to the election during primary season.
As the actual election day approached, I think Trump’s two main messages were 1) I’m not Hillary Clinton, and 2) do you really want to side with those dangerous nutso Clinton supporters?
For me, the tipping point was the bizarre “Airport Ramp” meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch.
“I think Trump’s two main messages were 1) I’m not Hillary Clinton, and 2) do you really want to side with those dangerous nutso Clinton supporters?”
I’m in The People’s Republic of Minnesota, myself, and have a lot of Democrat friends who told me that “he’s not Hillary” was his best qualification, and was the reason they voted for him.
As an aside, every time I think “Loretta Lynch” my associative memory comes up with “Loretta Lynn”. My imagining of that Bill / Loretta meeting tends to veer in direction of a horror movie script…
(Spoiler: Bill does not survive.)
I live in the fascist state of South Carolina, so Hillary was never a viable option here. The only ads we even saw were spillovers from North Carolina (which was in play). I seized the opportunity to vote for Crazy Uncle Bernie in the primary. That was fun, but I’m sure I’ll pay for it by getting myself onto many Democratic Party mailing lists.
Most of my non-libertarian friends (who tend to be Tea Party types) were Ted Cruz supporters, but eventually came around to Trump. My personal opinion is that he originally ran on a lark, but the longer it went on the more he came to believe that he could win and the more serious about it he became.
As an American conservative, I was terrified of the prospect of a Hillary Presidency. She would have continued Obama’s policies and completed the Balkanization of the American people. The weaponization of the Federal bureaucracy would have accelerated with her tacit approval to punish her enemies.
I wanted Ted Cruz as President. As Trump gathered steam and the size of his rallies overshadowed every other candidate, I dug as deeply as I could into his stated goals. Make America Great Again makes for a good slogan, but conveys no information. I found that his specific goals aligned with mine for the most part. I saw that he was deliberately reaching out to those disdained and ignored by the self-anointed elites in government and media. He was seeking support from all those who felt that a change in direction was needed. His rallies had blacks, hispanics, gays, and other supposedly impossible to reach minority groups standing together cheering as Americans. It was a visceral joy to see an America I had thought lost forever.
As Trump started demolishing his opponents in the primaries, I saw him build and refine a team that was successfully winning. I started to think that he might have a chance. He understood that he was fighting the Media, the Democrat machine, and the Republican establishment. He beat them all to win the nomination. He beat them them again to win the Presidency. And he did it owing zero favors to the usual out of sight string pullers.
So that’s my view from across the pond.
With the exception of my preferred self-designation being libertarian (or classical liberal depending on the weather) George’s comment exactly echoes my experience.
Laird @ December 26, 2016 at 10:24 pm: That was fun, but I’m sure I’ll pay for it by getting myself onto many Democratic Party mailing lists.
Which could be an opportunity for additional Merry Pranking… Some years back, when I was an occasional small donor to Republican causes, I was bombarded with masses of solicitations that included Business Reply Mail envelopes. I had a stack of about 100 at one time; if I had mailed them all, it would have cost the issuers about $50.
If the Democrats send you such mail, put an insulting note in the BRM envelope and drop it in the box.
RR
Something tells me that the Dems would be too mean to pay your postage, but if not, I understand that etiquette requires that BRM mail be sent back to them with a brick inside, presumably to keep it from being used in Mr Trump’s new wall.
Is it an accident that the video is nine minutes and 11 seconds long?
Alexander Dugin thinks Alex Jones’ Infowars is the most powerful resource for true information in the US. These Russians have a lot of friends in Europe and America on the right and the far left now don’t they.
But … but the Russians DID interfere with the election.
THIS conclusively proves it …
(The comments are definitely worth a look, too!)
The left *did* pretty much win the culture wars. Which made it a stupid battle to keep fighting.
“Yay, we took the hill”
“Great. Now let’s go take that village”
“Nah, let’s take the hill again. Maybe if we bayonet a few corpses, the other side will lose twice as much”
“But now they’re attacking the industrial district and winning”
“Hill…”