Friday, July 26, 2019
Wednesday, September 6, 2017
How To Recognize An Internet Or Facebook Troll, Bot or Fake Social Media Account
HOW TO SPOT AN ONLINE OR FB TROLL
Decades ago, before there was any internet, the idea of people all over the country and even the world, being able to communicate spontaneously, freely and openly and discuss any desired topic, would have been considered a wondrous thing, possibly facilitating universal understanding, worldwide harmony, and even peace on Earth.
Now we know better, however. By this time, our online innocence has long been tempered by the realization that any communication, like any other usually positive thing in life, can be mis-used, abused, misunderstood or violated, far beyond reasonable disagreement.
In this day and age, when internet communications can escalate into edgy, fiery, or even enraged debates between strangers, it is a good idea to be able to recognize those who are not there to honestly discuss, or even logically argue about a topic. Some folks' intent is specifically to disrupt, upset, confuse and/or distract the party with whom they are engaged. They will persist especially in disputes that have no real resolution, or are based on past events that cannot be changed.
The so-labelled internet (or Facebook) troll is defined by their dishonesty, in terms of seeking actual discourse on a subject. Either for reasons of sadistic pleasure, personal aggrandizement, or even just profit, some people on the internet aim to "do damage" to others they perceive as adversaries, fools or inferiors, in some way.
This can be anyone, even a regular, normally "nice" person who happens to be in a foul mood, due to a personal difficulty, or perhaps their bitterness over the status or effects of a current issue. YES----Even good people might go trolling sometimes, in a weak moment, in a desire to hurt somebody they perceive as an "enemy" in some way. Sadly, this is part of being human.
The truth is, for a short time, anybody can turn troll.
But the persistent trolls, and the PAID ones, are generally not self-correcting, and they can be identified if their behavior is consistent enough.
This list is an attempt to assist in the recognition of TRUE trolls ---- NOT just somebody feeling hurt and in a bad mood (which could be anybody) -- But the devoted trolls, the ones who never let up, and have no desire to honestly communicate at any time. Or, additionally,
the ones who do it for profit.
THIS is not what online communication should be about
Back in High School, you probably had an English Teacher or 2
constantly reminding you to back up your arguments, or buttress your case, with supporting information, examples, quotes, etc etc.
Online communication is a great place to put that advice to work.
There are always alternatives to insulting people, if your arguments are fact-based
This is not to say that factual, evidence-based arguments won't piss some people off, or evoke their displeasure in some way.
But empty name-calling and un-grounded accusations are a sure way
to trash any conversation at any time.
Without basing discussion on evidence and and actual examples, internet arguments are just 2 creatures making noise at each other
RECOGNIZING THE "TROLL"
Bots:
Automated programs designed for doing repetitive or mass-number
tasks/posts online;They may be commercial in origin, or malicious
or designed to manipulate or deceive large numbers of people.
Link:
A useful clue for recognizing likely youtube Bots
When a youtube account *has no content, but somehow still has a number of subscribers*, that is a indication of a possible "Bot" (an automated account programmed to give automatic "troll-like" responses to posts on different threads).
If you check the account of someone who has given a hostile, "troll-like" response, and you get an account that looks like the image below, consider that a warning flag of a possible Bot.
Typical "Bot" youtube account
(note: "No content", but has 15 subscribers)
Link:
Link:
REMEMBER:
LIKELY TROLLS CAN BE IDENTIFIED BY THEIR ONLINE BEHAVIOR ...
Typically, Trolls:
1. Keep repeating "edgy" or anger-inducing
talking points, with no other kind of response.
Posts are usually, but not always, short.
2. Get angrier when you try to address
them seriously when discussing a topic,
and will try to evoke an emotional,
non-cognitive response. They may even suddenly LEAVE
a discussion when the interaction stays serious
and avoids combative emotion.
3. When pressed by earnest questions, will
sometimes strike-back with OFF-TOPIC COMPLAINTS,
such as, "Stop tagging me"/"Stop using my name"
or similar non-topical complaint.
4. Will not participate in actual discussions
of policy/ideas/related *substantive* topics
and will try to keep discussion emotional
and REACTIVE by continuously trying
to AGGRAVATE others in an online discussion.
Trolls normally AVOID SUBSTANCE and often,
when they are unable to keep angry emotion
on an un-resolvable/continuous level,
change the subject, or bring up new "edgy" points to
keep the talk in a more antagonistic mood.
5. Will sometimes have brief FB pages that lack substance,
and are comprised almost entirely of
copy/paste images and political
slogans, with little or no personal content
that is not inflammatory in some way.
6. May have a "female" FB moniker, but respond
in ways that seem at least subtly (or more overtly)
male, in terms of their
hyper-aggressiveness/profanity.
(****IMPORTANT NOTE**** : I am
not saying that women never respond with
aggressiveness or profanity, but I have found
this type of response to be far less-common
among female online posters than in males.
Maybe it's a "testosterone thing". It is hard to say.)
7. May have a moniker that seems glib or contrived,
and may possibly not be an actual name. The moniker itself
may even be subtly antagonizing, or ironic.
..............................................................................................................
PLEASE ... If you are going to argue, and you do not want to be a troll, keep it factual (CLICK to ENLARGE)
Note:
Being able to turn-off the computer when, or even BEFORE you get really upset is a good idea, and will be beneficial to your mental health.
Try not to be too obsessive over what unseen strangers say
It is pointless to end up like this, or even worse ----
Want OTHERS to end up like this
Besides avoiding trolls, and better yet, avoiding BEING a troll,
this is always good advice, if you can do it ...
=================================================================
Thursday, May 18, 2017
Is this classic song the REAL National Anthem of American Workers?
"Sixteen Tons" tells an old story----The arduous plight of the exploited manual laborer, or "Company Worker", with no Labor Union or leverage to balance the power of their rapacious employers.
VIDEO (Tennessee Ernie Ford version):
VIDEO (Johnny Cash version):
LYRICS:
SIXTEEN TONS
==========
Written by Merle Travis
Some people say a man is made out of mud
A poor man's made out of muscle and blood
Muscle and blood and skin and bones
A mind that's weak and a back that's strong
You load sixteen tons, and what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store
I was born one mornin' when the sun didn't shine
I picked up my shovel and I walked to the mine
I loaded sixteen tons of number nine coal
And the straw boss said "Well, a-bless my soul"
You load sixteen tons, and what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store
I was born one mornin', it was drizzlin' rain
Fightin' and trouble are my middle name
Raised in the Canebrake by an old mama lion
Ain't no a high-toned woman make me walk the line
You load sixteen tons, and what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store
If you see me comin', better step aside
A lot of men didn't, and a lot of men died
With one fist of iron, and the other of steel
If the right one don't get you then the left one will
You load sixteen tons, and what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store
----Sixteen Tons Lyrics | MetroLyrics----
"Sixteen Tons" is possibly the best song ever written
about the exploitation-oppression by distant, unreachable, wealthy
corporate ownership, and the rough plight of the worker
under an exploitive capitalist-corporate system.
The song is not a self-conscious, academic/didactic work,
but a huge, "evergreen" hit on the popular charts -- its original recorded version holding the #1 spot for months, and since performed
by countless artists down though the years.
Right from the start, the song clearly resonated with Americans, and
with people all around the world. It is a classic by any standard.
This simple song's relevance is timeless, and it stands up
beautifully to any detailed analysis.
Written by Merle Travis, "Sixteen Tons" is based on the life of coal-miners living in a rural area "company town".
The ownership looks for workers, with "A mind that's weak
and a back that's strong", who will work a hard, dangerous job,
to produce wealth for them, while not having the will,
or depth of understanding, to know much about, or question
the system that exploits them.
The worker in the song has produced, with his strength and effort,
in a dirty, scary, risk-filled environment, for his employers,
the wealth of "sixteen tons" of coal, which will presumably
be sold for far more profit than the miner's meagre wages.
Certainly, the employers are pleased with the production ("boss
said 'Well, a-bless my soul'").
But Ownership has all the leverage, and can pay what it wants, and impose other extractive policies as well.
This worker's wages are not sufficient to keep him out of serious debt.
The debt is so large for this hard-working man, that it seems
it could even extend to the afterlife ("Saint Peter don't you call me...").
However, although this working man makes this single reference to a traditional Christian image, he rejects the more poetic/mystical vision of the world (man "made out of mud"). He sees the world as a very material place, where life is brutish, and for some, short ("Poor man's made out of muscle and blood"). And the load he carries is more than
just his arduous labor, for relatively low pay.
This is a physically-powerful and productive, but simple man.
The worker's debts are magnified further by the fact that he is
forced to buy essential goods and supplies from the same
people who employ him, and at presumably very high
(i.e. gouging) prices, that clearly eat-up the miner's
small paycheck before he has even paid all his bills.
This hard, risk-filled work in the mine has made the miner
physically strong and very tough. Due to the routine perils of
his workplace, he is accustomed to danger.
Also, he was born into hardship, and raised to be strong and tough by others (mother) who had rough lives as well.
As a result, he also has a tendency to become angry and fight,
perhaps more often than necessary ("Fightin' and trouble
are my middle name"), and it is apparent he has a tendency to
express his dissatisfaction with his life--not against his exploitive employers, but against other people on a similar societal level as himself, whom he can directly challenge in a physical fight.
If he challenges his employers, he could lose his job, or worse,
so that is not even considered an option. He may never even have
met the mine-owners, who presumably live far away.
He has much strength and ability to fight ("With one fist of iron...the left one will), maximized by his hard labor, but will probably
never fight anyone who is not in a peer situation.
As it is, he tends to fight, often devastatingly ("a lot of men died") over issues such as not being respected ("step aside")
by a relative peer who likely suffers from the same exploitation.
Ownership seems utterly safe and distant from his feelings of aggression/frustration, as well as his ability to fight and defeat others.
This man will eventually wear-out and be replaced by another,
similar person, though younger and "fresher", like a used or worn-out part in a big machine is replaced with a new one.
And another person will then become the subject of the song, as a
"new" cog in the big mechanism that grinds away the lives of some, while enriching, distant, unseen others.
To ponder:
In an age dominated by corporate-Capitalism,
is "Sixteen Tons" actually the story of the TYPICAL
American worker now, working hard for long hours and low-pay
to produce wealth for others, while the workers themselves
stay poor, powerless and constantly owing money?
Maybe it should be our new American National Anthem?
It would seem apt, given the nature of the lives of many millions,
and still-increasing numbers of Americans these days,
stuck in low-wage jobs and crushed by varied forms of debt.
The gritty, timeless reality of "Sixteen Tons" beats the
awkward, superficial, war-glorifying "Star-Spangled Banner"
by a country mile, in the opinion of this writer.
Make that a "coal-country" mile.
LINKS:
Recent coal-mine disaster:
'Dear murderer': With a letter a day, West Virginian tried to remind coal executive of his role in 29 deaths
Dr. RD Wolff: How the system has always worked ...
America, Land of Low Pay -- The Numbers Will Surprise You
The United States Leads in Low-Wage Work and the Lowest Wages for Low-Wage Workers
Overworked America: 12 Charts That Will Make Your Blood Boil
(sample chart)
Low Wage Workers: “We Can’t Breathe”
Great Book:
NICKEL and DIMED, By Barbara Ehrenreich
LINKS:
Regarding debt that leaves you "owing your soul to the company store" ...
THE MIDDLE CLASS IS NOW THE "COMPANY STORE" CLASS
A 21st-Century Form of Indentured Servitude Has Already Penetrated Deep into the American Heartland
WIKIPEDIA--"Sixteen Tons"
Are companies like McDonald's, Amazon
and Walmart the new coal-mines?
(This post was inspired by the work of Dr. R D Wolff)
=========================
VIDEO (Tennessee Ernie Ford version):
VIDEO (Johnny Cash version):
Merle Travis, the writer of "Sixteen Tons"
LYRICS:
SIXTEEN TONS
==========
Written by Merle Travis
Some people say a man is made out of mud
A poor man's made out of muscle and blood
Muscle and blood and skin and bones
A mind that's weak and a back that's strong
You load sixteen tons, and what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store
I was born one mornin' when the sun didn't shine
I picked up my shovel and I walked to the mine
I loaded sixteen tons of number nine coal
And the straw boss said "Well, a-bless my soul"
You load sixteen tons, and what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store
I was born one mornin', it was drizzlin' rain
Fightin' and trouble are my middle name
Raised in the Canebrake by an old mama lion
Ain't no a high-toned woman make me walk the line
You load sixteen tons, and what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store
If you see me comin', better step aside
A lot of men didn't, and a lot of men died
With one fist of iron, and the other of steel
If the right one don't get you then the left one will
You load sixteen tons, and what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store
----Sixteen Tons Lyrics | MetroLyrics----
"Sixteen Tons" is possibly the best song ever written
about the exploitation-oppression by distant, unreachable, wealthy
corporate ownership, and the rough plight of the worker
under an exploitive capitalist-corporate system.
The song is not a self-conscious, academic/didactic work,
but a huge, "evergreen" hit on the popular charts -- its original recorded version holding the #1 spot for months, and since performed
by countless artists down though the years.
Right from the start, the song clearly resonated with Americans, and
with people all around the world. It is a classic by any standard.
This simple song's relevance is timeless, and it stands up
beautifully to any detailed analysis.
Written by Merle Travis, "Sixteen Tons" is based on the life of coal-miners living in a rural area "company town".
The ownership looks for workers, with "A mind that's weak
and a back that's strong", who will work a hard, dangerous job,
to produce wealth for them, while not having the will,
or depth of understanding, to know much about, or question
the system that exploits them.
The worker in the song has produced, with his strength and effort,
in a dirty, scary, risk-filled environment, for his employers,
the wealth of "sixteen tons" of coal, which will presumably
be sold for far more profit than the miner's meagre wages.
Certainly, the employers are pleased with the production ("boss
said 'Well, a-bless my soul'").
But Ownership has all the leverage, and can pay what it wants, and impose other extractive policies as well.
This worker's wages are not sufficient to keep him out of serious debt.
The debt is so large for this hard-working man, that it seems
it could even extend to the afterlife ("Saint Peter don't you call me...").
However, although this working man makes this single reference to a traditional Christian image, he rejects the more poetic/mystical vision of the world (man "made out of mud"). He sees the world as a very material place, where life is brutish, and for some, short ("Poor man's made out of muscle and blood"). And the load he carries is more than
just his arduous labor, for relatively low pay.
This is a physically-powerful and productive, but simple man.
The worker's debts are magnified further by the fact that he is
forced to buy essential goods and supplies from the same
people who employ him, and at presumably very high
(i.e. gouging) prices, that clearly eat-up the miner's
small paycheck before he has even paid all his bills.
This hard, risk-filled work in the mine has made the miner
physically strong and very tough. Due to the routine perils of
his workplace, he is accustomed to danger.
Also, he was born into hardship, and raised to be strong and tough by others (mother) who had rough lives as well.
As a result, he also has a tendency to become angry and fight,
perhaps more often than necessary ("Fightin' and trouble
are my middle name"), and it is apparent he has a tendency to
express his dissatisfaction with his life--not against his exploitive employers, but against other people on a similar societal level as himself, whom he can directly challenge in a physical fight.
If he challenges his employers, he could lose his job, or worse,
so that is not even considered an option. He may never even have
met the mine-owners, who presumably live far away.
He has much strength and ability to fight ("With one fist of iron...the left one will), maximized by his hard labor, but will probably
never fight anyone who is not in a peer situation.
As it is, he tends to fight, often devastatingly ("a lot of men died") over issues such as not being respected ("step aside")
by a relative peer who likely suffers from the same exploitation.
Ownership seems utterly safe and distant from his feelings of aggression/frustration, as well as his ability to fight and defeat others.
This man will eventually wear-out and be replaced by another,
similar person, though younger and "fresher", like a used or worn-out part in a big machine is replaced with a new one.
And another person will then become the subject of the song, as a
"new" cog in the big mechanism that grinds away the lives of some, while enriching, distant, unseen others.
To ponder:
In an age dominated by corporate-Capitalism,
is "Sixteen Tons" actually the story of the TYPICAL
American worker now, working hard for long hours and low-pay
to produce wealth for others, while the workers themselves
stay poor, powerless and constantly owing money?
Maybe it should be our new American National Anthem?
It would seem apt, given the nature of the lives of many millions,
and still-increasing numbers of Americans these days,
stuck in low-wage jobs and crushed by varied forms of debt.
The gritty, timeless reality of "Sixteen Tons" beats the
awkward, superficial, war-glorifying "Star-Spangled Banner"
by a country mile, in the opinion of this writer.
Make that a "coal-country" mile.
LINKS:
Recent coal-mine disaster:
'Dear murderer': With a letter a day, West Virginian tried to remind coal executive of his role in 29 deaths
Dr. RD Wolff: How the system has always worked ...
America, Land of Low Pay -- The Numbers Will Surprise You
The United States Leads in Low-Wage Work and the Lowest Wages for Low-Wage Workers
Overworked America: 12 Charts That Will Make Your Blood Boil
(sample chart)
Low Wage Workers: “We Can’t Breathe”
Great Book:
NICKEL and DIMED, By Barbara Ehrenreich
LINKS:
Regarding debt that leaves you "owing your soul to the company store" ...
THE MIDDLE CLASS IS NOW THE "COMPANY STORE" CLASS
A 21st-Century Form of Indentured Servitude Has Already Penetrated Deep into the American Heartland
WIKIPEDIA--"Sixteen Tons"
Are companies like McDonald's, Amazon
and Walmart the new coal-mines?
(This post was inspired by the work of Dr. R D Wolff)
=========================
Thursday, May 11, 2017
Even though she "lost", Hillary Clinton Didn't Actually Lose in 2016
........................................................
The Election of 2016 is over. Nothing can change it.
No more tears. No more whining, no more bitter accusations.
This is not about sour grapes. This is a calm consideration of actual facts regarding this election. And note that not all of these facts were reported on
in mainstream corporate media.
But truthfully, these facts are disturbing, and highly worthy of sober consideration.
And in some ways, the truth may disable at least some of the current disagreements between Progressives and Mainstream "Centrist" Democrats, over "who [supposedly] lost
the election"?
Because, the truth is, the election was rigged, but almost certainly
not, at least principally, by Russia.
Nope ---- the GOP and their operatives were able to get it done all, or
at least mostly, by their little dedicated selves.
The story has actually all been documented, but in many widely-spread
pieces and sections, with much of the best data not reported on
in corporate media, so not that many people have been able to add
up the whole picture.
I am going to bring them all together, on this Blog.
Here's a place to start:
LINK:
2016 Case Study In GOP Voter Suppression
When you add up all factors, in entirety, it doesn't look like Hillary Clinton actually lost the 2016 election, in terms of the number of people
who intended to vote for her, as clearly and consistently indicated in
most polls before the election, as well as in the exit polls, versus the
number of people who intended to vote for Trump.
The difference?
Nobody stopped anybody from voting in the many polls before the election, or the important exit-polls (which are barely reported on in corporate media).
Clinton consistently won almost all of those, again and again, making
the end result so confounding.
****But somebody was definitely stopping voters from voting for Clinton, when it came to the actual election.****
Millions of those with INTENT to vote for Hillary were erased, "caged", unable to get to their polling place, or couldn't overcome the ID requirements in their very "red" state.
And a mysterious (to statisticians), but recurring "red-shift" in the voting
results looks like it finished the job, and with an almost surgical precision in
the crucial swing states, thanks to "Black Box" [computer] voting and/or tabulation.
Meanwhile, a far far smaller number of folks with INTENT to vote for Trump were caged or erased from the rolls, or were unable to overcome ID requirements. Plus, the Trump voters were usually perfectly able to physically get to their polling place.
WHY?
Things were set-up to work exactly that way, well in advance of the election.
The GOP made sure of that.
Yet, Hillary still got 2.9 Million more popular votes nationwide.
In addition, in late October, the FBI chipped-in, perhaps even at the inside urging of GOP operatives, although that is unknowable at this time.
But in total, all 5 factors combined were devastating to the Clinton campaign.
Here's what happened:
1. Chris Kobach's now well-documented GOP Interstate Cross-Check: Millions
of Democratic Party voters, across more than
half the states, were caged (i.e. had their names separated, and
labeled not-eligible) and were unable to vote.
This is the biggest single factor, as you will see below.
2. Strategic Closing of Polling Places in Democratic Party demographic zones in
nearly all 'red" (i.e. GOP-controlled) states.
Also, termination of early-voting in most GOP-controlled states, which
many minorities and poor depend on, helped the GOP even more.
Thousands more Dem votes were snuffed this way.
These closings did not occur in GOP-heavy voting areas,
only in Democratic Party ones.
3. Strict ID requirements, precisely designed to affect/limit poor and minority
voters (read: Democratic Party voters) in (surprise!) GOP-controlled states,
blocking many thousands of (mostly Dem) votes in each state.
Democratic Party lawsuits stemmed some of the damage here,
but only some.
Thousands more votes per (GOP-controlled) state, were snuffed.
4. Comey's announcement on October 28, 11 days before the election, was
unquestionably a factor as well, as polls show.
Comey insisted later he stood by his quite speculative statement about
the Weiner emails, even though there turned out to be nothing there,
as Comey himself later admitted.
But real damage had been done. The polls changed against Hillary--
Not decisive by itself, but this one event didn't have to be, since
it is just one part of a "team" of factors combining their forces,
into a malevolent political "perfect storm". Virtually all of it, planned.
5. On Election Day----A sneaky, but persistent "red-shift" (i.e. rightward
trend) in final vote tallies away from (i.e. in direct opposition to) exit
poll results, especially in the key swing states.
Thousands of votes appear "flipped" during (computerized) tabulation,
away from the Democrat and towards the Republican, which is very
reminiscent of the Karl Rove era elections (2000/2004).
Red shifts are nice in fashion ...
But the "Red-Sift" in elections is a disaster for the concept of
Representative Government.
====== red-shift>=======>>>
Before we get into the documentation, I need to say that this Blog represents
a Progressive viewpoint, along the lines of Bernie Sanders/The New Deal/FDR, and his way of dealing with wealthy elites. The policies are clearly described in other posts.
I am very aware of the current bitter arguments between the left/Progressive side of the Democratic Party, and the mainstream DNC-"Centrist" side of the Party.
You know, the "Bernie" side is indignant about the shenanigans by DWS, Donna Brazile and others behind-the-scenes in the Party who "sabotaged" Bernie, and snubbed other Progressives at the Convention, etc.
Meanwhile, the "centrist" side of the Party accuses Bernie voters of voting 3rd party or even staying home, depriving Hillary of the necessary votes in key states.
Sure, this was probably a factor, to some small degree, but is way overrated, IMO.
Most Bernie-supporters I know voted for Hillary out of fear of Trump,
although were often unhappy about doing so. And I live in a state where Clinton was always way ahead, and folks could vote 3rd party without the danger of Trump taking the state. Still, most Bernie-voters I have communicated with went with Hillary.
Online, I read constantly about Bernie-supporters who were going to "hold their nose and vote" for HC because Trump was just too scary.
Extremely few Bernie-supporters actually ended-up voting for Trump, that is for damn sure.
Maybe some Bernie-ites in swing states stayed home (not many), and certainly some in swing states did vote 3rd party. But I firmly believe these numbers were definitely NOT what made the difference.
It is true, as some polls have shown, that some non-Progressive/working class voters who voted for Bernie in both "swing" and "red" states primaries did turn around and vote for Trump. They didn't vote for Hillary because her "centrism" is just not well-liked by working people, due to its strong corporate sympathies.
So, after losing Bernie as an alternative, these normally non-progressive voters decided to take a chance and vote for Trump, since it appeared to them at the time that Trump was a candidate of change, albeit chaotic change.
What does that show?
It shows the appeal and popularity of Bernie Sanders' Democratic Socialist policies (single-payer healthcare, free college, job creation, etc) is still strong with The People, as was The New Deal of the Democratic Party's glory years.
Hopefully, the Party will absorb this message in future campaigns
against the GOP. There are lots of votes and victories waiting there,
if the party truly wants to pursue them.
Centrists are correct, however, about the negative effect of the Comey announcement 11 days prior to the election, which did actually cause a drop in the polls for HC, while Trump rose. The Comey announcement could be seen legitimately as a one of the big factors, and absolutely did do some damage, although it was probably not critical by itself, IMO.
In addition, Centrists keep bringing up the Russia factor, which is extremely overrated, almost, but not quite, to the point of becoming an urban myth, IMO.
Russia flipped zero votes in tabulation systems. No evidence for that at all.
Email "hacks" (John Podesta's email account) by Russia, no matter what folks choose to believe, have not so far been verified by actual evidence.
Even so, the Podesta emails' disclosures were no real surprise to politically
sophisticated voters who know how dirty both parties' politics are, and are
way overrated as a source of vote-loss for Clinton.
The "Russian effect" did exist, but I am convinced after much research and cross-referencing that it had a much lesser effect than the 5 factors
discussed here, which, in total, basically STOLE the election
for the GOP.
The election wasn't stolen by a foreign power, but by
domestic operatives----All-American thieves who have done it before.
As far as claims of mass-numbers of online trolls "hired by Russia" are concerned ...
I myself have had a number of online encounters with these types over
the last year or so, including some nasty "head-butts" with what I cane to
strongly suspect were some of those hired Russian/Macedonian
"professional trolls" mean't to twist peoples' minds
and affect the election.
Yeah, they were around, and still are, BTW, as nasty as ever.
BUT ...
Those A-holes changed very few minds, I can assure you.
Not. A. Factor.
I am utterly convinced,
it was those 5 big factors listed above that were the difference.
It just becomes more and more obvious the more you research it.
The 5 factors' combined effect was overwhelming.
The Shocking Truth:
America did not actually intend to reject Hillary Clinton in November,
as crazy as that may sound to some folks now.
A large number of her votes got effectively snuffed by the combination of GOP vote-erasure, geographical/demographic manipulations, and vote-caging.
And then, ofcourse, there was Comey.
So ... as far as blame for the election loss is concerned ...
Both sides (Progressives and Centrists) need to back-off and CHILL.
Because BOTH SIDES ARE WRONG.
The election was rigged and stolen, but BY THE GOP, or operatives
in support of the GOP and/or Conservative interests.
You want to hate on somebody, hate on them.
Hey, they're good at it. That's what they do. Nothing new here.
They stole 2000 and 2004 as well. No kidding.
Plus, just for another piece of the election-fraud picture, please note
the famous GOP extreme-gerrymandering since 2010, which
gives them a built-in advantage in The House Of Representatives.
GOP GERRYMANDERING PLAN IS DESTROYING OUR DEMOCRACY
All cut from the same cloth, of fraud.
Again, that's what the GOP does.
But those, although related, are whole other stories.
However, IMO, the GOP did steal the Presidency in 2016, and may well be
able to do it again in the future.
Once again, with links and detail,
Here's how:
#1. Interstate Cross-Check, reported on brilliantly by Greg Palast, which
basically, scrubs voters off "eligible" lists for people having matching
names in multiple states with criminals in other states.
In other words, if someone with the same name as you in another state
committed some crime, YOU lose your right to vote in your state (if it is
GOP-controlled). All names were computer-program verified to be
Democratic Party demographics by address, ethnicity and even
by such details as the magazines and periodicals they subscribe to.
Now that is precision.
Millions of votes were lost over a range of
(always GOP-controlled) states.
LINKS:
The GOP's Stealth War Against Voters - Greg Palast
Over 2-Million Voters on Caging List - Greg Palast
#2. The closing of polling places undoubtedly took out thousands more Dem
votes in more than half the states.
868 POLLING PLACES CLOSED BY GOP FOR 2016 ELECTION
Mass poll closures in battleground states create potential for Election Day chaos
REPORTS ON VOTING PROBLEMS AROUND US, INCLUDING POLL CLOSURES, NOV, 2016
Polling places become battleground in US voting rights fight - Reuters
This process was especially blatant in Arizona, where long lines resulted from
so many polling places being closed.
"State Rep. Reginald Bolding, a Democrat and the only black member of the Legislature,
said he visited four county polling places and said what he saw "was disheartening."
"You saw individuals who were seniors, handicapped, you also saw individuals who
had to spend their entire workday waiting in line to cast a vote," Bolding said.
"And this was directly due to the county recorder's negligence in cutting the
polling locations in Maricopa County from 200 to 60 locations."
He said while he didn't suspect the efforts were intended to suppress turnout,
combined with cuts in election funding and new laws passed by the GOP-controlled
Legislature, he sees a pattern.
"When you start to put all of these different voter-suppression mechanisms in a line,
it's hard to believe that this is all coincidental," Bolding said.
Long Voting Lines in Phoenix
And the problem continues TODAY ...
91,000 voters left off voter rolls in Maricopa County Alone in 2017
#3. Ultra-strict, picky ID Card requirements in, where else---GOP-controlled
states, eliminated thousands more votes.
(sample card)
Also, from back in 2012, you may remember this ...
How voter ID laws helped Donald Trump win the presidency
#4. The Comey Effect.
"...the big change does coincide well with the release of the Comey letter [on Oct.28th]. Opinion swung toward Trump by 4 percentage points, and about half of this was a lasting change. This was larger than the victory margin in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida, and Wisconsin. Many factors went into this year’s Presidental race, but Comey’s letter appears to have been a critical factor in the home stretch."
PRINCETON ELECTION CONSORTIUM--THE COMEY EFFECT
THE COMEY LETTER PROBABLY COST HILLARY THE ELECTION
Before the election, even Fox News certainly thought Comey's announcement
had an effect ...
New poll: 34 percent 'less likely' to vote for Clinton after new email revelations
Even though Clinton won big in CA, she may actually have still lost a few
votes there due to Comey's Letter ----
CLINTON'S LEAD DROPS IN CALIFORNIA IN THE DAYS AFTER COMEY ANNOUNCEMENT
Presidential race tightens, Hillary Clinton’s support falls after FBI reopens email probe
Polls Show Clinton Support Slipped After FBI Letter (Bloomberg)
#5. The mysterious election day "Red-Shift" (cue creepy sci-Fi music),
especially in swing states.
Please note: The way exit polls work (around the entire world),
is this ---- Generally, any variance between actual votes counted from
exit polls that is over 1%, is a red flag in a close race and is
calling out for investigation.
BTW, landslide wins, for either candidate in
a state, may have larger shifts and it is not considered a factor.
Still, it's odd that Trump gained the most votes (by %) in a state he lost by a
whopping 24%, but a GOP-controlled state (NJ) with an eager-to-please
Buddy (Gov Christie), and a long-storied history of political shenanigans.
But no worry, just a curiosity.
In the chart below, note the nifty, almost-perfectly-reversed victory
margins for Trump in those key swing states.
For students of the 2004 Election, this is like deja vu.
But 2004 is another story. Just rest assured, "red shifts"
have appeared before. A lot.
Repeatedly, Trump won in those swing states by almost the same
margins he was predicted by polls to lose.
BTW, please note that "blue shifts" in close races basically
never happen. Not in any US election, ever.
Seriously. This blank spot "anomaly" drives statisticians crazy.
The disturbingly-consistent "Red-Sift" is reported on
very soberly, here:
VIDEO:
2016 VOTE RESULTS IN KANSAS SHOW MANIPULATION,
ACCORDING TO UNIVERSITY STATISTICIAN ----
LINKS:
US ELECTIONS "RED-SHIFT" FROM 1988-
2012
2012 ARTICLE BY LONGTIME
ELECTION EXPERT WHO GIVES
BACKGROUND HISTORY ON
THE "RED-SHIFT"
BRAD FRIEDMAN AND JONATHAN SIMON ON THE "RED SHIFT" IN 2016
DAILY KOS ON THE "RED-SHIFT" --
IT'S REAL
But back to 2016 ...
Surgical precision?
"Of the more than 120 million votes cast in the 2016 election, 107,000 votes in three states [Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania] effectively decided the election."
Myths About Clinton’s Defeat in Election 2016 Debunked
Millions of UN-Counted Votes
in 2016
Links:
EXIT POLLS CAST DOUBT ON 2016 ELECTION RESULTS
RED SHIFTS found in 2016 Presidential race & in nearly every Senate race in states with exit polls
Something Stinks When Exit Polls and Official Counts Don't Match
MARK CRISPIN MILLER ASKS: WHERE ARE OUR VOTES? WAKE UP!
(More recently) FROM SEPTEMBER, 2017 -- THOUSANDS OF WISCONSIN VOTERS DETERRED FROM VOTING IN 2016 ELECTION
===========>>==========>>
Plus, we knew this ominous truth well before the election:
GOP To Control Voting Process In 2016 Swing States
America doesn't need to trust it's voting systems,
it needs to verify them.
Here's some more:
New Voting Restrictions in Place for 2016 Presidential Election
Did the Republican War on Voting Rights Help Trump Win?
The GOP’s Attack on Voting Rights Was the Most Under-Covered Story of 2016
Yes--US elections can be stolen!
Current GOP claims of "voter fraud" is a cover for a new Trump/GOP effort to erase even more votes in future elections.
Did Trump win, or “win”? And what about those “winning” Senate races? Exit polls show a “suspicious pattern”
A disturbing question:
Why did Hillary Clinton NOT want a recount
in Michigan, a key swing state?
Alert:
Please be aware that all of the above factors are still in play for upcoming elections.
The Election of 2016 is over. Nothing can change it.
No more tears. No more whining, no more bitter accusations.
This is not about sour grapes. This is a calm consideration of actual facts regarding this election. And note that not all of these facts were reported on
in mainstream corporate media.
But truthfully, these facts are disturbing, and highly worthy of sober consideration.
And in some ways, the truth may disable at least some of the current disagreements between Progressives and Mainstream "Centrist" Democrats, over "who [supposedly] lost
the election"?
Because, the truth is, the election was rigged, but almost certainly
not, at least principally, by Russia.
Nope ---- the GOP and their operatives were able to get it done all, or
at least mostly, by their little dedicated selves.
The story has actually all been documented, but in many widely-spread
pieces and sections, with much of the best data not reported on
in corporate media, so not that many people have been able to add
up the whole picture.
I am going to bring them all together, on this Blog.
Here's a place to start:
LINK:
2016 Case Study In GOP Voter Suppression
When you add up all factors, in entirety, it doesn't look like Hillary Clinton actually lost the 2016 election, in terms of the number of people
who intended to vote for her, as clearly and consistently indicated in
most polls before the election, as well as in the exit polls, versus the
number of people who intended to vote for Trump.
The difference?
Nobody stopped anybody from voting in the many polls before the election, or the important exit-polls (which are barely reported on in corporate media).
Clinton consistently won almost all of those, again and again, making
the end result so confounding.
****But somebody was definitely stopping voters from voting for Clinton, when it came to the actual election.****
Millions of those with INTENT to vote for Hillary were erased, "caged", unable to get to their polling place, or couldn't overcome the ID requirements in their very "red" state.
And a mysterious (to statisticians), but recurring "red-shift" in the voting
results looks like it finished the job, and with an almost surgical precision in
the crucial swing states, thanks to "Black Box" [computer] voting and/or tabulation.
Meanwhile, a far far smaller number of folks with INTENT to vote for Trump were caged or erased from the rolls, or were unable to overcome ID requirements. Plus, the Trump voters were usually perfectly able to physically get to their polling place.
WHY?
Things were set-up to work exactly that way, well in advance of the election.
The GOP made sure of that.
Yet, Hillary still got 2.9 Million more popular votes nationwide.
In addition, in late October, the FBI chipped-in, perhaps even at the inside urging of GOP operatives, although that is unknowable at this time.
But in total, all 5 factors combined were devastating to the Clinton campaign.
Here's what happened:
1. Chris Kobach's now well-documented GOP Interstate Cross-Check: Millions
of Democratic Party voters, across more than
half the states, were caged (i.e. had their names separated, and
labeled not-eligible) and were unable to vote.
This is the biggest single factor, as you will see below.
2. Strategic Closing of Polling Places in Democratic Party demographic zones in
nearly all 'red" (i.e. GOP-controlled) states.
Also, termination of early-voting in most GOP-controlled states, which
many minorities and poor depend on, helped the GOP even more.
Thousands more Dem votes were snuffed this way.
These closings did not occur in GOP-heavy voting areas,
only in Democratic Party ones.
3. Strict ID requirements, precisely designed to affect/limit poor and minority
voters (read: Democratic Party voters) in (surprise!) GOP-controlled states,
blocking many thousands of (mostly Dem) votes in each state.
Democratic Party lawsuits stemmed some of the damage here,
but only some.
Thousands more votes per (GOP-controlled) state, were snuffed.
4. Comey's announcement on October 28, 11 days before the election, was
unquestionably a factor as well, as polls show.
Comey insisted later he stood by his quite speculative statement about
the Weiner emails, even though there turned out to be nothing there,
as Comey himself later admitted.
But real damage had been done. The polls changed against Hillary--
Not decisive by itself, but this one event didn't have to be, since
it is just one part of a "team" of factors combining their forces,
into a malevolent political "perfect storm". Virtually all of it, planned.
5. On Election Day----A sneaky, but persistent "red-shift" (i.e. rightward
trend) in final vote tallies away from (i.e. in direct opposition to) exit
poll results, especially in the key swing states.
Thousands of votes appear "flipped" during (computerized) tabulation,
away from the Democrat and towards the Republican, which is very
reminiscent of the Karl Rove era elections (2000/2004).
Red shifts are nice in fashion ...
But the "Red-Sift" in elections is a disaster for the concept of
Representative Government.
====== red-shift>=======>>>
Before we get into the documentation, I need to say that this Blog represents
a Progressive viewpoint, along the lines of Bernie Sanders/The New Deal/FDR, and his way of dealing with wealthy elites. The policies are clearly described in other posts.
I am very aware of the current bitter arguments between the left/Progressive side of the Democratic Party, and the mainstream DNC-"Centrist" side of the Party.
You know, the "Bernie" side is indignant about the shenanigans by DWS, Donna Brazile and others behind-the-scenes in the Party who "sabotaged" Bernie, and snubbed other Progressives at the Convention, etc.
Meanwhile, the "centrist" side of the Party accuses Bernie voters of voting 3rd party or even staying home, depriving Hillary of the necessary votes in key states.
Sure, this was probably a factor, to some small degree, but is way overrated, IMO.
Most Bernie-supporters I know voted for Hillary out of fear of Trump,
although were often unhappy about doing so. And I live in a state where Clinton was always way ahead, and folks could vote 3rd party without the danger of Trump taking the state. Still, most Bernie-voters I have communicated with went with Hillary.
Online, I read constantly about Bernie-supporters who were going to "hold their nose and vote" for HC because Trump was just too scary.
Extremely few Bernie-supporters actually ended-up voting for Trump, that is for damn sure.
Maybe some Bernie-ites in swing states stayed home (not many), and certainly some in swing states did vote 3rd party. But I firmly believe these numbers were definitely NOT what made the difference.
It is true, as some polls have shown, that some non-Progressive/working class voters who voted for Bernie in both "swing" and "red" states primaries did turn around and vote for Trump. They didn't vote for Hillary because her "centrism" is just not well-liked by working people, due to its strong corporate sympathies.
So, after losing Bernie as an alternative, these normally non-progressive voters decided to take a chance and vote for Trump, since it appeared to them at the time that Trump was a candidate of change, albeit chaotic change.
What does that show?
It shows the appeal and popularity of Bernie Sanders' Democratic Socialist policies (single-payer healthcare, free college, job creation, etc) is still strong with The People, as was The New Deal of the Democratic Party's glory years.
Hopefully, the Party will absorb this message in future campaigns
against the GOP. There are lots of votes and victories waiting there,
if the party truly wants to pursue them.
Centrists are correct, however, about the negative effect of the Comey announcement 11 days prior to the election, which did actually cause a drop in the polls for HC, while Trump rose. The Comey announcement could be seen legitimately as a one of the big factors, and absolutely did do some damage, although it was probably not critical by itself, IMO.
In addition, Centrists keep bringing up the Russia factor, which is extremely overrated, almost, but not quite, to the point of becoming an urban myth, IMO.
Russia flipped zero votes in tabulation systems. No evidence for that at all.
Email "hacks" (John Podesta's email account) by Russia, no matter what folks choose to believe, have not so far been verified by actual evidence.
Even so, the Podesta emails' disclosures were no real surprise to politically
sophisticated voters who know how dirty both parties' politics are, and are
way overrated as a source of vote-loss for Clinton.
The "Russian effect" did exist, but I am convinced after much research and cross-referencing that it had a much lesser effect than the 5 factors
discussed here, which, in total, basically STOLE the election
for the GOP.
The election wasn't stolen by a foreign power, but by
domestic operatives----All-American thieves who have done it before.
As far as claims of mass-numbers of online trolls "hired by Russia" are concerned ...
I myself have had a number of online encounters with these types over
the last year or so, including some nasty "head-butts" with what I cane to
strongly suspect were some of those hired Russian/Macedonian
"professional trolls" mean't to twist peoples' minds
and affect the election.
Yeah, they were around, and still are, BTW, as nasty as ever.
BUT ...
Those A-holes changed very few minds, I can assure you.
Not. A. Factor.
I am utterly convinced,
it was those 5 big factors listed above that were the difference.
It just becomes more and more obvious the more you research it.
The 5 factors' combined effect was overwhelming.
The Shocking Truth:
America did not actually intend to reject Hillary Clinton in November,
as crazy as that may sound to some folks now.
A large number of her votes got effectively snuffed by the combination of GOP vote-erasure, geographical/demographic manipulations, and vote-caging.
And then, ofcourse, there was Comey.
So ... as far as blame for the election loss is concerned ...
Both sides (Progressives and Centrists) need to back-off and CHILL.
Because BOTH SIDES ARE WRONG.
The election was rigged and stolen, but BY THE GOP, or operatives
in support of the GOP and/or Conservative interests.
You want to hate on somebody, hate on them.
Hey, they're good at it. That's what they do. Nothing new here.
They stole 2000 and 2004 as well. No kidding.
Plus, just for another piece of the election-fraud picture, please note
the famous GOP extreme-gerrymandering since 2010, which
gives them a built-in advantage in The House Of Representatives.
GOP GERRYMANDERING PLAN IS DESTROYING OUR DEMOCRACY
All cut from the same cloth, of fraud.
Again, that's what the GOP does.
But those, although related, are whole other stories.
However, IMO, the GOP did steal the Presidency in 2016, and may well be
able to do it again in the future.
Once again, with links and detail,
Here's how:
#1. Interstate Cross-Check, reported on brilliantly by Greg Palast, which
basically, scrubs voters off "eligible" lists for people having matching
names in multiple states with criminals in other states.
In other words, if someone with the same name as you in another state
committed some crime, YOU lose your right to vote in your state (if it is
GOP-controlled). All names were computer-program verified to be
Democratic Party demographics by address, ethnicity and even
by such details as the magazines and periodicals they subscribe to.
Now that is precision.
Millions of votes were lost over a range of
(always GOP-controlled) states.
LINKS:
The GOP's Stealth War Against Voters - Greg Palast
Over 2-Million Voters on Caging List - Greg Palast
#2. The closing of polling places undoubtedly took out thousands more Dem
votes in more than half the states.
868 POLLING PLACES CLOSED BY GOP FOR 2016 ELECTION
Mass poll closures in battleground states create potential for Election Day chaos
REPORTS ON VOTING PROBLEMS AROUND US, INCLUDING POLL CLOSURES, NOV, 2016
Polling places become battleground in US voting rights fight - Reuters
This process was especially blatant in Arizona, where long lines resulted from
so many polling places being closed.
"State Rep. Reginald Bolding, a Democrat and the only black member of the Legislature,
said he visited four county polling places and said what he saw "was disheartening."
"You saw individuals who were seniors, handicapped, you also saw individuals who
had to spend their entire workday waiting in line to cast a vote," Bolding said.
"And this was directly due to the county recorder's negligence in cutting the
polling locations in Maricopa County from 200 to 60 locations."
He said while he didn't suspect the efforts were intended to suppress turnout,
combined with cuts in election funding and new laws passed by the GOP-controlled
Legislature, he sees a pattern.
"When you start to put all of these different voter-suppression mechanisms in a line,
it's hard to believe that this is all coincidental," Bolding said.
Long Voting Lines in Phoenix
And the problem continues TODAY ...
91,000 voters left off voter rolls in Maricopa County Alone in 2017
#3. Ultra-strict, picky ID Card requirements in, where else---GOP-controlled
states, eliminated thousands more votes.
(sample card)
In some states, court challenges may have moderated some effect of this policy, to some degree,
but not in most states ...
Again last September, the GOP admitted the importance of the Voter ID laws ----
Also, from last Spring...
Also, from back in 2012, you may remember this ...
General Info
How voter ID laws helped Donald Trump win the presidency
#4. The Comey Effect.
"...the big change does coincide well with the release of the Comey letter [on Oct.28th]. Opinion swung toward Trump by 4 percentage points, and about half of this was a lasting change. This was larger than the victory margin in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida, and Wisconsin. Many factors went into this year’s Presidental race, but Comey’s letter appears to have been a critical factor in the home stretch."
PRINCETON ELECTION CONSORTIUM--THE COMEY EFFECT
THE COMEY LETTER PROBABLY COST HILLARY THE ELECTION
Before the election, even Fox News certainly thought Comey's announcement
had an effect ...
New poll: 34 percent 'less likely' to vote for Clinton after new email revelations
Even though Clinton won big in CA, she may actually have still lost a few
votes there due to Comey's Letter ----
CLINTON'S LEAD DROPS IN CALIFORNIA IN THE DAYS AFTER COMEY ANNOUNCEMENT
Presidential race tightens, Hillary Clinton’s support falls after FBI reopens email probe
Polls Show Clinton Support Slipped After FBI Letter (Bloomberg)
#5. The mysterious election day "Red-Shift" (cue creepy sci-Fi music),
especially in swing states.
Please note: The way exit polls work (around the entire world),
is this ---- Generally, any variance between actual votes counted from
exit polls that is over 1%, is a red flag in a close race and is
calling out for investigation.
BTW, landslide wins, for either candidate in
a state, may have larger shifts and it is not considered a factor.
Still, it's odd that Trump gained the most votes (by %) in a state he lost by a
whopping 24%, but a GOP-controlled state (NJ) with an eager-to-please
Buddy (Gov Christie), and a long-storied history of political shenanigans.
But no worry, just a curiosity.
In the chart below, note the nifty, almost-perfectly-reversed victory
margins for Trump in those key swing states.
For students of the 2004 Election, this is like deja vu.
But 2004 is another story. Just rest assured, "red shifts"
have appeared before. A lot.
Repeatedly, Trump won in those swing states by almost the same
margins he was predicted by polls to lose.
BTW, please note that "blue shifts" in close races basically
never happen. Not in any US election, ever.
Seriously. This blank spot "anomaly" drives statisticians crazy.
The disturbingly-consistent "Red-Sift" is reported on
very soberly, here:
VIDEO:
2016 VOTE RESULTS IN KANSAS SHOW MANIPULATION,
ACCORDING TO UNIVERSITY STATISTICIAN ----
LINKS:
US ELECTIONS "RED-SHIFT" FROM 1988-
2012
2012 ARTICLE BY LONGTIME
ELECTION EXPERT WHO GIVES
BACKGROUND HISTORY ON
THE "RED-SHIFT"
BRAD FRIEDMAN AND JONATHAN SIMON ON THE "RED SHIFT" IN 2016
DAILY KOS ON THE "RED-SHIFT" --
IT'S REAL
But back to 2016 ...
Surgical precision?
"Of the more than 120 million votes cast in the 2016 election, 107,000 votes in three states [Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania] effectively decided the election."
Myths About Clinton’s Defeat in Election 2016 Debunked
Millions of UN-Counted Votes
in 2016
Links:
EXIT POLLS CAST DOUBT ON 2016 ELECTION RESULTS
RED SHIFTS found in 2016 Presidential race & in nearly every Senate race in states with exit polls
Something Stinks When Exit Polls and Official Counts Don't Match
MARK CRISPIN MILLER ASKS: WHERE ARE OUR VOTES? WAKE UP!
(More recently) FROM SEPTEMBER, 2017 -- THOUSANDS OF WISCONSIN VOTERS DETERRED FROM VOTING IN 2016 ELECTION
===========>>==========>>
Plus, we knew this ominous truth well before the election:
GOP To Control Voting Process In 2016 Swing States
America doesn't need to trust it's voting systems,
it needs to verify them.
Here's some more:
New Voting Restrictions in Place for 2016 Presidential Election
Did the Republican War on Voting Rights Help Trump Win?
The GOP’s Attack on Voting Rights Was the Most Under-Covered Story of 2016
Yes--US elections can be stolen!
Current GOP claims of "voter fraud" is a cover for a new Trump/GOP effort to erase even more votes in future elections.
Did Trump win, or “win”? And what about those “winning” Senate races? Exit polls show a “suspicious pattern”
A disturbing question:
Why did Hillary Clinton NOT want a recount
in Michigan, a key swing state?
Alert:
Please be aware that all of the above factors are still in play for upcoming elections.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)