Last edited:
US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians
- Thread starter SeniorFuckFace
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2019
I have to ask, did the raid actually make a difference for say, the voters participating in the Wisconsin governor Republican primary?
God of Nothing
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2016
i also like how it did away with his legacy in the span of several seconds
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2018
Got to remember that Obama was temporarily FORCED out after Trump won by the Clintons.
The plan, as Obama saw it, was that once his two terms end and Hillary failed to get elected, was that the Clintons would fade away as graceful losers and retire from politics and the public life. Obama would take the Iron Throne of the DNC and basically be King Nigger the Kingmaker running the DNC and leading the charge against Trump and controlling the DNC party as a whole.
Hillary and Bill however, said "fuck no!" to this as Hillary was still steaming mad and threatening a third run as President. They told Obama to get his darkie ass out of Washington (Obama made a big deal about staying in Washington after leaving the White House to "lead the resistance") and resumed running shit from the shadows.
Obama pouted and went on a lengthy island vacation in the Pacific and it wasn't until Charlottesville that Biden (estranged from Obama after Obama told him to STFU and let Hillary skip ahead of him to run in 2016 as the nominee) approached him to back Biden in 2020 by shaming him over picking a loser (Hillary) and guilting him over how something like Charlottesville wouldn't have happened if he had backed Biden and helped him get the nomination.
With that, Obama was back in the game and basically outmaneuvered Hillary to secure the nomination for Biden and exile the Clintons. Obama has his henchmen around Biden but has kept enough distance to give him levels of plausible deniability.
- Joined
- May 6, 2019
Too close together to really move the needle on the primary. The general however....
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2018
I think its pretty obvious that while the Democrats had a very reliable vote rigging system at one point, it was a very delicate system that required a lot of factors all aligning to work.
1) ZERO SCRUTINY: As long as nobody was looking for the fraud to happen, it slipped easily under the radar so by the time the winner was called, it was too late to spot the damage and call it out. Now with the modern amenities of the internet organization and video it is much harder to hide. Hell just sticking Boomers with smartphones near drop boxes cut the legs out from under their efforts in Arizona! Putting well-trained and motivated legal spotters in voting and counting centers makes it much more difficult.
2) LOW INTENSITY/FREQUENCY: The other way they kept things going was by nudging a few thousand votes here or there in select races, which makes it harder to spot. When the margins increase because of opponent turnout, they end up having to scramble and are unable to make their attempt anything except obvious. (See 2020) This puts them in a rock and a hard place - abandon the rig or be so blatant that they get caught, the entire risk calculation skews.
3) MANUFACTURED CONSENT: By manipulating polls and media, the Democrats could portray even a popular candidate as being a surefire winner/loser, and thus make their rigging seems more 'reasonable' through the centralized media. They could also smother complaints post election. Now there is a fractured media landscape and worldwide, live exposure on EVERYTHING, which makes their game much more difficult to play.
4) GROUND TROOPS: Rigging was always about low level ground troops, election secretaries, poll workers, vote counters, etc - and traditionally the more moneyed, activist/student classes of the liberals had more time and inclination to hold those roles. Without them, they can't rig jack shit - and it has to be a total blanket in the office because any one person could potentially blow the lid off the rigging. With Republicans and other 'rightist' people muscling in, it makes rigging much more risky and difficult to pull off.
5) INSECURE SYSTEMS: Rigging depends on an insecure election system that is prone to exploitation by design or incompetence, period. The ramshackle defenses allow last minute ballot dumps, unlogged vote alterations, big pools of 'potential' voters', the list of attack profiles is lengthy and the riggers had to use every last one to put in the fix. Now many states are moving to reform and secure their systems - and even weak security upgrades have set the Democrats screaming in terror because their attack patterns are that delicate.
All of these recent developments throwing those factors into disarray are definitely a good start, but two things must be kept in mind. First, election security in law must be advocated and fought for until we have elections that are secure in the legal, policy, and physical sense - the laws, processes, and equipment must be robust, accurate, and transparently reliable. Perhaps more importantly is the administrative security, the actions taken to secure and keep secure our elector processes. Virginia and Arizona would have been rigged in a heartbeat if money, time, and manpower wasn't put into making it secure. Countless hours were spent training, planning, and preparing to safeguard the process from start to finish. Organizing volunteers for drop box watching, training poll observers, retaining lawyers in anticipation of legal challenges, informing the party members, the list goes on and on - stopping the steal can be done, but it takes constant effort and attention.
As the Founders said: "The cost of liberty is eternal vigilance."
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2019
Individualism Incarnate
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2019
In Memoriam
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2019
National school board association, wasn’t it?
Netizennameless
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2021
nigger, is your argument seriously that Texas doesn't have major industries like seasonal agriculture that need cheap labor? Texas, the 2nd largest state in the US, doesn't have a need for cheap, unskilled labor like restaurant workers and day laborers?
Not to speak about the rest of your post, but this part is comically ignorant to the reality of Texas.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2022
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 6, 2019
I said as much, not "not at all"
California alone makes a third of the entire countries vegetables and two-thirds of the entire countries fruits and nuts. The -closest- Texas gets to that is cotton at about a fourth of the nations usage... and that is done mostly with heavy machinery in the modern era. Its not even vaguely comparable and just shows you are actually ignorant of the sheer size of California's agriculture.
Weppers
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2018
A much larger percentage of Texas' agriculture is shit you can pick with a machine instead of a Mexican.
- Joined
- May 6, 2019
As in, all of them. The number of crops which must be hand-picked is very, very low and are either very speciality crops (Saffron) or... fruits. Like oranges.
All of Texas' agricultural items are machine harvestable.
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2016
- Joined
- May 6, 2019
Every time I see a picture of this... thing, I feel myself lurch a little more to the right.
Netizennameless
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2021
A ton of illegal immigrants in Texas work in construction, by far the largest industry they work in. Followed by the service/restaurant industry.
My original point was that illegals do a ton of shit other that picking fruit and nuts, and it's ridiculous to think Republicans in Texas somehow benefit less from illegal labor than California does. It's ignorant of the reality on the ground.
@Gehenna my argument wasn't that Texas has more immigrants, or makes more money off of them than California. It's that Republican business owners in Texas benefit as much as anyone in California does from illegal immigration.
Last edited:
namelesstacotruck
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2020
Im convinced that if you pick just a small few, you could convince the others to side with you if they think they get pieces of that agencies portfolio. If they actually consume it you may make things worse though.
CIA would LOVE to own domestic intel and counter intelligence. (You really dont want to give them that btw) and you might be able to pit DEA and ATF against each other by declaring your merging them.
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2021
Quick spam more photos so we can get Gehenna to go mech-Hitler and then we can watch his old grumpy nigger ass beat the shit out of commies on the street with a cane.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2019
Let me rephrase the opinion for him. The Pros and Cons of Illegal Immigration have been recalculated recently, and the profits of Illegal Immigration for the GOP political class has started to become worth less than the political liability coming from both inside and outside the party.
Does that still mean we have further to go to purge the political hacks? Yes. But the tide is turning on this issue.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2019
Not to toot Arizona's horn, but there is lots of agriculture here. Cotton, for one (one of Arizona's 5 C's (Cotton, Copper, Cattle, Citrus, and Climate). Cotton is pretty much automated. Lot's of AZ Kandy melons, all requiring a huge migrant labor force because it's strictly manual labor, sorghum, winter wheat, which are also automated, and surprisingly enough, flowers. Again, manual labor. Citrus used to be one of AZ's 5 C's, but the land became too valuable and got gobbled up into sub-divisions of custom homes and gated posh communities.
So we're really down to a couple of C's at best -- Copper and Climate. Cattle went away awhile ago as Texas took those reigns.
Still, what agriculture remains relies on Mexican labor by and large. The real coming question is if we'll continue to have water for agriculture, not currently as bad as, but running closely behind Cali. All the migrant labor in the world can't pick crops that haven't been grown.
- Status