Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Election Rigging
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(1)
Message 16 of 31 (796321)
12-28-2016 8:03 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Percy
12-28-2016 7:26 AM


Re: Riggers
Perhaps Douglas Adams was inspired by that observation. The position of Galactic President to which Zaphod Beeblebrox had been elected was full of publicity and celebrity, but utterly devoid of any actual power, since (entirely from memory) who would be so stupid as to give that much power to anybody who actually wanted it?
Rather, all such power resided in a dottering old man living all alone on a planet with his many cats. Every once in a while a spaceship would land and some nice person would ask him to sign some papers. He never had any idea what those papers said nor the enormous power he wielded.
Sorry, my edition of the original radio play scripts is at work, unavailable to me until the next year.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Percy, posted 12-28-2016 7:26 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Modulous, posted 12-28-2016 8:26 PM dwise1 has not replied
 Message 19 by ringo, posted 12-29-2016 10:42 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 17 of 31 (796328)
12-28-2016 8:26 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by dwise1
12-28-2016 8:03 PM


Re: Riggers
quote:
It is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by dwise1, posted 12-28-2016 8:03 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 18 of 31 (796352)
12-29-2016 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Percy
12-28-2016 4:52 PM


Re: Let's start with the basics.
Really? You trust the alt-media to report on this?
Certainly. The MSM have been lying throughout the election period, while the independent media have called it pretty well.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Percy, posted 12-28-2016 4:52 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 19 of 31 (796367)
12-29-2016 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by dwise1
12-28-2016 8:03 PM


Re: Riggers
DWise1 writes:
Rather, all such power resided in a dottering old man living all alone on a planet with his many cats. Every once in a while a spaceship would land and some nice person would ask him to sign some papers. He never had any idea what those papers said nor the enormous power he wielded.
In that case, the one who actually had the power was not the one who signed the papers but the one who wrote them. You can bet it was somebody who wanted the job.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by dwise1, posted 12-28-2016 8:03 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 20 of 31 (796370)
12-29-2016 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by frako
12-28-2016 11:14 AM


Re: Riggers
frako writes:
... those who want power really should not have it.
That's a cute saying but how would it work in reality?
Suppose I'm selected to be president of the United States. They drag me kicking and screaming into the White House. What reason is there for me to actually DO anything?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by frako, posted 12-28-2016 11:14 AM frako has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Modulous, posted 12-29-2016 12:56 PM ringo has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 21 of 31 (796394)
12-29-2016 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by ringo
12-29-2016 10:46 AM


Re: Riggers
What reason is there for me to actually DO anything?
You'd be the President. There's no need for you to do anything. Naturally, by not doing anything Congress would need, what is it, a 2/3 majority to get anything past your refusal to sign it into law?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by ringo, posted 12-29-2016 10:46 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by NoNukes, posted 12-29-2016 3:42 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied
 Message 26 by ringo, posted 12-30-2016 10:42 AM Modulous has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 31 (796404)
12-29-2016 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Modulous
12-29-2016 12:56 PM


Re: Riggers
Naturally, by not doing anything Congress would need, what is it, a 2/3 majority to get anything past your refusal to sign it into law?
If the president allows the 10 day period to expire and Congress is in session at the end of the ten days, then the bill becomes law without the president's signature. If Congress is not in session, then a 'pocket veto' happens and the bill does not become law. Obviously in that scenario, Congress cannot vote.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson
Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith
Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Modulous, posted 12-29-2016 12:56 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


(2)
Message 23 of 31 (796411)
12-29-2016 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by RAZD
12-28-2016 4:35 PM


Re: Let's start with the basics.
hi RAZD,
Good posts.
Using the word conspiracy in this thread is aggravating. I had the same disagreement with Straggler many years ago. Businesses do specific things to make money. This IS what corporations do, it's not a conspiracy."
Also, people in power want to stay in power or gain more power. There's no conspiracy in this either. Who doesn't know this? Is it considered a 'conspiracy' for humans to breath air?
And, if I may add to your list, here's info from my two previous posts in May, 2009. I updated them slightly, but think the info they contain is still relative:
From my Message 114:
quote:
ELECTION FIASCO
ELECTION FRAUD/SUPPRESSION. Surely you heard about American "irregularities" such as unclear butterfly ballots, dangling chads, insufficient voting booths for democratic precincts, proprietary programmed electronic voting machines with no papertrail, pushpull polls, police intimidation at the voting booths, and the purging of thousands of legal names that were illegally put on a convict-no-right-to-vote list, etc. As the supposed democracy-beacon to the world, America's voting procedures is in actuality like a banana republic. The dirty tricks of the two major parties is completely unethical and often illegal.
SYSTEMATIC VOTER DISENFRANCHISING. About HALF of all American eligible voters don’t vote. They are convinced no matter what they do, nothing will matter. Individually, perhaps they are right. After 9/11, the Bush administration urged the population to go about their business and continue to shop. Big daddy Bush and his administration will take care of the bad boogey men. Best not to look or care at what Bush will be doing to keep your family safe. Afterall, government business should not concern the population, should it?
MOST IMPORTANTLY, PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES ARE A SCAM . . .
The presidential debates not only exclude legitimate third-party candidates, but are structured in a way to inhibit meaningful engagement between the candidates over the major issues of the presidential race.
the debates are not publicly-funded events. Like the Olympics, they are sponsored by MAJOR CORPORATIONS
They are sponsored by MAJOR CORPORATIONS! The bi-partisan committee, The Commission on Presidential Debates, Commission on Presidential Debates decides how long, where, how many, what questions will be asked, what questions will NOT be asked, and whether or not to exclude other candidates based on made-up criteria. It reduces the election process to a TV game show. It's a complete sham. And just one more way big-business, corporate media, and the government can successfully control voter's decisions.
Eureka Street
Commission on Presidential Debates - Wikipedia
_______________________________________________________
From my Message 113. General Electric and Westinghouse makes war components. Gee, how did you think their news shows slanted the news about the middle east conflicts? Again, maximizing gross profits is not a conspiracy.
The post below is eight years old, so some of it is dated. Some businesses have been sold/bought, but the point should be clear, just a handful of corporations control 90% of everything Americans see, hear, and consider important. Democracy cannot be supported by such limited array of biased information. It partly explains the recent Trump victory. And it's not entirely the fault of amerikans that they are very ignorant. Nobody can corroborate 100% of everything they read/see/hear? Especially those who are hurting economically, working three jobs, while raising a family. It would be easy for a rural voter to just accept the simplistic jingoism of "Make Amerika Great again."
There’s a more updated list here (These 6 Corporations Control 90% of the Media in America) showing only six corporations in 2012 owning 90% of media in america (I would like to post the informational graphics but it is too long for the forum. Maybe one of the admins can assist?).
quote:
CORPORATE MEDIA in 2009
GENERAL ELECTRIC owns NBC Network News: The Today Show, Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, Meet the Press, Dateline NBC, NBC News at Sunrise.
WESTINGHOUSE owns CBS Network News: 60 minutes, 48 hours, CBS Evening News with Dan Rather, CBS Morning News, Up to the Minute.
DISNEY owns ABC Network News: Prime Time Live, Nightline, 20/20, Good Morning America, ESPN, Lifetime Television, others
TIME-WARNER TBS owns America Online (AOL), CNN, HBO, Cinemax, TBS Superstation, Turner Network Television, Turner Classic Movies, Warner Brothers Television, Cartoon Network.
NEWS CORPORATION LTD. / FOX NETWORKS owns Fox International: extensive worldwide cable and satellite networks include British Sky Broadcasting (40%); VOX, Germany (49.9%); Canal Fox, Latin America; FOXTEL, Australia (50%); STAR TV, Asia; IskyB, India; Bahasa Programming Ltd., Indonesia (50%); and NEWS Broadcasting
Who owns CNN? or MSNBC? ABC? : LA IMC
Lastly, maybe I missed it, but voting day on Tuesdays is another suppression tactic.
I wish the average amerikan would consider ALL these tactics, then ask themselves why the people in power, the 1%ers, design it this way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by RAZD, posted 12-28-2016 4:35 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Modulous, posted 12-29-2016 8:02 PM dronestar has replied
 Message 25 by RAZD, posted 12-30-2016 10:11 AM dronestar has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


(1)
Message 24 of 31 (796422)
12-29-2016 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by dronestar
12-29-2016 5:16 PM


conspire
Businesses do specific things to make money. This IS what corporations do, it's not a conspiracy."
Unless of course, those specific things are planned amongst themselves, in secret, to break the law or at least moral norms. Such as price fixing, for example.
Also, people in power want to stay in power or gain more power. There's no conspiracy in this either. Who doesn't know this? Is it considered a 'conspiracy' for humans to breath air?
It's not the general, it's the specific. Are they hatching plans with one another to avoid legal ramifications of criminal or quasi-criminal acts? If so, that's a conspiracy. Even if we know they are 'up to something dodgy' the specific agreements and deals are conspiracies.
I'm not sure if this was an intentional joke, by the way. But breathing air is respiring. Respiring together as one is con-spiring. Hence the word.
Again, maximizing gross profits is not a conspiracy.
Unless they make group plans amongst one another that are hatched in secret and are harmful to society.
I wish the average amerikan would consider ALL these tactics, then ask themselves why the people in power, the 1%ers, design it this way.
It's almost as if they are working together, behind closed doors, to develop tactics to inhibit the average American from such considerations....almost like they were conspiring.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by dronestar, posted 12-29-2016 5:16 PM dronestar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by dronestar, posted 12-30-2016 12:24 PM Modulous has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(2)
Message 25 of 31 (796462)
12-30-2016 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by dronestar
12-29-2016 5:16 PM


media and the massage
Also, people in power want to stay in power or gain more power. There's no conspiracy in this either. Who doesn't know this? Is it considered a 'conspiracy' for humans to breath air?
They have the means (hackable vote recording and tabulating machines, etc), they have the motive (retain or gain more power, money) and they have the opportunity (parties in charge of the machines).
And, if I may add to your list, here's info from my two previous posts in May, 2009. I updated them slightly, but think the info they contain is still relative:
And I think we can add here Percy's post Message 806 from The 2016 United States Presidential Election thread:
From today's New York Times: Obama Strikes Back at Russia for Election Hacking
The Obama administration ejected 35 Russian diplomats it claims were spying and sanctioned Russian's two foremost intelligence agencies. I don't think this solves anything, and I expect Russia will respond with a roughly equivalent number of ejections and sanctions against the US.
The New York Times today also reran their December 13th story on the how of the Russian hacking: The Perfect Weapon: How Russian Cyberpower Invaded the U.S.
There are three main reasons Trump will be president, and if only two of them had happened the outcome would have been different. But the Democrats ran a weak candidate, the Russian hacking caused a weekly flood of leaks of DNC and Clinton campaign emails, and the FBI director revived the Clinton email server issue in the form of two letters to Congress just a week before the election, the second just two days before election day. It seems unlikely that the Russian hacking swung the election by itself.
AbE: Here's some irony from the first link:
quote:
A more detailed report on the intelligence, ordered by President Obama, will be published in the next three weeks, though much of the detail especially evidence collected from implants in Russian computer systems, tapped conversations and spies is expected to remain classified.
Got that? Some of the important evidence of Russian hacking was gathered through the hacking of Russian computers by the US. But hey, we're the victims here.
Now I've found it rather humorous to hear people complaining about the Russian hacking affecting the results, while they ignore the hacking done by both parties to affect the results. That's my irony for the day.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by dronestar, posted 12-29-2016 5:16 PM dronestar has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 26 of 31 (796466)
12-30-2016 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Modulous
12-29-2016 12:56 PM


Re: Riggers
Modulous writes:
ringo writes:
What reason is there for me to actually DO anything?
You'd be the President. There's no need for you to do anything. Naturally, by not doing anything Congress would need, what is it, a 2/3 majority to get anything past your refusal to sign it into law?
Surely we're not talking about just the President. If the Congress was selected by lottery, what reason is there for them to do anything?
It may be true that people who "want power" shouldn't have it but it doesn't follow that people who don't want power should have it.
Instead of fussing about who has power, maybe we should be thinking about changing the nature of "power".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Modulous, posted 12-29-2016 12:56 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Modulous, posted 12-30-2016 3:18 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 27 of 31 (796482)
12-30-2016 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Modulous
12-29-2016 8:02 PM


Re: conspire
Mod writes:
It's not the general, it's the specific.
Mod writes:
It's almost as if they are working together, behind closed doors, to develop tactics to inhibit the average American from such considerations....almost like they were conspiring.
Hi Mod,
Hmmm, . . . I don’t know. Maybe you are being overly pendantic? Or maybe I am misunderstanding.
I can agree with you that the amerikan public may not know about specifics, like blacks were (are) to be considered 3/5 a person, or the quantity, ten million native americans have been annihilated, but do you really believe that amerikans have not gotten the general gist that the elites who are in charge rig the system for themselves?
The doors, they may be closed doors, but are you really arguing that they are absolutely opaque? That after two hundred years of systematic designs of oppression, you are arguing that it would be understandable that amerikans haven't figured this stuff out?
Consider amerika’s founding fathers (please). James Madison said that government should "protect the minority of the opulent against the majority." They passed laws that prevented woman, minorities, and the landless from voting. These laws were kind of public for a long time. Not very secretive. How does knowing the specifics make a difference? Please be, . . . errrm, . . . specific.
Mod writes:
Are they hatching plans with one another to avoid legal ramifications of criminal or quasi-criminal acts? Even if we know they are 'up to something dodgy'
Slavery is just a little bit ‘dodgy’? Native american annihilation is just a little bit ‘dodgy’?
You are arguing americans don’t know about slavery? You are arguing americans don’t know about the slaughter of native americans?
Things have been in plain site, for a very very long time. I should think it shouldn't take a huge leap of imagination to believe amerika could do something a little less evil, like vote-rigging . . .
There has been a economic class war since america was founded. Not really a top secret encrypted code. I recently read the top 100 CEOs of american business have as much wealth as the bottom 41% of americans. This is a secret?
I just posted above about only a handful of american CORPORATE media have total control of information in the US. This is a secret?
I believe election-rigging is as amerikan as apple pie. Both Reps/Dems sides do it, and the voters literally support it.
Mod, can you explain what difference general versus specifics make?
Edited by dronestar, : clarity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Modulous, posted 12-29-2016 8:02 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Modulous, posted 12-30-2016 1:27 PM dronestar has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 28 of 31 (796492)
12-30-2016 1:27 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by dronestar
12-30-2016 12:24 PM


Re: conspire
I can agree with you that the amerikan public may not know about specifics...but do you really believe that amerikans have not gotten the general gist that the elites who are in charge rig the system for themselves?
Right they know in general dodgy things are happening, but they are blind to the specifics, not just the stuff you mentioned because that's general too, and I'm surprised Americans don't know about them if that's the case.
The doors, they may be closed doors, but are you really arguing that they are absolutely opaque? That after two hundred years of systematic designs of oppression, you are arguing that it would be understandable that amerikans haven't figured this stuff out?
On the contrary, I agreed they do. But the specifics are the actual secret deals being made which benefit some, while harming many. Those are conspiracies by any reasonable definition.
Consider amerika’s founding fathers (please). James Madison said that government should "protect the minority of the opulent against the majority." They passed laws that prevented woman, minorities, and the landless from voting. These laws were kind of public for a long time. Not very secretive. How does knowing the specifics make a difference? Please be, . . . errrm, . . . specific.
quote:
conspiracy
kənˈspɪrəsi/
noun
noun: conspiracy; plural noun: conspiracies
a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.
A conspiracy could be open I suppose, but your primary angle was 'but people know dodgy things are going on so its not a conspiracy. The founding fathers probably conspired to get those laws passed, but the laws are not themselves conspiracies.
Slavery is just a little bit ‘dodgy’? Native american annihilation is just a little bit ‘dodgy’?
Don't be silly.
You are arguing americans don’t know about slavery?
No. But I'm not arguing that slavery is a conspiracy. There are people today who are conspiring to trade slaves, however.
Things have been in plain site, for a very very long time. I should think it shouldn't take a huge leap of imagination to believe amerika could do something a little less evil, like vote-rigging
The conspiracies would be the specific plans, not the general effect.
I just posted above about only a handful of american CORPORATE media have total control of information in the US. This is a secret?
No, and nor is it a conspiracy. But when they get together to conspire to fix prices, that is. Even though we know price fixing happens.
People are found guilty of conspiring to commit all manner of crimes we know actually do happen. It's not the crime that makes it a conspiracy its a specific plan by specific people to carry out those crimes that are the conspiracies.
Mod, can you explain what difference general versus specifics make?
Murder is killing someone. Murder is general. Sometimes more than one person plans to kill someone. A specific plan between two or more people to kill someone would be a conspiracy to commit murder.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by dronestar, posted 12-30-2016 12:24 PM dronestar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by dronestar, posted 12-30-2016 2:03 PM Modulous has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 29 of 31 (796496)
12-30-2016 2:03 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Modulous
12-30-2016 1:27 PM


Re: conspire
Mod writes:
conspiracy
kənˈspɪrəsi/
noun
noun: conspiracy; plural noun: conspiracies
a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.
Mod writes:
Surely we can understand dronester's meaning and not worry about the awkwardness of language and making our lives more difficult by insisting on pedantry rather than trying to understand one another.
_______________________________________________________
Mod writes:
The conspiracies would be the specific plans, not the general effect.
I already stated, "I can agree with you that the amerikan public may not know about specifics."
___________________________________________________
Drone writes:
Mod, can you explain what difference general versus specifics make?
Mod writes:
Murder is killing someone. Murder is general. Sometimes more than one person plans to kill someone. A specific plan between two or more people to kill someone would be a conspiracy to commit murder.
( Okay, my fault, I should have been more specific with my question)
It seems you're arguing a difference with the same results, eh? The result for both of your examples above is a person is murdered, right?
So let me re-ask: Mod, can you explain the different results between general effects versus specific plans regarding election rigging?
Or is the result for both the same as your example above, . . . absolutely the same?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Modulous, posted 12-30-2016 1:27 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Modulous, posted 12-30-2016 2:50 PM dronestar has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 30 of 31 (796500)
12-30-2016 2:50 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by dronestar
12-30-2016 2:03 PM


Re: conspire
I already stated, "I can agree with you that the amerikan public may not know about specifics."
That wasn't the disagreement. The disagreement was whether the specific plans between groups of people made in secret constitute conspiracies.
The result for both of your examples above is a person is murdered, right?
Well...no, conspiracies can be thwarted, or reconsidered, or bottled out of. Conspiracies are the plans, not the actions.
So let me re-ask: Mod, can you explain the different results between general effects versus specific plans regarding election rigging?
Election rigging is rigging an election.
Making a plan with other people to rig an election is a conspiracy.
Or is the result for both the same as your example above, . . . absolutely the same?
No, one is an act, the other is a plan to act made by a group of people, usually in secret.
That people commit the act, is not a conspiracy.
The plans people come up with to act as a team to commit the act, are conspiracies.
So no, they aren't the same. One is a general crime, the other is a particular plan by more than one person to commit a crime.
It's the difference between planning to go to the cinema with your friends, and actually going to the cinema with your friends. They are quite different things.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by dronestar, posted 12-30-2016 2:03 PM dronestar has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024