NP - Reductio ad absurdum on FB

[Mark Thibodeau]

Every one since 2000 I mean - which saw the beginning of wide-spread
use of paper-free top secret proprietary "private" software-using,
Republican owned and operated touch-screen electronic voting machines.

J.

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Mark Thibodeau <jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thing is? She fucking won.
>
> Popular vote, electoral vote, she won them all.
>
> The PROBLEM is that the paperless voting machines didn't reflect that fact.
>
> Evidence of a stolen election
> http://www.gregpalast.com/election-stolen-heres/
>
> Yet more evidence of a stolen election
> http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/can-we-count-election-results-exit-poll-discrepancies-and-voter-suppression-are
>
> And yet even more evidence of a stolen election
> https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/
>
> That last one is particularly good if you dig into the materials about
> 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2010 and 2014 (all stolen) as well as 2008 and
> 2012 (attempted steals).
>
> Exit polling raw data is the gold standard for determining if an
> election is rigged. By that standard, every federal election, both
> presidential and mid-term, has been rigged.
>
> J.
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:46 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>> A FB sage (& P-lister) recently reasoned that Hillary's loss proved that she
>> was the "wrong candidate" for this election, presumably as a lesson to be
>> learned for the future.  I challenged that we had the "wrong electorate,"
>> willing to vote for a clearly visible moral monster over a qualified and
>> rational human being.  His counter was that her loss was proof of his
>> thesis: She lost, therefore she was the wrong candidate.
>>
>> Beneath his logic was a belief that Trump voters first need to be
>> understood, and not destained.  Understanding is always useful, but it
>> doesn't follow that such understanding will become mutual. Nor should it
>> imply that opposition to those assholes should become less vehement.
>> Understanding a rapist doesn't make him sympathetic.
>>
>> Hillary's loss doesn't make her the wrong candidate. It only means she lost.
>> By absurd logic she only became the wrong candidate at the moment of her
>> loss.  Before that we all knew she was winning.  And this absurd logic is
>> accepted as the premise for too much post-loss analysis.  Trumps voters are
>> a mix of deplorables, nihilists, racists, opportunists, religionists, and a
>> list of other "wrong" electorate qualities.  Our country is less noble than
>> many of us thought.
>>
>> Lesson learned?
>> David Morris
>>
>>
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l