Ray9
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2016
- 2,707
- 4,467
- 1,970
The behavior of some democrats in the wake of this presidential election is something that should be a lesson for all of us. They’re hopping mad as they rant about recounts.The high dudgeon is infused with bizarre accusations that the Russians may have tampered with their vote. Reasonable citizens are a little taken aback as they watch these people fly into an indignant rage like a pro football coach who launches a red challenge flag onto the field of play. You see they wanted to win so badly and the disappointing result was so incomprehensible that reality is unacceptable-so in effect they’re challenging reality with fantasy.
There isn’t a shred of evidence that any foreign entity interfered with the mechanics of any part of the voting process. Some IT experts have stated that it’s theoretically possible for this to happen but no trace of foul play has been seen and there is certainly no smoking gun. In fact no hacking is possible as the machines are sequestered from the internet so any contaminated software would have to be physically loaded by a human right in front of voting officials. But grasping at straws does not require anything precise, controlled or dignified. It’s as if the supporting structure of a popular world view has been shaken and weakened so true believers find themselves in a wilderness of bewilderment lost, alone and drawn to blaming outlandish demons-like the Russians.
The bitter frustration and inability to get a grip on the outcome of this election has now descended to hatching absurd conspiracy theories and of course the Russians are always a handy bogey man to pull out of the conspiracy barrel. If there’s a method to this apparent madness it’s probably rooted in the obsession of the disgruntled on the losing side to smear the winner and delegitimize the result. It’s also interesting that the catalyst in this state of affairs is a third party fringe candidate that has nothing to lose and everything to gain.
What bears watching is the conduct of the losing candidate in this election who under advisement has already conceded defeat and acknowledged that the process was fair and legitimate. There should have been immediate calls from the campaign of Hillary Clinton for Jill Stein to cease and desist from this venture as it could harm the legitimacy of the system in the minds of some voters. But instead a wait-and-see strategy emerged under the guise of determining if the machines worked correctly and the vote count was correct. Right away this sounds suspicious because no one voiced any concerns about the voting machines before or during the election and no officials raised any concerns about the validity of the vote count.The election did not go as all the experts predicted. It was supposed to be little more than the coronation of a sure winner after a sure loser was quickly dispatched.
Time to draw an analogy: In 2007 The New England Patriots played the New York Giants in Super Bowl XLII. The Patriots had a perfect 16-0 season and they were on the way to becoming the first team in history to go 19-0. The Giants had a measly 10-6 record and they got in on a wild card. The Patriots had a sparkling quarterback in Tom Brady who was widely touted as the best quarterback in history. The Giants had Eli Manning, a somewhat ordinary, unproven and inconsistent commodity. The Super Bowl party was packed. The Giants were just a formality. The lone Giants fan at the party said the Giants are coming to town and they will win. The place erupted in an uproar of laughter and jeers. In the fourth quarter the crowd fell silent. The Giants had won. Eli was the MVP-the people filed out like the walking dead.
Patriots coach Bill Belichick was terse and disappointed but he never called into question the officiating or insinuated that the scoring may not have been accurate. If he had it would have hurt the game. He knew he lost and he took his lumps. They call it class. Hillary Clinton should be more like Bill Belichick and disavow Jill Stein.
There isn’t a shred of evidence that any foreign entity interfered with the mechanics of any part of the voting process. Some IT experts have stated that it’s theoretically possible for this to happen but no trace of foul play has been seen and there is certainly no smoking gun. In fact no hacking is possible as the machines are sequestered from the internet so any contaminated software would have to be physically loaded by a human right in front of voting officials. But grasping at straws does not require anything precise, controlled or dignified. It’s as if the supporting structure of a popular world view has been shaken and weakened so true believers find themselves in a wilderness of bewilderment lost, alone and drawn to blaming outlandish demons-like the Russians.
The bitter frustration and inability to get a grip on the outcome of this election has now descended to hatching absurd conspiracy theories and of course the Russians are always a handy bogey man to pull out of the conspiracy barrel. If there’s a method to this apparent madness it’s probably rooted in the obsession of the disgruntled on the losing side to smear the winner and delegitimize the result. It’s also interesting that the catalyst in this state of affairs is a third party fringe candidate that has nothing to lose and everything to gain.
What bears watching is the conduct of the losing candidate in this election who under advisement has already conceded defeat and acknowledged that the process was fair and legitimate. There should have been immediate calls from the campaign of Hillary Clinton for Jill Stein to cease and desist from this venture as it could harm the legitimacy of the system in the minds of some voters. But instead a wait-and-see strategy emerged under the guise of determining if the machines worked correctly and the vote count was correct. Right away this sounds suspicious because no one voiced any concerns about the voting machines before or during the election and no officials raised any concerns about the validity of the vote count.The election did not go as all the experts predicted. It was supposed to be little more than the coronation of a sure winner after a sure loser was quickly dispatched.
Time to draw an analogy: In 2007 The New England Patriots played the New York Giants in Super Bowl XLII. The Patriots had a perfect 16-0 season and they were on the way to becoming the first team in history to go 19-0. The Giants had a measly 10-6 record and they got in on a wild card. The Patriots had a sparkling quarterback in Tom Brady who was widely touted as the best quarterback in history. The Giants had Eli Manning, a somewhat ordinary, unproven and inconsistent commodity. The Super Bowl party was packed. The Giants were just a formality. The lone Giants fan at the party said the Giants are coming to town and they will win. The place erupted in an uproar of laughter and jeers. In the fourth quarter the crowd fell silent. The Giants had won. Eli was the MVP-the people filed out like the walking dead.
Patriots coach Bill Belichick was terse and disappointed but he never called into question the officiating or insinuated that the scoring may not have been accurate. If he had it would have hurt the game. He knew he lost and he took his lumps. They call it class. Hillary Clinton should be more like Bill Belichick and disavow Jill Stein.
Last edited:
