How do you see election/DC compared with policing/BLM riots: Interesting study of political bias and media narratives

[emilynghiem]

When this speaker announced "Democracy belongs to all the people" not just to one man to decide:

I realized that summed up the problem with WHO changed the election rules to allow millions of mail-in ballots not to be notarized,
but to come and be counted by the MILLIONS, much greater than the few hundreds or thousands of absentee or military ballots that not all states require to be notarized.

The vast difference this makes, not only in deciding narrow margins in close races, but in public perception of how other people view the election as valid or invalid,
was summed up here. That one person or group cannot just "unilaterally" decide for everyone else what the policy is going to be.
And both side accused the other of trying to "subvert" democracy by "dictating" if those ballots were legitimate or not.

Why weren't all the voters and people of each state represented fully in recorded votes of their ELECTED State Legislators,
who are distributed equally among the districts and include both major parties? A recorded vote of the LEGISLATURE at state levels, elected by the people,
is DIFFERENT from internal officials within state govt administrations, or even courts and judges, "making that decision" as to changing election rules, process and voting requirements.

That is one area of bias in how people either accept unnotarized ballots as valid, or don't "see a difference" between state legislatures voting on a policy and a judge/court ruling on
a decision made by an internally appointed SINGLE official or other agency besides the statewide elected Legislature as the national laws provided as the requirement for state election laws.

The other equally revealing bias is how do we each see the ACCOUNTABILITY for
* policing abuse that caused BLM riots that caused death and damages
* political suppression of the contested election process that caused both lawful protests and unlawful rioting in DC including criminal threats, deaths and damage, and cost to the public.

How people see this as seditious treason against govt or see the contested election process as violating and undermining democracy and Constitutional oaths to defend the entire nation,
this is a critical area of political bias that needs to be resolved to hold the nation together and not fall victim to our own divisions.

Do you blame "Trump" for inciting the riots or the contested election?
Do you blame "police" or "BLM" for the property destruction and damage or the protestors?

I even notice I have a bias toward blaming protestors not police for BLM destruction since there were many protestors who worked to solve problems with police WITHOUT destructive rioting.
And I blame the election problems more for what happened in DC, and would support holding Trump and protestors to restitution to correct problems together instead of merely punishing or suppressing them more.

If I have this bias but am willing to work with all people of all views equally, why can't we all admit our biases and still solve the problems without blaming or judging why we see it differently?

Why in one case is it NOT the responsibility of the rioters who actually committed crimes,
but the fault of either Trump or the police or whoever the rioters were protesting for causing them to act that way???

Whoever it is that can embrace and include all such views equally --- THAT to me is what Constitutional govt is, for equal justice and protections of all persons regardless of party, belief or creed.

All this business of taking one side and demonizing the other only begets more of the same.

I hope we can critically analyze all angles and all contributing factors, not dismiss any source of conflict as invalid,
and address all grievances so we solve the root problems.

The speakers all agreed that this should never happen again.

But their solutions are not agreed upon, but are part of more suppressing the problems.

We need to address full and equal representation in the democratic process.

The charade is more than one level, more than one side accusing the other of falsified narratives.

This is truly profound, and I call on all people with the level of insights and leadership
to unite across party lines to solve the root issues and reform the system of representation to avoid any more such pitfalls and abuses.

 

[emilynghiem]

I answered my own poll to explain where I think my biases are coming from.

1A. I believe we can solve policing issues by direct collaboration, and have seen this work.
So that's why I blame BLM rioters for failing to negotiate first before inciting protests without enough management to keep these safe from criminal escalation.

1B. with the election protests, contestors TRIED to go to Courts but were denied hearing, and the media and parties ran wild with accusations attacking both sides.
There isn't a process in place to resolve this, as there is with policing that all people have access to, We can all go to our local police and demand audience.
But the more people TRIED to present the arguments, these avenues got shut down to the point people today still believe it can't be changed.
So this suppression is causing extreme angst and it would take agreeing to state or party level conventions to address the issues that cross over between state and national
where no court had full authority to address both state and national (and individual at the same time).
This is why I have sympathy and take responsibility myself for what happened in DC and ask to address the root causes that I believe those rioters would respond to.
We don't have a process for that, I am willing to set one up, and willing to participate and moderate a process of restitution, corrections and reimbursement for costs.
I take responsibility for why I have this bias, so I think I have the right to that.
I don't have rights to sympathize with things and then do nothing about the consequences.
That would shifting blame or responsibility to avoid resolving the issues.

2A. I don't see the election protests as insurrection or threat to national security
but see the Border/trafficking cartel crimes as already compromising govt integrity and security.
I have already heard from law enforcers that the cartels are already influencing and basically blackmailing govt
where there are some areas of crime that they cannot investigate or bring anyone to justice or more people will get killed.

Liberals tend not to have equal knowledge of how bad the border and cartel crimes are.
Some of the Libertarians who know of the corruption "blame govt" and don't see the cartels as the ones responsible.

2B. Again, I believe the election conflicts can be resolved democratically by Constitutional changes to how parties work and perhaps
separate jurisdiction over contested programs deemed unconstitutional by shifting those to party administrations to manage to clean up govt.
So I don't see that as treasonous the way Liberals do who "DEPEND on govt" for their health care and sense of security of the democratic process.

I see it as depending on the democratic process by equal enforcement by all people of Constitutional laws and due process.
So security comes from us agreeing to respect each other's rights and protections from violation.

My bias comes from seeing the foreign criminal influences as outside Constitutional agreement,
while citizens within parties and the US have direct access to enforce these laws among ourselves first.

While the liberals who fear "Conservatives Republicans and Christians/Constitutionalists" as "white racist supremacists enemies and threats"
do not see foreign cartels and criminals as a threat.

I do not see Conservative Constitutionalists as a threat but as the spine that we need to build on to keep America intact and running.
Even the Liberal agenda of universal health care and democratized schools require having a solid central spine to support such democratic equal ownership and participation.

But the Liberals I know believe in using GOVT (and thus PARTY) to build this upon.
Not everyone agrees to Statist Liberal/Democrat administration as the central authority.

So that is why these schools of thought are split.

And why I believe we are heading toward a bicameral system of govt where the Democratic/Liberal approach to defining national security
based on health care, education and internal domestic welfare should be managed under a SEPARATE administration
while the Conservative focus on military defense, national security in terms of border and economic/rule of law should
be reserved to limited EXTERNAL govt that does not manage any internal domestic or individual programs such as schools, health care and welfare.

Again, I take responsibility for my biases and encourage all others to do the same:
by going to your local party and precinct leaders and asking to organize cooperative
health care, economic networks, and ownership of local businesses, schools, clinics and other community
operations so we can all move toward democratic self governance by the approach to govt we each believe in,
without conflicting with how others want or don't want to use govt.

www.ethics-commission.net
www.earnedamnesty.org

 

[MisterBeale]

IMO?

The establishment purposely does things to manipulate and control folks, to put whomever it needs into power, regardless of party.

Having folks focus on partisan politics, and partisan personalities, depending on the year, decade or era, is just a convenient distraction, that the media and establishment deploy, to get folks arguing with each other. IMO? THIS? IS not a mistake. And I know, folks call me a "tin foil hatter," for believing it is not a mistake, but, there it is.

I honestly don't believe the JFK official narrative, (and many other controversies,) and since that truth of that has never come out, all of this, is related to corrupt narratives, and the reasons behind them. There are interests that have subverted our institutions, they purposely do not want the public to control the government. For good reason. There is a lot of purposeful disinformation, and provocateurs, trying to divide us, and it will continue I'm afraid.



The issues that we are confronting today, are so very similar to issues that we have confronted a decade ago, and a decade previous, and a decade before that, and etc. etc. etc.

Nothing ever seems to change, which is precisely the way these folks that are doing it to to the nation, are planning it.

And? I already see controversy and a train wreck coming up, and we have a lot of people, SO confident in their, "victories," coming up. Counting their chickens, as it is. It will not be pretty when the expectations, do not pan out. . .

huh.

The voting machine hacking threat you probably haven’t heard about

Modems help election officials report results quickly, but security experts say they’re too dangerous to trust.

www.politico.com