Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 11:09 pm Post subject: Re: US Elections 2016
I was disappointed at Jon Stewarts retirement. He was very good at showing the irony and hypocrisy of politics. He retired just as Trump was entering. He was not over the top like The Colbert Report or Samantha Bee. One thing I believe John Oliver said regarding his own show was that its "comedy first." That probably goes for all shows. They can take things out of context, cherry pick or make up things, its comedy first. I wonder if Jon Stewart could he have swayed the election? He did have a large viewer base.
Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 11:59 pm Post subject: Re: US Elections 2016
Mooxe - That's is possible. I think if Sanders vs Clinton was conducted cleanly where Sanders actually had a chance and lost to Clinton. Maybe some more voters may not have been pushed away from the Democrats. The fact that to some it appeared that the Democrat Party itself had already decided behind the scenes wasn't liked by many.The Democrats Campaign in it's self appeared to me to be one of several influences pushing voters to the Trump camp (just like the leaks, her history etc).
Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:42 pm Post subject: Re: US Elections 2016
I've always found it quite annoying how the US president is in a way 'the president of the world'. My country already has a president, and we are also part of EU and EMU and there we have another high level leader, Juncker. So now we should be worried because in a separate economic zone there might be bad leader? IMHO I hope that the American citizens prevail, I've met many Americans and the average people are very nice folks. However it's up to the American people to fix this Trump-problem.
Modern day Democratic party isn't necessarily that different from Republicans, they are both big money parties with big money donor money in their pockets. So I don't think Hillary Clinton would have been that much better. However Trump is a big unknown and has so far only created chaos in the world's economic markets and made many negative statements about various ethnicities, women, disabled, etc.
Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2016 9:15 pm Post subject: Re: US Elections 2016
Yes you are spot on. Now we have the Rise of the War Hawk party again. Counting down the days until the next war. At least they don't seem stupid enough to get into a fight with Russia. Now Trump is rumored to appoint Ted Cruz as the Attorney General, the biggest Partisan in the entire party.
Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2016 10:53 am Post subject: Re: US Elections 2016
Modern day Democratic party isn't necessarily that different from Republicans, they are both big money parties with big money donor money in their pockets. So I don't think Hillary Clinton would have been that much better. However Trump is a big unknown and has so far only created chaos in the world's economic markets and made many negative statements about various ethnicities, women, disabled, etc.[/quote]
The difference between Trump and others like Obama, Clinton's, Bush Snr and Jnr. Trump says what has thinks ( non PC ) and really a political novice. The others are all career politicians and really let slip their trues thoughts. Right down to speeches written for them, interviews are all preordained with questions given to them pre-interview and little off the cuff. These guys are managed and their spin doctors feed the public the same that mainstream media spouts.
History shows a record and that of Clinton's is really a horror show while Trump we are yet to see. Although he is making the right noises - purging the Repub's of opposition to him and International Diplomacy to most.
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2016 9:02 pm Post subject: Re: US Elections 2016
Looks like a recount in Wisconsin is underway soon. Guaranteed the count will at least be different than the first count. Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan were all in the 2% range. If the recount confirms Trump it will help quash some of the future conspiracy theories. If the Wisconsin count shows Clinton winning, prepare for the storm.
Michigan
T 2,279,805
C 2,268,193
0.5% difference (11,612)
Pennsylvania
T 2,912,941
C 2,844,705
2.3% Difference (68,236)
Wisconsin
T 1,409,467
C 1,382,210
1.9% Difference (27,257)
New Hampshire
T 348,521
C 345,789
0.78% Difference (2732)
Minnesota, Nevada and Florida all within 2.5 to 3%.
Some states have vote recount measures in place. Enacted if the difference meets a certain percentage.
If the recount confirms Trump it will help quash some of the future conspiracy theories.
Our newly elected Tweeter-in-Chief is now claiming he actually won the popular vote if 3 million "illegal" votes hadnt been counted. The swamp is only going to get swampier when the Oval Office becomes the source of future conspiracy theories.
If the recount confirms Trump it will help quash some of the future conspiracy theories.
Our newly elected Tweeter-in-Chief is now claiming he actually won the popular vote if 3 million "illegal" votes hadnt been counted. The swamp is only going to get swampier when the Oval Office becomes the source of future conspiracy theories.
If the recount confirms Trump it will help quash some of the future conspiracy theories.
Our newly elected Tweeter-in-Chief is now claiming he actually won the popular vote if 3 million "illegal" votes hadnt been counted. The swamp is only going to get swampier when the Oval Office becomes the source of future conspiracy theories.
"The researchers used Internet analytics tools to trace the origins of particular tweets and mapped the connections among social-media accounts that consistently delivered synchronized messages. Identifying website codes sometimes revealed common ownership. In other cases, exact phrases or sentences were echoed by sites and social-media accounts in rapid succession, signaling membership in connected networks controlled by a single entity."
They haven't presented any evidence, only mentioned the technique internet firms may have used. Things like this are easily provable because of IP addresses and logs. The truth about this theory is definitely out there, its either in the logs or it isn't. Just to give you an idea, with Google Analytics you can watch in real time what a single person is doing on a website. Besides an IP address you can identify a person from Windows version, screen resolution, browser version, website habits. Basically you can be identified by anything you do on a computer broken down into 100 different acts your aren't even consciously aware of. That's just the tip of the iceberg.
Without the organization evidence.... orders/instructions/pay records all we have are the logs.
I wonder how they would even present their evidence that's consumable for the general public.
Personally, I don't need any evidence to believe the internet is being used this way haha. The internet used to be about discovery, learning, fun.... now its about monetization, influence and control.
Posted: Mon Nov 28, 2016 9:15 pm Post subject: Re: US Elections 2016
It doesnt take a quantum leap of faith to connect the Russian DNC hack/Wikileaks dump to a broader disinformation campaign via social media. Were the shoe on the other foot, the CIA would have (and has) operated similarly. Far less plausible that 3 million illegal votes were cast though it is rather a convenient number to allege a Trump plurality.
Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2016 12:03 am Post subject: Re: US Elections 2016
They haven't presented any evidence, only mentioned the technique internet firms may have used. Things like this are easily provable because of IP addresses and logs. The truth about this theory is definitely out there, its either in the logs or it isn't. Just to give you an idea, with Google Analytics you can watch in real time what a single person is doing on a website. Besides an IP address you can identify a person from Windows version, screen resolution, browser version, website habits. Basically you can be identified by anything you do on a computer broken down into 100 different acts your aren't even consciously aware of. That's just the tip of the iceberg.
They haven't reported any evidence because it simply doesn't exist. They ( Govt sources ) have had evidence of WMD's yet we all no that was a lie as this is. Remember the Nth Korean hackers - turned out to be an inside job. Hardly mentioned the truth in the media over that and still some today believe Nth Korea were the hackers. It's called deflection - taking the real story out of the spot light and allocating blame to others. I do see that nothing reported through Wikileaks during the election once again has been discredited. But the leak becomes the issue and not the truth.
If anyone had evidence we would all known about it yesterday.
Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2016 1:59 am Post subject: Re: US Elections 2016
The evidence of propaganda/fake news/trolling exists and can be traced to Russian sources. But I guess its not really evidence, its research. In your context Sod I think you mean evidence in a court of law. Whether it was a conspiracy led by the Russian government remains to be proven. This is not something that can ever be proven without a doubt. The court of law for this type of thing is public opinion. There were probably multiple countries and organizations doing this. Were Russians doing it in some form, most definitely.
Was there motive? Yes.
Was there means? Yes
Did it happen? Yes
I am almost surprised you need evidence to believe it. I would need evidence not to believe it. And I am not just saying Russia did it. The US was doing it to themselves! To not have a concerted effort online trying to discredit your opponent and misinform their supporters would be not using the best tool for victory ever created.
Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2016 8:24 am Post subject: Re: US Elections 2016
I am almost surprised you need evidence to believe it. I would need evidence not to believe it. And I am not just saying Russia did it. The US was doing it to themselves! To not have a concerted effort online trying to discredit your opponent and misinform their supporters would be not using the best tool for victory ever created.[/quote]
The clip I put on here only involved where Clinton, the DNC, the media and others all referred to the Russians. To date speculation doesn't count as evidence in any other country that I am aware of. The FBI said their is no evidence so once again where is it. Just saying something doesn't make it correct or factual lucky - Assad use of sarin gas is another example of media shooting from the lip.
A possible leak was a guy called Seth Rich. Only speculation as he is now dead. He was the DNC leak. Wikileaks offered $20,000 for info as to his death. Plolice say he was a victim of a robbery. However he still had his wallet, cellphone and watch. It appeared he was only robbed of his life. Rich worked for the DNC.
Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2016 4:44 am Post subject: Re: US Elections 2016
"Plolice say he was a victim of a robbery. However he still had his wallet, cellphone and watch. It appeared he was only robbed of his life. Rich worked for the DNC."
Very observant, sod. Seth Rich may have made the worst decision of his life by working for the DNC an by extension, Hillary Clinton. I read the book by one of Bill Clinton's longest affairs at 30 years, Dolly Kyle. In her book Hillary, the Other Woman, she mentions that when things got public about her time with Bill during his time as President her sister and brother, who were working for Bill, came to her and told her to basically lay low or they would have to destroy her. Those were the words she used. I am assuming they meant her reputation. But the interesting thing is that even though she said many of the Clinton murders you can find online were utterly ridiculous she did not discount all of them. She knew that Bill and Hillary can be very ruthless to to get what they want.
Carol Swain is a black professor who like myself also was rasied democrat. She picked up some of the same history books (well before I did) and educated herself, and has become an authority on the subject.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!
