Plot twist: They're both puppets. Who cares who wins?
95% of the population can't cite a rule, law, policy, executive order, etc... which they oppose unless they're (the public) emotionally invested or they're parroting propapanda.
The mob wants their candidate to win. Beyond that -- they have no fucking clue.
Thats a good plan. Anything that causes uncertainty in the election results will be the basis for the msm narrative that the election is not official and to keep Kamala in there.
The Move would be if some independent candidate (if any) suddenly win. :)
From the outside there is really no any significant difference between two main candidates. In addition, it looks like wrestling show where rivals throw and hit each other hard, but it is all in pretence, for public. Looks very unnatural, really.
I thought about this possibility, but there's just no way they can let Trump retake the presidency. He's got a much better idea what he's up against and he's going to go to work right away with a chainsaw and a sledgehammer. He's had four years to make plans and shape the battlespace.
You can see that this is understood implicitly by many, underlying certain statements they make, as if he will take power on Election Day instead of in January. That's when the Rubicon will be either be crossed or it will not, with this exception....
So Kamala is going to lose bigly even though there's going to be rigging in her favor bigly. Given all the foregoing, the only way to play that is to expose the rigging but leave out who it was in favor of. Then they just wave their hands around about having to redo the whole thing next year because "the American people deserve a fair and honest election and will settle for no less".
That will buy them time for something to break their way, like a nuclear war or some such. You can't lose as long as the game continues, can you?
I think They must look back and realize this is the gambit They should have run back in 2016. Given the controversy, a lot of people would have went along with it. It's way more obviously lopsided now than it was then. Few will be inclined towards accepting it or even putting up with anyone else that does.
EDIT: I came across this variant gambit right after posting:
Lots of detailed legal history with the conclusion:
Therefore, reviewing these decisions, I would have to say that while it would be controversial, the government could call this a necessity if they can get Russia, China, North Korea, or Iran to declare war or attack before the election or certainly before January 20th, and they could declare Martial Law. Hence, the Democrats, in the hands of the Neocons, could carry out their coup, suspend the election, and seize the country as Zelensky has done in Ukraine under the same theory. They would need to close all courts, including the Supreme Court, out of NECESSITY, real or manufactured.
a) ELEC (life) within TION (inception towards death) aka ones reaction to nature enacted upon one.
b) Ones free will of choice cannot be stolen...only ignored, when consenting to suggested choices by another.
obvious way
Obvious/obviam - "in the way"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/obvious aka being (life) in the way (inception towards death). Any other way suggested makes one oblivious to it.
they're giving up
Consenting to suggested pluralism (they) gives up ones singular autonomy to others.
what if the plan is to lean into
Trump or Kamala...either side tempts ones choice to lean away from center and into a conflict against the other side.
inciting voter fraud
Few suggest voting to tempt many to defraud ones "free will of choice" by shirking it onto another. Temptation incites ignorance.
a lot of sense
A lot confines ones share of sensing. Few casts lots (lottery; lotto) to tempt many to risk a share on chance aka gambling.
Plot twist: They're both puppets. Who cares who wins?
95% of the population can't cite a rule, law, policy, executive order, etc... which they oppose unless they're (the public) emotionally invested or they're parroting propapanda.
The mob wants their candidate to win. Beyond that -- they have no fucking clue.
Thats a good plan. Anything that causes uncertainty in the election results will be the basis for the msm narrative that the election is not official and to keep Kamala in there.
I will be vigilant and express my concerns of election fraud regardless of the winner.
The Move would be if some independent candidate (if any) suddenly win. :)
From the outside there is really no any significant difference between two main candidates. In addition, it looks like wrestling show where rivals throw and hit each other hard, but it is all in pretence, for public. Looks very unnatural, really.
I thought about this possibility, but there's just no way they can let Trump retake the presidency. He's got a much better idea what he's up against and he's going to go to work right away with a chainsaw and a sledgehammer. He's had four years to make plans and shape the battlespace.
You can see that this is understood implicitly by many, underlying certain statements they make, as if he will take power on Election Day instead of in January. That's when the Rubicon will be either be crossed or it will not, with this exception....
So Kamala is going to lose bigly even though there's going to be rigging in her favor bigly. Given all the foregoing, the only way to play that is to expose the rigging but leave out who it was in favor of. Then they just wave their hands around about having to redo the whole thing next year because "the American people deserve a fair and honest election and will settle for no less".
That will buy them time for something to break their way, like a nuclear war or some such. You can't lose as long as the game continues, can you?
I think They must look back and realize this is the gambit They should have run back in 2016. Given the controversy, a lot of people would have went along with it. It's way more obviously lopsided now than it was then. Few will be inclined towards accepting it or even putting up with anyone else that does.
EDIT: I came across this variant gambit right after posting:
Martin Armstrong: Can Biden Declare Martial Law To Suspend the Election? (10/23/2024)
Lots of detailed legal history with the conclusion:
Some variation of "colluded with Russia to steal the election"?
Totally plausible.
a) ELEC (life) within TION (inception towards death) aka ones reaction to nature enacted upon one.
b) Ones free will of choice cannot be stolen...only ignored, when consenting to suggested choices by another.
Obvious/obviam - "in the way"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/obvious aka being (life) in the way (inception towards death). Any other way suggested makes one oblivious to it.
Consenting to suggested pluralism (they) gives up ones singular autonomy to others.
Trump or Kamala...either side tempts ones choice to lean away from center and into a conflict against the other side.
Few suggest voting to tempt many to defraud ones "free will of choice" by shirking it onto another. Temptation incites ignorance.
A lot confines ones share of sensing. Few casts lots (lottery; lotto) to tempt many to risk a share on chance aka gambling.
How could storage be negated from outside?