Even though all signs point to Trump winning, I have a feeling that they not will ALLOW him the presidency. There is no way in hell that the race is as close as the polls and media are making it out to be and I wonder if this is them gearing up for a steal.
They have come after him from every angle possible from slander to law fare to assassination, and if he becomes the big man in the chair, they could be in trouble. (OR, has this all just been a big publicity stunt? - not sure as they gave him hell even when he was president).
On one side, you have all of the apparent rigging in the swing states in an attempt to get Harris in - more war, more money laundering, higher taxes, higher inflation, communism etc - TPTB want this.
On the other side, Trump seems to have far more popularity than Harris - which means less friction when plans are pushed through, implementation of cashless system, Musk involvement, more bigger israel supporter too, maybe Iran problems - TPTB want this too.
if TPTB wanted Dems to win, why insert such an unlikable person who clearly has no organic support? There has been such exposure of flops too: Dropping out of interviews, doctored interviews, scripted responses, paid for support, obvious hypocrisy - all making her seem even more incompetent and unlikable. This stuff is covered by the likes of CNN who are ardent democrat supporters. It all just seems TOO obvious.
If TPTB wanted Trump to win, why all the shenanigans in the blue states with illegal voting, non registered votes, judges an courts allowing undocumented voting, no voter ID and the apparent delayed results after election night?
Either way TPTB wins, regardless of the election. But I don't know which way they lean as the intent isn't clear (probably by design). Is it all a humiliation ritual? - Massive demoralization tactic?
Who will be the President when this is all over?
BOTH OF THEM HAVE IDENTICAL DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN POLICIES. IT DOESN’T FUCKING MATTER. ELECTIONS DO NOT EXIST. VOTING IS A HOAX.
100%. When you realize this it all becomes reality TV or a game show. Depressing or entertaining depending on how you choose look at it.
Personally I am leaning towards Harris, judging by other recent global elections.
I generally agree, and this has been true for most of the elections since Kennedy, but I think the "elites" in question do have a preference in this one. The policies of these two candidates are not the same. I believe the difference is that DJT actually thinks that the Office of the President does have power that can be used to instigate change – which was apparent when he was president before, until they threw COVID at him. I believe he thinks he can control the military to some degree. This is all based on his actions and words while president. Whether or not that is actually true is debatable. I think he has been a useful foil for TPTB, but he's also a pain in the ass. He has been sporadically reprehensible through his adult life, but he's not a kid fucker like many on the other side and in the Republican leadership.
In contrast, Kamala is an empty vessel and would do exactly everything her Blackrock & WEF handlers tell her to do. She will gladly usher the U.S. into destruction, whereas DJT is a genuine nationalist.
They've tried to tie up his fortune and time in court, convict him of felonies, sully his character and reputation, and they took a shot at him. It seems clear that they want him gone, publicly, to destroy what he represents and demoralize his base.
By that same process of thought, it doesn't matter if the moon landings were real or not, it doesn't matter if the Titanic sinking was an accident or planned. It doesn't matter if existence itself is tangible or entirely fabricated by the subconscious mind.
If we base our thinking along those lines, this site would not have purpose.
Like many others here, I am interested in rationalizing the reasons as to WHY, in the interests of furthering understanding. That is the whole point, to discuss and find rationale and thus, meaning behind why events play out the way they do, as well as the implications and motives behind them, the "WHY".
In order to substantiate or refute ideas and give them meaning, evidence, opinion, thought and motivation must be explored. Motive is equally as important as result.
The operational difference between and results of a manned Moon landing vs. not having done it are ludicrously huge. Hundreds of technologies we use today wouldn’t exist if not for it.
It does; it’s the difference between delusional retards retroactively inventing explanations without evidence and a physical representation of the hubris of the gilded age.
It does; only stoners think otherwise.
The purpose of this site is to not fall for jewish hoaxes. Truth. Not made up bullshit. Not entertaining Hollywood movies as though they’re real.
You’ve based your life on a lie. This is your wake-up call. Get the fuck over it before it kills you.
White genocide. That’s the reason.
The motive is white genocide. Your submission has nothing to do with motive, by the way. They don’t care who sits in the puppet seat. They don’t care which actor gets the part. They own all the actors. They wrote the script. Everything continues on exactly the same no matter who is there. “The part of president will now be played by…” It’s a fucking soap opera. Or maybe you think those are real?
I see where you are coming from, although we are talking across each other.
My question was not whether or not elections are real or rigged or hoaxes or if the winner mattered. My question was who would come out as the torch holder.
You are fundamentally correct in that election speculation inherently makes no difference. The agenda will continue regardless, and the results have already been decided and concluded regardless. I don’t disagree with your conclusion either.
However, as you alluded to, those on this site are here because they question things and seek truth, which exists on different planes of significance. My post was focused on a microcosm within a broader macrocosm. A macrocosm upon which your response is focused.
There is always a broader picture to consider, however that does not mean that speculation on all levels does not matter. The examples I provided substantiate that point, in the grand scheme of things, speculating upon them isn’t going to change anything, regardless of how much truth is known. Does that mean they don’t matter? Your response suggests otherwise.
When it comes to things that are outside of our control, knowing whether or not they exist, are real or are hoaxes or whatever ultimately changes nothing, but that does not mean that questions should not be asked or that answers on all planes should not be sought out regardless of their perceived significance.
Dude, if you think this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apollo_11_Lunar_Lander_-_5927_NASA.jpg
reached the moon but now we lost the 'tech'... Idk.
It did. This has been proven by a dozen other countries.
No. Eat shit and die, flat earther.
It doesn't matter?
The truth matters. The truth is the only thing we seek.
It matters what the truth of the moon landings are. It matters if voting is a charade or not. In every conspiracy, in every idea and philosophy, the truth is the only thing that matters.
Only through truth can we properly view the world, make correct decisions, protect ourselves, exfiltrate ourselves from false paradigms, charades, and control mechanisms, and most importantly, only through truth can we properly identify and fix our problems.
a) Seeking truth to hold onto...destroys matter (life) during motion (inception towards death).
b) Only implies motion (oneness)...thing implies matter (ones). Only within motion can one come into being.
Whatever one wants to hold onto becomes truth...others not wanting to hold onto it becomes lie.
Nature cannot be held onto since it moves. Truth (want) vs lie (not want) tempt one to ignore change (need).
Exchange truth with "motion" and notice that motion cannot be held onto as truth, nor could motion lie.
Decision implies "free from hesitation or wavering"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/decided
Having free will of choice implies ones struggle to hesitate and waver as matter within balance of motion.
Any decision held onto harms ones FREE will of choice through neglect of choosing to adapt to being moved.
Solution (inception towards death) generates problems (life) through differentiation, hence setting each being apart from one another.
Identification and fixation dissolves (inception towards death) problems (life), hence destroying being alive in the process of dying.
ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!
It's probably one of the most debated philosophical questions throughout history: "what is more important, intention or result?"
I would agree that searching for meaning comes before whether something matters.
IN implies being within. RE implies responding to...both imply a perceivable origin, which one ignores when reasoning (more vs less) about suggested importance.
Agree vs disagree implies reasoning about a suggested meaning one already consented to.
Only matter can search FORwards...doing so tempts matter (life) to ignore motion (inception towards death) aka the forwarding origin of coming into being.
Thinking implies differentiation. Many "thinking" alike implies equalization...which benefits few.
Fiction can only exist within reality...and it's shaped by ones de-nial (Latin nihilo; nothing) of reality.
Few suggest OR to tempt many to consent to alternatives aka substitutes for perceivable reality...that's fiction.
a) Plane (inception towards death) of existence (life)...
b) Accident implies that which comes by chance...an inversion of coming into being as choice within balance of nature.
There are no accidents in nature...unless one chooses to ignore natural (perception) for artificial (suggestion).
Purpose aka pur (forth) pose (position) implies being positioned (life) forwards (inception towards death)...one needs to resist purpose.
Reasoning implies a conflict about suggested artifice, which tempts both sides to ignore perceivable nature/nasci - "to be born"; which implies the why of being...
The longer one "stands under"...the longer it takes for one to grow.
Being implies sentenced (life) towards point of death...as partial (temporary growth) within whole (ongoing loss).
There's only one way (inception towards death) for each one (life) within...few suggest events and plays to tempt many to ignore that.
Reason (versus) inverts implication (if/then)...motion (motive) implicates, while reason tempts one to hold onto a side within a conflict against others, while ignoring to be (life) within motion (inception towards death).
TO implies towards...natural order (inception towards death) destroys substitutes (life) unless resisted.
Few suggest progressivism to tempt consenting many to think "towards" suggested outcomes, while ignoring perceivable origin.
Before one can refute ideas one has to consent to suggested ideal-ism by either agreeing or disagreeing...no matter the side, both find themselves within a conflict of reason against each other afterwards.
Nature impresses (inception towards death) expressions (life)...a moving process of action generating reactions. Few within nature suggest many to hold onto meaning which tempts the ignorance of motion.
Holding onto, while being moved, implies constipation...nature flushes the shit out of any constipation within, and many choose to behave like shit, which permits few to treat them as such.
Exploration (life) during motivation (inception towards death) aka status quo of being...unless ignored for finding suggested meaning, evidence, opinion etc.
Motive (inception towards death) generates result/resultare/resilire - "resilience" aka life rebounding during the process of dying.
Equal (inception towards death) generates differentiation (life)...few equalize differences by tempting many to respond alike.
Responding alike lowers resilience, which tremendously benefits a parasitic few feeding upon many hosts.