Killary Clinton, The Donald, or Jill Stein: The US Election

[Scottie]

So assuming that the secret team is just the team on the ground for higher "elites", and they do not really plan what they do (at least in the way we would think of planning), then that begs the question how much actual planning is involved in higher echelons of power. When we assume that wishful thinking is the main criterium of that STS structure and that it becomes more pronounced the higher you go up in that network, then the question arises how much of it is even more "STS wishful thinking run amok", the higher you go up?

I think you're spot on with these observations, Pashalis.

The impression I get is that this recent shift of focus from Hillary to Trump within (at least some of) the halls of power was a rather scrambled together and very recent reactionary move. -Possibly to her being ill, or more power hungry than predicted, or simply because everybody on her staff is sick of her crap, -as well as seeing where the wind is blowing. Maybe some of the establishment is genuinely swayed by Trump's speeches. Who really knows?

This is also where I'm at right now. When something shifts, we always look for the "secret plan of action that explains everything". They wanted Hillary, no wait they wanted Trump all along, no wait they wanted to call off the election...

I don't think they know what they want at a "details level". We project our need to have a plan onto the bozos running the show, because we want there to be some kind of order. But in reality, I don't think it works that way at all.

They're running the show as best they can to achieve a general outcome, which is more control. But then, stuff happens... Like Putin and Russia. This throws them for a loop because they didn't expect it. Oops, change course!

Then something else happens, like Hillary insiders despise her... Oops, change course!

Each time, the chaos increases, and "they" keep adjusting course. Normally, I think they will just throw multiple irons in the fire, see which one heats up, and then go with that.

Of course, there is a problem with this not-plan: it's all subject to wishful thinking. The other problem is that they might push people too far, and unexpected resistance will crop up, which further alters things and leads to even more chaos.

In short, "they" are pushing things towards the edge of a cliff, they don't know it, and they don't care. They're like the virus destroying the host body.

And they're damn sure that nothing you or I do matters, except that it just might... And therein lies the potential for a different future. When things are in such a state of crazy flux, I think there are many points where new options become open. We just need to navigate the storm wisely. Just as the clueless masses follow the idiots, they could just as easily turn and follow the smart people under the right conditions.

So, what really matters is level of being, frequency, whatever you want to call it. It's not that my voting or not voting will make a difference; the important thing is who I am, what I am working towards, what I know, the type of future I envision, and how I go about spreading that knowledge. Note that I said, "envision", not "visualize". Visualization doesn't do much, but envisioning something different based on what we see as true at this moment, and then adjusting our own course and putting bits and bobs of energy out there in a different direction... that's a whole different thing than just "visualizing". Furthermore, what is true today may not be true tomorrow! We all need to stay on our toes as things progress and shift (as they no doubt will again).

Ya know, like: Maybe the number of people who Like my FB post is the LEAST important thing. The popularity contest is for Dark T-shirts. What's most important is that it's out there, people read it, and it's working on them or with them in a free will-respecting kind of way.

Well, wait and see!

 

[Laura]

I keep thinking about what the Cs said about a "big miscalculation" being possibly Killary's dumb decision to do the private server thing. That was said back in 2003 during the Bush administration when we thought things were very bad already... oy, we sure didn't know!

Q: (A) The point is, that people have no choice. They are backed into a corner. The only thing they can do now is just impeach Bush. If they don't do that, there is nothing else they can do. Because if they don't do anything, they will bear the blame for doing nothing - the same way Germany did after Hitler. All the signs are here now: it is exactly like it was in 1939 in Europe.

(L) Well, anything we do, we cannot anticipate the outcome. We can't even know if it will be helpful. We just have to do what is right from one moment to the next based on what we know using our best efforts. For all we know, if we keep pushing the "impeach Bush" issue, we may end up in jail as "enemy combatants."

(A) What did we learn? That there is this help on the way. We know that we cannot quit working. We are helping the help, so to say.

(L) Well, I wrote to some people pointing out that the anti-war stance is only more divisiveness. There are people who are for the war to support Bush, and there are people who are against the war who don't support Bush. It is a question of supporting Bush. Everybody agrees that Saddam is a stinker, but they can't agree on whether how Bush is handling the matter is appropriate or not. They forget that what is happening here is that they are all being put into an oppositional stance against each other, and Bush, himself, is coming out on top clean. If they would concentrate on the REAL issues: that Bush is a liar, that he is not even our legal president, that he stole the election by nefarious means, that he is a criminal from a criminal family, making it clear and plain with facts and massive media coverage about who and what Bush really is, then the whole issue would be focused where it belongs: on Bush and the Consortium that has put him in power to serve its agenda. But, instead of concentrating on the problem - of which Bush is only the representative, the real issue being the Consortium - people are not seeing that the whole situation is being manipulated for the benefit of the Industrial-Military Complex just as Eisenhower foresaw. Bush is only the puppet for this Consortium. If that could be seen as the real danger that it is, if they could impeach Bush - who is their creature - and get somebody into the presidency who was uncorruptible, who could kick butt and take names like Kennedy tried to do. Well, we have learned. Kennedy didn't take the danger as seriously as he should have. If he had, maybe he could have carried through what he wanted to do: disband the CIA, tie the hands of the military, make things more equitable for the common people, enhance civil rights and civil liberties. If we could get somebody in the White House who was smart enough to not get assassinated, and who was clean and not tied up with the consortium, things really COULD change.

(A) The problem is only in America. If America would just stand down, Saddam would be dealt with appropriately. Nobody likes the guy. He doesn't have anything. He is no danger to anybody. But Bush is a danger to the whole planet. He has created this crisis and the whole world has gone to hell in just a few months.

(L) And the reason he is able to do what he is doing - which is basically that he is going to destroy the whole damn planet - is because of the media. The media is controlled by the Jews who have only one agenda: to own all of Palestine and revenge. And so, they dangle carrots for Bush to follow without even knowing that they are signing their own death warrant. They are following the script of the Consortium which wants, above all other things, to see all Semitic peoples destroyed, and their hubris won't even allow them to see it. For that reason, the Jews have helped George Bush plunge the entire world into chaos. And they will wonder why, at the last moment, everyone hates them just as Americans will wonder why they are the most hated nation on Earth. Blind hubris.

(A) Well, there is this Game Theory, and they are employing it to the max. They are playing a game. They know where the buttons need to be pushed, to steer the delicate equilibrium where they want it. No one in the world of politics is clean. No one. They are all dirty, and if you know all the dirt, you can do what you want. As much as it seems to be a horrible thing to lay at the door of the Jews, that's where it ends up of its own. You can't help it. You follow the threads, and that's where they take you: the Zionists.

(L) So, if something comes along that destroys their game theory...the whole operation will collapse. Game theory is based on data. It's like Vincent Bridges. His whole game was based on pushing our buttons, trying to blackmail us, saying things like "I'll tell the whole sordid story." Well, guess what? I'll tell it first! I'm not perfect and I have certainly made mistakes. But nobody is going to use it to control me. If other people could do that, if they could get over their fear of being judged for making mistakes, there would be nothing that anyone could hold over their head anymore.

(A) Okay, there is Bush and his Skull and Bones. And then, there is the Illuminati. And they are looking for something. So, probably somebody behind Bush is also looking for something. So, the only way for us to help, is to work on this project. And then, hopefully, these people will halt this mass destruction hoping they will get what they are after: grail or whatever. Because if they destroy the world, they will get nothing.

(L) And then meanwhile, there is the North Korean guy - the mirror image of George Bush; everything he says and does is modeled from George Bush. It is actually comical to watch them. "I'm going to blow up the world!" "No you're not, I'm going to blow it up first! I'm going to turn America into a sea of fire." And Bush is saying "I'm going to bomb Iraq back to the stone age." "No you're not! We're going to bomb YOU back to before the Stone Age!" They are like two identical characters! Crazy! We are in a hell of a mess. Any comments?

A: The situation looks bleak indeed. But remember the Achilles heel of STS: Wishful Thinking.

Q: In this case, how is wishful thinking going to help?

A: There will be a big miscalculation made. It will reveal the "Man behind the curtain."

This latest thing about "Spirit Cooking" just puts the cherry on the cake.

 

[SummerLite]

WOW! thanks everyone for your input here, I follow everyday. The last few days have been quite intense for me (maybe others also?). On Thursday night, 11/3(?), I watched for a few hours, the big blow up on Fox news where Clinton was thrown under the bus and what an intense show that was!!! This plunged me into depression along with the renewed talk of the rise of the next Hitler, Trump. Its was CLEAR to me then, Trump had been the chosen one all along... But now, it seems this Fox broadcast wasn't legit and is now debunked... . What a roller coaster ride, I've decided to back off the whole matter sense I've become emotionally involved and it doesn't do me or anyone else any good. My emotional reaction doesn't make sense to this bogus Fox report. A win for either candidate is depressing.

How the "Secret Team" works and the further discussion about this here, also is another very new way of looking at things for me...an eye opener. Things are not as planned out as the general view believes perhaps. This makes the whole fiasco look very shaky indeed. Since there is 0 integrity in this planning and thoroughly STS, it does feel as though its on the verge of total collapse.

For many years I've believed we where in the time of the "Great Revealing" and its really gaining speed. Now we've got the Spirit Cooking revelation which plunges these people into the very lowest pit of darkness and corruption. Throw in the rape charges by a 13 year old girl. The sex parties in the movie "Eyes Wide Shut" comes to mind but that didn't include children, maybe a remake is in order.

The spirit of revealing continued for me last night when I checked out Project Avalon to see what was being discussed about the campaign. What I found was the exposing of Simon Parks, a man that claims he is a hybrid child of a Mantis being and Drac. For a few years he had an enthusiastic following on Avalon and I watched a few of his videos. Since Feb. 2016, people have been coming forward, reporting their negative experiences with him. Although I didn't read all that was said, being quite extensive, the gist is plagiarism and sexual exploitation of women who went to him for healing treatments. Looks like another phony baloney, delusional, con man has been revealed.

Thanks everyone for your input.

 

[Aeneas]

Each time, the chaos increases, and "they" keep adjusting course. Normally, I think they will just throw multiple irons in the fire, see which one heats up, and then go with that.

Of course, there is a problem with this not-plan: it's all subject to wishful thinking. The other problem is that they might push people too far, and unexpected resistance will crop up, which further alters things and leads to even more chaos.

In short, "they" are pushing things towards the edge of a cliff, they don't know it, and they don't care. They're like the virus destroying the host body.
>snip<

I think Pashalis is right and that it largely functions the way Scottie has elaborated on. The book, The Secret Team, certainly gives the feel that they continually react to what the responses are to their meddling. They go like cowboys and shoot a place up, then the see the fall-out, adjust and keep going.
This is also seen in their support for dictators and at the same time being infiltrated with the opposition groups, so if the dictator dies or is overturned, then they have the support of the new leader from the oppositions ranks. But they could well have miscalculated in their wishful thinking as people have smartened up to their games. This can be seen in Asia, where the revolt among nations is starting to spread...Phillippines, Malaysia etc. with the empire looking helpless.

 

[bjorb]

[quote author= Neil]It's just totally bizarre. I casually knew some people who were into some Wicca spellcasting stuff, but never anything like drinking blood and semen.[/quote]

Yeah, it's really the last party you ever want to crash.

But this is how the psychopath Elite entertain themselves while the camera's aren't rolling. And we haven't seen nothing yet.


[quote author= SummerLite]What I found was the exposing of Simon Parks, a man that claims he is a hybrid child of a Mantis being and Drac.[/quote]

What..? But he just looks human. And how do Mantis beings and Draconians even mate? Did someone ever asked him?

This is Simon Parks with a drawing of his mom.

I don't get how sexual predators such as him can be successful. Allthough, he isn't anymore. People finally found out that he is nuts. Who would have thought.

 

[SummerLite]

Very funny bjorn.

What..? But he just looks human. And how do Mantis beings and Draconians even mate? Did someone ever asked him?

People finally found out that he is nuts. Who would have thought.

 

[bjorb]

+

=

Enough said...

 

[angelburst29]

Russian agents, spies, hackers, and Trump's "secret affiliations" ........ to Putin - it's all bollocks, as masterminded by Team Clinton.

Published on Oct 30, 2016

America is tired of the Elites - Putin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMrWn6tOVuM (3:53 min.)

 

[griffin]

Scott Adams - the US cartoonist who draws the syndicated Dilbert strip - has put up three new blog entries on this final weekend before the election. These are:
Unhypnotizing a Clinton Supporter, http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152734465316 ;
Trump the Closer, http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152747601271 ; and,
The Dehypnotizing has Begun, http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152771168956 .

Do watch the video clip in the second post. Adams calls it the best political ad of the year. It's very good.

 

[angelburst29]

Donald Trump Rushed Off Stage In Reno By Secret Service – Pictures Of Suspect – Video – Updates
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/assassination-attempt-donald-trump-rushed-off-stage-in-reno-by-secret-service-after-protester-flashes-gun_11052016

ORIGINAL REPORT:

Donald Trump has been rushed off the stage in Reno by Secret Service agents. It is unclear exactly what happened but unconfirmed reports indicate that an anti-Trump protester in the crowd flashed a gun.

Crowd response and Secret Service activity immediately following Trump’s evacuation from the stage shows at least one individual being restrained just feet from where Trump was speaking.

Has the Secret Service thwarted an assassination ? Video:

"A law enforcement official tells CNN no weapon has been found related to the incident in Reno and Donald Trump"

 

[Gaby]

I keep thinking about what the Cs said about a "big miscalculation" being possibly Killary's dumb decision to do the private server thing.

Well, one thing I have noticed is that people who formerly wouldn't touch political news on their social media, are now publishing and commenting about it without reservations.

That is refreshing to see!

 

[A Jay]

I keep thinking about what the Cs said about a "big miscalculation" being possibly Killary's dumb decision to do the private server thing.

Well, one thing I have noticed is that people who formerly wouldn't touch political news on their social media, are now publishing and commenting about it without reservations.

That is refreshing to see!

Where I work it's now become normal for guests to talk about the corruption of the government, rigged elections, etc. Which was something I never thought would happen, but here we are. A big miscalculation revealing the 'man behind the curtain' indeed!

 

[MK Scarlett]

I keep thinking about what the Cs said about a "big miscalculation" being possibly Killary's dumb decision to do the private server thing.

Well, one thing I have noticed is that people who formerly wouldn't touch political news on their social media, are now publishing and commenting about it without reservations.

That is refreshing to see!

I was thinking the same along those lines on these last days...

 

[angelburst29]

What if ... "the big miscalculation" ... turns out to be "a tie" between both Candidates? The process would then be placed in the hands of Congress. The problem with that - the results might apply to the election of a Third Party Candidate like former CIA officer Evan McMullin ... or ... in a hypothetical tie situation in the Electoral College and the House of Representatives, either Tim Kaine or Mike Pence, not Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, would become president.

Due to the two-stage presidential election system in the United States, a tie between Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump and Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton is a possibility. In this case the tie will be resolved by Congress.

What You Do Not Expect: Exotic US Presidential Election Scenarios
https://sputniknews.com/us/201611031047021759-us-presidential-elections-scenarios/

US Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump often states at his rallies that he is determined to uphold his principles regardless of the outcome of the upcoming November 8 presidential election, be it victory, defeat or tie. This is not a figure of speech.

Due to the two-stage presidential election system in the United States, a tie between Trump and Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton is a possibility. In this case the tie will be resolved by Congress.

Trump is likely to win the vote in the House of Representatives. In this case, however, new surprises, such as the election of a third party candidate, former CIA officer Evan McMullin, cannot be ruled out. Another exotic scenario is a recount in at least one of the key states, which means it could take weeks for the winner to be determined. Both scenarios are unlikely but possible. After all, there was a recount in the crucial state of Florida in the 2000 election.

Tie and Recount

Presidential elections in the United States are indirect. During their first stage, so-called electors are elected in each state, who then approve the results of the popular vote. A key rule here is that all the electoral votes in each state go to the winner no matter the margin of his or her win. It is, therefore, not necessary to garner more popular votes. The key aim is to get a majority of electoral votes.

There are a total of 538 electors. To win, 270 votes are needed. Since the number of electors is even, a tie is also possible: 269 to 269. It is also possible that no one candidate will receive enough electoral votes to win.

In case of a tie, the president is elected by the House of Representatives where an electoral college is formed again. Each state gets one vote. If there is a tie vote in the House of Representatives, the vote goes to the Senate. There can be no tie in the Senate as there are 100 senators plus the deciding vote of the incumbent vice president, who is the ex officio president of the Senate. Importantly, the senators do not vote for the main candidates but for their running mates, which are the vice presidential candidates. Thus, in a hypothetical tie situation in the Electoral College and the House of Representatives, either Tim Kaine or Mike Pence, not Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, would become president. The influential polling analysis website FiveThirtyEight estimates the probability of a deadlock in the Electoral College at 1.1 percent. This means that the probability of a tie is small but cannot be ruled out completely. For this to happen, Trump would have to carry the must-win states of Ohio, North Carolina and Florida, and pick up Wisconsin, given that Clinton is predicted to win Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Nevada. If voters in other states go for the candidate who is currently leading according to pollsters, the result would be a tie in the Electoral College.

If this scenario comes to pass, the election will probably be decided in the House of Representatives, where the Republicans control both a simple majority and a majority of state delegations.

Another scenario, which is significantly more likely, is a recount in at least one key state. The probability of this event is rated at more than 6 percent. A recount is possible if the winner has a narrow margin of less than 0.5 percent. In this case, the losing candidate may demand a recount first in local courts and then in the state supreme court. The appeals process can go all the way to the US Supreme Court. The situation is complicated by the fact that there is no quorum in the Supreme Court due to the death of one of the justices, with the appointees of Republican and Democratic presidents evenly divided: 4-4. If party preferences hold and the votes are evenly divided, the decision of the lower court will stand. Thus, the fate of the recount will be decided at the level of individual states.

Historical Precedents

A recount occurred recently. In 2000, Al Gore was ahead of George W. Bush in the popular vote, 51 million (48.38 percent) to Bush’s 50.5 million (47.87 percent). In a direct election, Gore would have become president. The dispute occurred in Florida, which had 25 electors at the time, and the margin was too close a call.

The Florida vote was counted and recounted for several weeks. Eventually, the case went to the Supreme Court (at the time the majority of justices were Republican appointees), which stopped the recount. Bush was declared the winner with 48.85 percent of the vote, with Gore trailing by just 0.01 percent, giving Bush 271 electoral votes to the Democrat’s 266.

The margin between the winner and loser was the narrowest in US presidential election history. Nevertheless, this is not the only case when the winner did not become president.

In 1876, Samuel Tilden won the popular vote but received 184 electoral votes, while his opponent, Rutherford B. Hayes, won 165. There were still 20 electors in "disputed" states. In the end a decision was made that is known in US history as the Compromise of 1877 whereby the Democrats agreed to Hayes's election and he agreed to withdraw all federal troops from the South, bringing an end to Republican Reconstruction in the South.

Evan McMullin

History shows that a candidate who wins a majority of electoral votes does not necessarily become president if the election is decided in the House of Representatives. The US election is a multi-party election, despite the domination of the two major parties. This means that in theory, a third-party candidate could win in the House of Representatives by winning just a few electoral votes.

In the current election, the most popular third-party candidate is Republican candidate Gary Johnson. At one point he reached 8-10 percent in polls but he has since lost significant ground. The probability of Johnson winning at least one electoral vote is estimated at only 0.4 percent. He has to carry at least one state.

Evan McMullin, a former CIA officer, has far better chances. McMullin is running primarily in Republican-controlled Utah, whose residents are for the most part Mormons. McMullin is a Mormon, and many Utah voters prefer him to Donald Trump. Polls show that McMullin can compete with Trump and Clinton for Utah’s six electoral votes. The probability that McMullin wins at least one electoral vote is put at nearly 20 percent. If this happens, McMullin will deprive Trump of six critical electoral votes and increase the likelihood that none of the candidates reach the required 270 electoral votes. In this case, the decision will be made by the House of Representatives, and McMullin will "just" need to convince the Republicans that he is more fit for the presidency.

The Republican Party elite is on very bad terms with Trump, but during the primaries and the party convention it did not dare openly challenge him with procedural technicalities. Nevertheless, this possibility cannot be ruled out in the future – for example, if the president is elected by Congress. Thus, McMullin’s chances of becoming the next president are seen as extremely low, but they are more than zero.

Theoretically, McMullin is the third most likely candidate to win the presidency, after Clinton and Trump.

 

[meta-agnostic]

Wow, yes, a repeat of the 2000 presidential election debacle or something similar has probably been in the back of people's minds for a while but the numbers are shaping up to where it could be a real possibility. One wonders how much control the elites really have in such a scenario. Was 2000 completely controlled from start to finish, or did they just mop up the mess as they saw fit, leaving quite a bad taste in the mouths of the populace but, eh, what are we going to do about it?

https://sputniknews.com/us/201611031047021759-us-presidential-elections-scenarios/

<snip>
Presidential elections in the United States are indirect. During their first stage, so-called electors are elected in each state, who then approve the results of the popular vote. A key rule here is that all the electoral votes in each state go to the winner no matter the margin of his or her win. It is, therefore, not necessary to garner more popular votes. The key aim is to get a majority of electoral votes.
<snip>

Not to be pedantic, but this is not 100% true as stated in the article. The states of Maine and Nebraska allocate their electoral votes by Congressional district with the remaining two electoral votes going to the statewide winner. That's why you sometimes see them represented with funny diagonal lines on electoral maps. It's up to each state government to decide how to allocate their electoral votes, but the vast majority go with winner-take-all as it is seen as giving more "clout" to the state or some such nonsense. If the majority of states decided to allocate by congressional districts (themselves mostly severely gerrymandered) or some other form of proportional representation, there might be a much more even form of presidential campaigning than the red state/blue state/purple state idiocy we've had for about the past 16 years. Not to mention a possibly more democratic representation of peoples "votes". Something to keep in mind for another 3D cycle somewhere down the line, I suppose.