- Press coverage, “red mirage” and narrative management.
- Trump declares victory before “blue shift”.
- The “Transition Integrity Project”
- Possible signs of fraud?
- Social media clampdown
Trump and Biden face off for the last time as America goes to the polls, and this is the open thread to discuss the results as they come in.
The polls (if you trust or believe them) all put Creepy Uncle Joe in a substantial lead. That, coupled with the support of the vast majority of the media and establishment suggest
As with all Presidential elections since “Dubya’s” first term (or even before), there’s very real reasons to doubt the legitimacy or fairness of the result. The huge emphasis on postal voting – an easily corruptible practice – is a further red flag.
There’s a certain school of thought that it “doesn’t matter who wins”. That has been broadly true for most of the last half-century, however it might not hold true here. Trump is a bombastic idiot, and he hasn’t come through on the vast majority of his anti-establishment promises at all, but he is at least the first POTUS in over 40 years to not start a war. He even attempted to end a couple. We certainly can’t trust Biden (or Harris) to carry on that pattern.
That, coupled with talks of a “national mask mandate” and more moves to “counter disinformation” make the prospect of Biden (or Harris) presidency deeply unpleasant.
There’s talk of Donald Trump being prosecuted should he lose, or refusing to accept the result. Both would be very surprising. But what do you think?
- Who will win the Presidency?
- Will the election be fair?
- Will the loser contest the vote?
- Will the military get involved?
- In the end, will it matter?
UPDATE: Both The Guardian and Washington Post are reporting the possibility of a “red mirage” in some battleground states. Meaning that, after in-person ballots are counted it might seem like Trump has won, but the postal ballots counted later will swing it back to Biden.
Various media are also reporting that Trump will declare victory “prematurely”, and that in this event the media will perhaps refuse to broadcast his speech. The New York Times sent this incredibly revealing tweet on the subject…and then deleted it:
“The role of declaring the winner of the presidential election falls to the news media…” hmmmm. At least they’re honest about it.
UPDATE 4/11/20: Trump held leads in five undeclared states – Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Pennsylvania and North Carolina – when all five stopped (or dramatically slowed) counting votes. Since then, a surge of postal votes wiped out Trump’s lead in Wisconsin, giving the Biden the state by as few as 6000 votes.
Pennsylvania’s governor has stated there are “over a million” postal votes yet to be counted.
Trump has declared that he should have won the election by now, and has hinted at a Supreme Court challenge. It certainly looks like we will see a “red mirage” – an appearance of a Trump win and then sudden Biden recovery, entirely due to postal ballots. Needless to say, rather suspicious.
In this context it’s a good time to revisit the “Transition Integrity Project”, a series of exercises carried out over the summer of 2020 backed by the Protect Democracy foundation. Their alleged aim was to “ensure a peaceful transfer of power”, but it doesn’t take a genius to read between the lines here.
Especially when you see the list of names involved – all current/former DNC employees and/or vociferous Trump opponents: Donna Brazille, John Podesta, Max Boot and Bill Kristol to name a few.
In this document, released August this year, they lay out their conclusions. Including (bold in the original):
“The concept of “election night,” is no longer accurate and indeed is dangerous. We face a period of contestation [sic] stretching from the first day a ballot is cast in mid-September until January 20. The winner may not, and we assess likely will not, be known on “election night” as officials count mail-in ballots.”
Remarkably prescient of them.
UPDATE 4/11/20 15:00: Are these signs of potential electoral fraud?
Early in the morning CNN’s rolling coverage map suddenly attributed 138,339 votes to Biden in Michigan, without recording a single vote Trump or any of three independent candidates:
This jump almost completely destroyed Trumps 5% lead.
Nate Silver’s statistics and analysis website fivethirtyeight.com has been plotting the votes on graphs. Both Wisconsin and Michigan have sudden, vertical jumps for Biden at around 4am:
It has been suggested that these are counties returning their results en masse,, which is technically possible, but if that were the case you’d expect a corresponding jump for Trump, even the most Democrat friendly areas of the country don’t give Biden 100% of their votes.
The best illustration of just how bizarre these events are, is the reaction of the CNN anchors. Watch how they handle Biden suddenly getting 109,000 new votes, and totally wiping out Trump’s 4 point lead in Wisconsin in an instant:
“Where did it come from?” Indeed.
Are social media going to clampdown on dissent or accusations of fraud? Last night, in a long-expected move, Twitter finally banned David Icke from posting. Whilst this was never explicitly said to be about the election, the timing was certainly suspect. (Whether you have any time for Icke or not, censorship is never OK).
However, we are now beginning to see some election-related moves on social media.
When Sean Davis, editor of The Federalist, pointed out the odd jumps in Biden’s votes, Twitter slapped a warning on his tweet. Calling it “disputed” and “potentially misleading”:
Source: OFF GUARDIAN