Election Results!

Post Reply
SkittleandTwix
Supporter in '11

Post   » Mon Nov 21, 2016 9:56 pm


That is chilling Lynx. A year ago I might have thought the author was delusional. I don't now. I saw a few Yahoo comments re how "God was back in the white house" which puzzled me. How could they think Trump's unsavory business deals, cheating business partners and Trump University students and philandering were compatible with any major religion? This article makes those comments make sense and makes them frightening.

Funny how they claim that making Christianity the official religion is conservative. It is a radical change. Freedom of religion was one of the founding principles of the US.

"But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."

-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782

I logged back in to post another article. I am really afraid of Trump's talk of limiting press coverage to those media outlets who favor him. I saw this article on how easily our media could become nothing more than a state run outlet, such as Russia has. It isn't as good as Lynx's article, but in light of the false news that helped win the election, it is right on point. Here is the quote that was all too true:

We are at the beginning of something new — a kind of ruling system that exploits the technologies which utopians thought would free us. It’s a post-truth world, and victory belongs to those who understand that reality belongs to the person with the best stagecraft. https://warisboring.com/breitbart-could-become-americas-rt-d777049c1156#.qpo2vv5tl

It is a post-truth world, one in which reality can be manipulated. I don't think the founding fathers saw that one coming.

The other frightening thing is my realization of how fragile democracy is and how much it rests on (for lack of a better word) sportsmanship. Every candidate has released his or her tax returns. Trump didn't and it didn't hurt him.

Every other president has put their assets in a blind trust so there is no conflict of interest. Trump is going to give his companies to his kids, but he knows what helps those companies and what hurts them. He wants his kids to have the highest security clearance which means they will have insider information. I believe any of the other Republican or Democratic or Green party candidates would have understood the need to avoid such a conflict and would have divested themselves.

No other president has talked about limiting a free press or protestors or had a staff member claim he was keeping a list of people who said negative things about him in order to get even with them. No president has talked about jailing his opponent. No president has suggested at his rallies that his election would be rigged or suggested that his rabid followers "should use their second amendment rights" if he loses the election. No one has asked someone, as in the case of the cast of Hamilton, to apologize for expressing their beliefs. (I realize this was a ruse and an intentional distraction, but it is still bizarre.)

How much more can he do once he is in office? What else has good sportsmanship kept his predicessors from doing that he will just do? Appropriate funds for himself? Take over the military? Declare martial law? Jail protestors? I don't know. Maybe this is melodramatic. I hope so, but so far he has shown little respect for checks and balances.

User avatar
Lynx
RESIST

Post   » Tue Nov 22, 2016 9:02 am


That is a very good article. The one I put up ties together SO MUCH. But yours is clear in its point.

Another issue is how many millions it will cost us (and cost NYC and other locations) to have a Trump president. And by that what do I mean?

Security. Nearby businesses suffering. Costing us (and/or NYC) 100's of thousands of dollars.

NYC, a million a day??!!!!
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/11/21/1602684/-CNN-Cost-o ... anytime-soon

NYC and the rest of us:
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/11/21/1602479/-Trump-s- ... ain-in-the-A

Bookfan
For the Love of Pigs

Post   » Tue Nov 22, 2016 5:24 pm


@Lynx -
Wow. Just wow. It does tie everything together in a very scary way. How do we stop this? You gotta know something's wrong when Glen Beck of all people sends out a warning.

SkittleandTwix
Supporter in '11

Post   » Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:05 pm


The president has total control over launching a nuclear attack:
http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2016/11/18/the-president-and- ... n=pockethits

Let's just hope that at 3 in the morning he doesn't get as mad at a foreign power as he got at a Miss America contestant.

User avatar
Lynx
RESIST

Post   » Tue Nov 22, 2016 10:46 pm


It just does not make any sense at all that he was elected president. The "unqualified" and "does not have the temperment" were tremendous understatements.

SkittleandTwix
Supporter in '11

Post   » Tue Nov 22, 2016 11:09 pm


I had a long post that got deleted when I was logged out a few posts back. In it, I mused that Trump might have no choice but to back out of his "climate change is a hoax" claim. There is a three year waiting period on pulling out of the Paris Accord and a long procedure after that. Also, China and other signators threatened serious trade sanctions if he pulled out. Quite a few US businesses, like Starbucks, signed a letter asking him not to pull out either because they seriously cared about the environment or because they were afraid of international trade sanctions.

That led me to realize that Trump really only had three choices - 1) go forward with attempting to pull out, knowing that he might FAIL at it and knowing that he might crash the US economy in the process; 2) stay in and complain that the other countries were not letting him out, in which case he looks like both a wimp who can't beat up other countries and a failure who made another stupid promise he can't keep; or 3) suddenly claim he's learned that climate change is real.

The third option is the only one that saves face for him. He hates to lose or be seen as weak. The third option allows him to shrug it off as something he wasn't fully informed about without looking like a wimp. If I (yuk) worked for him, I would have advised he take this option. It has the additional benefit of screwing the regular Republicans he hates and perhaps getting some of the protesters to hate him less. Big oil and coal will be furious, but unless he owes the oil companies big time, it is the best choice for him.

Still, I was shocked that tonight - he seems to have said he thought humans had a role in climate change and he'd have to think of it some more. Obviously, this wasn't planned as he has a climate denier as head of the EPA . I am guessing he's been briefed and the reality of it is setting in. Also, my friend who consults with the military says they are well aware of, accept and are preparing for climate change. Once he starts to get military briefings, he would get their (not overly liberal) opinion that it is real.

This may be interesting.

C Cole-Chakotay

Post   » Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:38 am


Lynx, I've said the things about 'unqualified' and 'temperament' all along. I just do not understand why otherwise good, rational people voted for dt.

Bookfan
For the Love of Pigs

Post   » Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:41 am


From CNN:
Computer scientists urge Clinton campaign to challenge election results

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/22/politics/hillary-clinton-challenge-results/index.html

User avatar
Lynx
RESIST

Post   » Wed Nov 23, 2016 12:49 pm


If there was any possibility of fraud, they should pursue it.

Bookfan
For the Love of Pigs

Post   » Thu Nov 24, 2016 6:29 am


Lots of stuff.

From The Independent:
Jill Stein demands vote recount after reports of potential hacking and manipulation in several swing states

***Need to raise money to fund the recounts and do it within days:***

https://jillstein.nationbuilder.com/recount

*****************************************

From the computer prof. who's quoted (incorrectly) in New York Magazine about the problem:

Want to Know if the Election was Hacked? Look at the Ballots

https://medium.com/@jhalderm/want-to-know-if-the-election-wa ... a#.id2tjzbnv

OK. This doesn't necessarily mean the election was hacked, just that it could have been. It's especially worrisome because the US gov has accused Russia of hacking before the election in an attempt to influence the election. And then there are Trump's extensive ties to Russia. So it needs to be looked into.

The last link to a blog of the computer science prof describes how easy it is. I've been worried about this since Gore v. Bush, but of course nothing gets done until it's a huge problem & too late. I used to be a software developer and am at least vaguely aware of how hacking voting machines could happen.

"The only way to know whether a cyberattack changed the result is to closely examine the available physical evidence — paper ballots and voting equipment in critical states like Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. Unfortunately, nobody is ever going to examine that evidence unless candidates in those states act now, in the next several days, to petition for recounts."

"America’s voting machines have serious cybersecurity problems. That isn’t news. It’s been documented beyond any doubt over the last decade in numerous peer-reviewed papers and state-sponsored studies by me and by other computer security experts. We’ve been pointing out for years that voting machines are computers, and they have reprogrammable software, so if attackers can modify that software by infecting the machines with malware, they can cause the machines to give any answer whatsoever. I’ve demonstrated this in the laboratory with real voting machines — in just a few seconds, anyone can install vote-stealing malware on those machines that silently alters the electronic records of every vote."

Bookfan
For the Love of Pigs

Post   » Thu Nov 24, 2016 6:40 am


"It doesn’t matter whether the voting machines are connected to the Internet. Shortly before each election, poll workers copy the ballot design from a regular desktop computer in a government office, and use removable media (like the memory card from a digital camera) to load the ballot onto each machine. That initial computer is almost certainly not well secured, and if an attacker infects it, vote-stealing malware can hitch a ride to every voting machine in the area. There’s no question that this is possible for technically sophisticated attackers. (If my Ph.D. students and I were criminals, I’m sure we could pull it off.) If anyone reasonably skilled is sufficiently motivated and willing to face the risk of getting caught, it’s happened already."

User avatar
Lynx
RESIST

Post   » Thu Nov 24, 2016 6:43 am


It would be helpful to get a recount to ensure voting was not tampered with.

I hope they succeed.

Bookfan
For the Love of Pigs

Post   » Thu Nov 24, 2016 6:48 am


Are you always up this early, Lynx? I woke up an hour ago & couldn't get back to sleep.

User avatar
Lynx
RESIST

Post   » Thu Nov 24, 2016 7:16 am


It's the chickens. They have made me an early bird too!

Post Reply
174 posts