This is no fucking joke. Worked in the Field.
The system is rigged,
wait and see, Riots will probably follow. Trump campaign know this.
Donald Trump will not Accept this bullshit and he will Call it out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t75xvZ3osFg&feature=youtu.be
>>70522782
forgot to add
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trumps-convention-strategy-the-fix-is-in
Trump knows how to organize about as well as OP knows how to speak English.
MAGA
>>70522782
>The system is rigged,
>Trump campaign know this.
a retarded alligator knows that.
you were working for his campaign in Norway, huh?
>Riots will probably follow
only if they take away these idiots' beer and Dancing With The Stars.
>>70523390
worked With the memory card machines which will be used in us election
>>70523582
i'll grant you this:
if they try to rob Trump of the nomination at the Republican Convention, and insert some establishment-friendly "compromise" candidate like Paul Ryan in (as it looks like they are getting ready to do), then there very well *may be* riots, no matter how generally brain dead and apathetic my fellow countrymen are.
it would be on par with messing with football.
what do you do for a living? how is it you claim to have occasion to work with Diebolt (or Sequoia, ESS, whatever) machines?
>>70524743
>then there very well *may be* riots,
hah. white people haven't rioted since the 60s.
every two weeks some stupid assed black "teen" kills a white woman and it barely makes the news. nobody marches or does anything. maybe rush limbaugh mentions it, but then he moves on to cry about Hillary or whatever.
If the nomination is stolen from Trump, nobody will care. we will have a lot of fun threads and that's it.
>>70522851
It's shocking to read how even a standard article about Trump and somthing bad that will happen to him mischaracterizes who he is and what he has done.
>>70523582
Tell us everything about these cards
>>70525050
i understand the sentiment you're expressing, and i said essentially the same thing in my post - but, i think it's not only possible, but maybe even likely, that denying Trump the nomination would result in violence. i say this as someone who's not even a Trump supporter - i simply recognize the enormous following he has accrued. people are very passionate about it. i was a Ron Paul supporter in 2008 and 2012. had Paul won the number of delegates that Trump has, and was denied the nomination, even the relatively mild-manner Paul supporters who have taken up the chant, "to arms, to arms!" Trump's supporters are, in my estimation, a rougher bunch and a bit less sophisticated, but no less passionate.
as i said: if they did that, even the normally apathetic and easily pacified masses would get violent.
>>70525543
>as i said: if they did that, even the normally apathetic and easily pacified masses would get violent.
the democrats were pretty sure that bush stole the election from gore. not one drop of blood was spilled, as far as i know.
white people in the usa have it great. that's why we don't go out and actually protest.
>>70522782
i don't care if he becomes president or not. just like i don't care about all you eurotrash shit heads constantly talking about American election
>he thinks a candidate who barely captures 30% of the population's vote losing will cause riots
lol
>>70524743
>>70525543
me again
OP's article here:
>>70522851
illustrates my point.
i'll say it again:
even these easily pacified, overly-entertained, brain dead couch potatoes whom i am ashamed to call my countrymen would erupt in violence if they pull this shit.
the "freedom movement" (or whatever you choose to call it) has long been asking, "what would it take to wake these people up? what would it take to get people out in the streets?"
well, we are all going to discover the answer to that question, should they try to steal the nomination from Trump.
again, i say this as someone who isn't even a Trump supporter.
>>70526034
it's much more about the qualities of those people and their passion than t is about the numbers.
i do not even support Trump, and this would anger me because it would make it manifestly obvious to even the dumbest low-info voter that their vote ultimately means nothing at all.
>>70526179
You guys don't riot when a candidate wins the popular vote but loses the presidency because electorate lol.
>>70526179
>i do not even support Trump
>>70526455
>loses the presidency because electorate lol.
if you mean the electoral college, then of course we don't riot. it's the way our system works. is is the best system, no, but it's there for a reason; unfortunately I'm too lazy to go look it up. but it's not there to "steal" elections.
>>70525851
please see:
>>70526179
it's not about their numbers - it's about the nature of his supporters.
the media has sort of created an egregore here: i do not organically think that his supporters, or an individual level, are more prone to be violent than anyone else. but, through the power of the mass media, they have sort of been transformed into "Brown Shirts Lite," and they will ultimately believe this characterization, as this is what media does best - it forges public opinion and perception.
and yes, i do believe that this is all by design. i think Trump was put into this race for the express purpose of getting Hillary elected. Trump may very well run as an independent or third party candidate, and split the vote, handing the race to Clinton. i was saying this since he first entered the race.
and the establishment would love nothing more than for there to be violence, as it always gives them an excuse to implement more draconian controls.
we have been witnessing the slow-motion death of the United States for a couple decades now, and it has not been an accident. not at all.
>>70526455
you seem to not understand how elections work here. we have an electoral college for a reason - it is so a candidate can't win by simply visiting the most populated cities. it forces the candidates to show as much concern for Bumblefuck, Iowa as they do for NYC. it is a good system, even if many people do not understand it. THAT is why there weren't riots after Bush/Gore.
see:
>>70526721
>>70526721
>>70526893
The point I was making is that people lose "because of the system" despite getting more votes already all the time in the US. And that doesn't cause riots, why should Trump's defeat do that then?
It's just like that: He'll get the most votes, but not enough to secure the nomination, and then someone else is gonna get chosen.
>>70526726
>they have sort of been transformed into "Brown Shirts Lite," a
that's what pisses me off most. Bernie's supporters are channeling the brown shirts over and over, and all we hear about is how trump's supporters are violent.
hell, they fucking chained themselves to cars to stop the rally in arizona, and the media thought it was wonderful.
>>70526034
They're already rioting at his conventions.
>>70527041
It's a different political climate this year. It's not like the last four elections. On top of that people in this country are rioting and throwing massive protests two, three, sometimes four times a year anyway. This has been going on since 2005, and it just gets bigger every year now with the spread of technology and social media.
I think people are going to get nuts no matter who is elected.
>>70527041
>The point I was making is that people lose "because of the system" despite getting more votes already all the time in the US
again, you misunderstand our system.
you are referring to the general election, where it is indeed possible (and has happened) that one candidate gets more popular votes than the other, and still loses.
but we are talking about a PARTY'S NOMINATION, and whereas it's theoretically possible that the same thing could happen (as the delegates are often not bound by law to vote for whoever won the popular vote in a given state), it would also be such a marked departure from the popular will of the people that it would amount to outright THEFT, and not some seemingly aberrant outcome of some Byzantine set of election rules and nuances.
>>70522782
I have no idea what this is. Like how the fuck is this the government or whatever? How am I supposed to care about some random ass people in a no budget youtube video with no context and shit. Even if they reach some kind of conclusion I can't see how anything in this video would every be credible and important enough to matter. It's basically removed from anything that matters cause there's no real media or science here.
>>70527527
>but we are talking about a PARTY'S NOMINATION
exactly. other than financing and things like that, there are no laws whatsoever about how a party chooses its candidate. hell, parties aren't even mentioned in the constitution at all, and did not exist when it was written.
the only reason the parties pretend to listen to the voters is because we actually have a say in the election.
>>70526726
>it's not about their numbers - it's about the nature of his supporters.
Not to mention you can only be so blatant before there's a violent reaction.
A cuckold may rationalize the various red flags of his wife's infidelity but walking in on the wife in mid-coitus more often than not still ends in violence.
>>70527801
>a violent reaction.
you guys (maybe it's just you) keep using that word. america is not russia in 1917 or germany in 1932. most of us just want to eat delicious food and root for the home team.
>>70527801
>A cuckold may rationalize the various red flags of his wife's infidelity but walking in on the wife in mid-coitus more often than not still ends in violence.
this is actually an excellent analogy for what i'm trying to express.
and it was said in a way /pol/ can easily understand.
>>70527887
It doesn't matter what most people want.
Most people want BLM matter not to block the highway but it happens anyway.
>>70522782
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t75xvZ3osFg&feature=youtu.be [
oH, i DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THESE COMPUTER THINGS YOU KNOW..
I just ... how does... what is ... umm...
>>70528047
you're pretty good at this analogy thing.
>>70527916
In essence, Trump not getting elected is the signal for the more moderate revolutionary elements in the American right (the extremist elements have already come to this conclusion) to decide that America cannot be changed from within the system.
>>70528255
and you are pretty good at dubs, which is like an analogy for how mediocre you are
>>70528365
exactly. many of us came to that conclusion long ago. now, if they rob Trump of the nomination, it will be undeniable.
and again - i'm not even a Trump supporter. but the powers that be got away with this crap for so long by not being so hamfisted and obvious. Trump's campaign - for all its faults - is forcing them to act blatantly.
you know the saying: "the quickest way to depose a tyrant is to make him act like one"
The local GOP offices in downtown Delaware, OH don't have any Trump information. Cruz? Yes. Kasich? Yes. Trump? "NO!! Not here"
It's already a done deal in the GOP.
>>70528365
>America cannot be changed from within the system.
but it can, and it has evolved for my entire life.
the problem is that you sound young. meaning, you expect america to change to suit you in just a year or two.
everyone agrees that the Senate sucks because it can legally block just about anything if it wants to. did you know that that was intentional? our government never "topples" or has a cabinet crisis. hell, even nixon's idiocy was handled quite easily. there's a good reason that we do not elect all the senators every two years, like the house. we have to be pissed off for three election cycles to vote for all the senators, and that's so that we have to really want something for it to happen.
civil rights? abortion rights? banking reform? how large a military? there are so many facets of american that have SLOWLY EVOLVED over my lifetime, and that's both wonderful and frustrating at the same time.
we are the world leader in many ways. we have to have a grownup system of government.
>>70529133
You don't seem to get it. The establishment can and does rig any election it has to. THAT is why the system doesn't work. It doesn't matter how many election cycles we're pissed off if the vote is rigged against us every time. If Trump gets robbed by the rigging, his supporters won't just lay down and take it like Democrats did in 2000, and why should they? The system is literally rigged against them and there's only one way to fix it.
>>70529133
>the problem is that you sound young. meaning, you expect america to change to suit you in just a year or two.
I'm not talking about what we personally think.
I'm talking about the conclusion drawn by the heavily armed and highly militant people who have been stock-piling guns and ammunition for the past decade.
They're not going to be willing to turn in their weapons and sit through a hundred years of increasingly blatant communist rule, working from the ground up to slowly convince the youth of America that maybe the Founding Fathers were right all along via a "long march through the institutions".
They spent thousands of dollars on gun and ammunition and fire-arms training for a reason, and it wasn't just so they could inadvertently create the sport of 3-Gun.
>>70529898
>The establishment can and does rig any election it has to.
bye.
>>70522782
>that Jeff Goldblum double
>>70529898
I'm not sure if you realize this, but if right ring revolutionaries start any kind of civil war or stage an attack on the system, it won't fix this country.
First let's propose that these moderate elements join, and you have a popular revolution, what then? Have you ever asked yourself what would happen if your revolution succeeds in starting a war with the government? I mean what would really happen.
The government in America is so essential, because it is literally the only glue holding all of the multicultural parts together into one big industrial economic machine. If a schism tries to upset that, then all of those parts will suddenly start to move against one another, while forces from other nations move in to exploit our division and weaken us from the outside.
You can't propose that the right wing group just kill or crush everyone on the left wing and 'fix' this country. It's impossible. Let's fancy this idea for one moment with our imaginations. Not only would the process be extremely long and painful, but the resources required to track down and eliminate every liberal simply don't exist. They especially would not exist for a fringe group of rebels. You would not be able to reach Point B: Fix the nation, because you would be stuck permanently on Point A: We're fucked, and everything is ruined. Like Syria, except with 300 million more people. While right wing groups radicalize, left wing groups and their peers will also radicalize to react. Meanwhile the radical rebel groups will be fighting within each other to find out who gets the larger slice of the cake, and what will probably occur for a decade or more.
We're probably looking at quite a few million people dead at the end of it, a devastated infrastructure, strengthened rivals abroad, an economy that will basically just disappear due to massive inflation, starvation, famine, disease, death, murder, and decay everywhere.
