MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
No bio...
User ID: 1783
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
30d ago
- Trump's advisers, advisers that were appointed by himself, repeatedly told him there was no outcome-determinative fraud after looking into it. Despite this, Trump still insisted there was outcome-determinative fraud. Trump still insisted even after he started losing court cases left and right about there being outcome-determinative fraud. Assuming 1 is true this means that Trump is either knowingly lying or willfully ignoring people he himself picked
A big problem here is there simply wasn’t enough time to actually conduct a serious investigation. In order to actually investigate the election fraud claim that voting machines changed votes, you’d have to forensically audit dozens of machines in every state. To do so properly would take several weeks. The people claiming no fraud were saying so within days. Likewise for counting irregularities where it appeared that the counting was stopped and republicans shooed out of the room before the democrats pulled out hidden ballots to begin counting again without republicans watching. No one, to my knowledge, was put under oath and questioned, no investigation of the videos showing this kind of thing was done, we certainly never put anyone under oath to testify about the claims. And again with mail in ballots being dropped en mass. Nobody really investigated such claims, nobody bothered to look at the ballots in question, no officials were put under oath to answer questions.
None of that was investigated in the very short time between the reporting of the results and the claims by these officials. The best that could charitably be said is that they called the head of elections in the states, and the official in charge said “we didn’t see anything.” On no planet is asking the person who might have committed fraud if he did so anything like a real investigation. The officials stating there wasn’t fraud have no way of knowing this because no evidence was collected and no investigation was done. The cops investigated themselves and found nothing wrong. Nothing to see here. And questioning is is disinformation.
- Trump, despite knowing there wasn't outcome-determinative fraud (assuming 2), still tried to change the outcome of the election. First, he tried the courts where he knowingly lied about there being outcome-determinative fraud in court filings. When that failed he tried contacting various state legislatures and other state officials to ask them to certify his slate of electors. When that failed, his final option was to try to convince Pence to either use his slate of electors to win (a slate of electors not officially certified despite claiming to be certified), or to invalidate enough state's electors to make it so no one gets 270 electors, throwing the election to the house where Trump would then hopefully win given it becomes 1 state 1 vote there.
The lawsuits were never heard. And when they were dismissed, they were dismissed on standing. To say we know for certain he was lying is pretty uncharitable. He couldn’t have known whether there was fraud as no evidence was ever investigated properly. And while I don’t agree with either the false electors or the Pence thing, I’m just not sure what else could have been done. He thinks there’s fraud, there’s no investigation, and there’s simply no time to try. The options at that point are either the Hail Mary he did try or give up and pack up to leave and hope there’s an investigation that exonerates him in several years.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
Kamala is declared the winner of the election. Trump disputes it, and several states refuse to certify. It goes to SCOTUS who declare a contested election. Trump wins the by state vote in congress. Lots of protesting.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I think there is a decline in the number and affordability of spaces where young adults could just hang out with peers, and I’ll definitely agree that the (safetyist) push for graduated licenses and later driving ages have made this worse. It’s driving the loneliness epidemic, the dating recession, and I’d argue the phenomenon of online radicalism (and it’s both sides) are driven by just a lack of offline, cheap and easily accessible places where a kid between 15 and 20 can afford to hang out and don’t need to get parental permission to get to.
I’ve come to the conclusion that all groups of people in society need their own in-person offline spaces where they can be with other people of similar ages and backgrounds especially away from the prying eyes of outsiders who might not appreciate the activities or discussions had by those people. Incels, I believe are created when socially awkward boys are not given access to male only private in person and offline spaces where they can learn to be social and learn from other men how to approach a woman and how to not be awkward when dating one. You simply cannot do that in mixed company or around adult gatekeepers who will be offended by the discussion.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I mean to be fair, this is how respectability has always worked. The point of having “polite” discourse” is that it entrenches the people with power. When it was the Catholic Church with all the power, “civility” meant that you didn’t publicly say anything against that version of Christianity. When it was King George III, being anti-Crown was uncivil.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I honestly think most people simply are not good at understanding the Zeitgeist of cultures outside of their own and perhaps nearby cultures that are fairly similar. We don’t really get the MENA region because most of us are generations removed from a culture that took religion seriously. To most WEIRD people, religion is just a personal preference, probably not much more important than other lifestyle choices. We don’t think of God in universal terms and not really as a thing to order society by. We would never ever suggest a state religion except in a nominalistic way— yes we’re Anglican, but it’s not like we take it seriously enough to seriously teach it or publicly acknowledge it or encourage its practice.
Comparing that to MENA, they’d be convinced that most of the West are atheists. They don’t allow the public display of religion outside of the state sect of Islam. They not only live by those rules themselves, and publicly so, but enforce those rules on everyone whether Muslims or not. The Quran bans homosexual behavior and they will teach gays to fly off skyscrapers. The mindset is that Allah is watching and allah is going to not only keep score but intervene in history and in personal life to enforce his will.
Now on the liberal conservative version, I think it’s the same thing. Liberals are farther along the path to practical atheism. Most have at best found churches that are liberal first and Christian second, if they bother to go. They’re much more down the path of chewing almost everything through the Post-Modern Neo-Marxist lens of oppression and global culture norms of not judging anything except traditional Western values. As such they simply cannot fathom that someone might take such things seriously.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I think a lot about this and to me a huge, unspoken aspect of the vitriol is how much of daily life is now political. It’s a power game, and increasingly it’s a power game that has no outside. The church I attend is political, the car I drive, my sports teams, my beer, the stores I shop at and the brands I buy. Further, politics is invading issues that used to be private business or family matters, or simply left too personal choice. And because politics is so total, it has a lot of power. And with so much power, getting a seat at the table is worth alienating other people. It’s worth walking out on thanksgiving dinner over politics if it means that someone watching might agree. It’s worth the inconvenience of having to check the boycotts to make sure you don’t accidentally fund someone who believes wrong-think.
If government either weren’t so powerful of didn’t require us to vote I think we’d have a lot less vitriol. A government too weak to do anything isn’t a prize to capture and loot. And as far as not having elections, if we weren’t required to give our legitimacy to the things our government wants to do to us, they’d have no reason to manufacture consent.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I think Reddit is populated mostly by college age children of PMC parents or by failsons who were raised in a PMC family. So while the actual PMC democrats probably aren’t, the people posting on Reddit have been raised in PMC families and have those values. They’re more obnoxious about it mostly because they don’t have the wisdom to hide their PMC power level, or perhaps don’t have to care yet.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I think this alongside the other types of events (football games for example) are things that are coded for the lower classes, the deplorables, the kinds of people that mainline Democrats sneer at while being really patronizing about their attempts to “help”. Republicans are able to appeal to that base because they don’t sneer. They see “dirty jobs” as noble, they see doing a job that needs doing so you can meet your obligations as noble. They see the note rests and sensibilities of the working class in flyover country as worthy and beautiful. And this phot opportunity highlighted the difference between the two parties. The democrats are run by the PMC who see working class whites as beneath them. They don’t want to feel snobby so they tend to give help to minorities. The republicans are the party of doers and builders.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I mean it’s certainly possible, but then again we didn’t seem to have that problem with other elections. Even with it being contentious in 2016 and 2020, people still talked about current events to some degree, and people did put out yard signs, at least around me. There are now more sports flags flying than Trump or Harris combined. There’s not really much tension that I’ve seen, just that it’s not something people are interested in. They’re also not really following news. It’s just not something in the air, or anything that people seem dialed in on. It might make a difference where you are, I’m in Missouri which is pretty conservative.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I kinda doubt it. I think it’s a hobby of the too-online crowd, but I’m not convinced that the median American is all that interested in the election. I’m not hearing much discussion of the election in the real world, I’m not hearing ordinary Americans discussing things like Project 2025, trans people, immigrants or their culinary habits, etc. I’m also seeing a lot fewer signs around my neighborhood, bumper stickers, roadside homemade signs, hats, shirts, etc. honestly I’m not sure anyone else is interested. The only real conversation I’ve had offline about the candidates was right after the first assassination attempt, and that was mostly a short conversation of “OMG, did you hear someone shot at Trump.” “Yeah, that’s really weird.” That’s it.
Given this level of interest, I think you’re not going to see a lot of people consumed with election uncertainty to the point of a measurable impact on productivity. It’s not really something I’m seeing a lot of people thinking about or talking about or anything like that. I see more sports talk around me than election talk.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I think of intelligence like I think of processing power in a computer. Now below a certain level, if you don’t have enough, it’s going to be nearly impossible to do anything useful. I think there are several types:, linguistics, mathematics, art, social. These can’t be used interchangeably— meaning I can’t use artistic intelligence to understand math or language, nor can I use mathematical intelligence to learn to write poetry. To my mind these sit atop a more general CPU that is needed for any type of thinking. And I further think that we’re dealing with multiple genes in multiple places which to my mind would complicate any sort of simple correlation to ethnicity. Until we know which genes exist in which population it’s impossible to tell for sure.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I mean it’s not necessarily going to be a Return To PreTrump. Somebody will take the crown simply because the sentiment precedes Trump and will be around without him. The MAGA crowd has now tasted real power, if you think they’re going to allow this moment to fade without any significant victories, you’re mistaken. And with that power available, someone (probably someone anointed by Trump himself) will take the cause and run with it.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
On the other side, I think a lot of the issue here is about this being as much a jobs program as a broadband program. Satellite broadband doesn’t employ a lot of backhoe drivers.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I think in some cases, she’s somewhat a hinderance. Not that it isn’t nice to have your nest to return to, but that’s a catch 22. For some people, the fact that you can afford to fail means that you don’t take things seriously enough. If not working means possibly sleeping in the car because you can’t pay rent, you’ll find the muscles to work full time. If failing out of college means poverty, class becomes much more interesting. I would actually suggest getting your own apartment or split Trent somewhere so that if you’re not working or doing the minimum it will be a risk to you.
I’d also recommend that if you’re not making it to class, maybe try either trade school or community college. If you’re doing community college, you can generally pay your way. That way the fact that you spent $400 a course might motivate you a bit more.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I think this is the fruit of the deep state long since being removed from any serious accountability for its decision making. It is now so partisan and blatantly so that a company that qualifies for funding doesn’t get it because of who runs it. An agency held to account for results would at least fear the wrath of elected officials for having done so. The FCC has so much protection from the official state that it can punish Musk’s company for his public crime think.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I think a lot of this is down to incentives. Nobody wants to be the government that gives a bad economic report. You don’t want to be up for election when crime is up or unemployment is high or inflation is high. So there’s a lot of pressure on the agencies making these reports because your boss is a political appointee and making his elected boss look bad is going to hurt his career. As such, people are using formulas that are inaccurate and almost always in the direction of making the boss look as good as you can get away with. Which is pretty easy when you can change the formula to suit the purpose. Unemployment rates are hot garbage because basically it’s only counting people actively seeking work within a 3 month timeframe. Which means that if you’re not actively filling out applications, you’re not unemployed. This obviously doesn’t count people who are discouraged or retraining because their old skills became useless. U6 is more useful because it counts all workers available, and if anything overcounts as a full time student is counted even if he doesn’t want a job at all.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
Not only that, but quite often the older version of the product is no longer available. I may have the option of buying a 4K TV, but it’s not like I could choose an old CRT TV if I wanted one. Or in the case of shrinkflation, if you make packages smaller, than the old version isn’t available. People are not choosing the new one, the old one is gone.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
Which is kind of the point. If the point was just to see who might win, why publish the results? If the polls say Trump wins, then it’s useful perhaps in business where you might want to long term plan for the future economic policies Trump brings. Or it might be useful to the various campaigns as a signal of where the weak points are. I suspect that they aren’t getting the polls generally available to the public, which are not about reporting the likely winners, but in motivating or demotivating various factions in the electorate. CNN isn’t trying to guess the outcome. They want to scare democrats into voting and working harder for Kamala and saying she might lose is motivation for people who are afraid of a Trump second term. If they’re wrong, it’s not like they get a black eye even.
I think what makes more sense is to try to gage enthusiasm and whether or not some factions of the base are not on board. Kamala has a big problem because of Israel Palestine. There’s a fairly large portion of the left that’s jumping to either staying home or voting Green Party. If they’re serious, I think that’s a problem no matter what the polls say. I don’t see the same divide with any issues for Trump. I see lots of people saying they can’t wait to vote for Trump. Both things seem important as data points.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I’ll go one further. I don’t think any poll is actually trying to figure out who will win so much as to convince the electorate of whatever the polling centers want to be true. There’s really no reason to bother with them other than to see if anything is changing within the narrative.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I’m not going to deny that at least some people think it’s nefarious. It’s just that it’s much more likely that FEMA is bean counting supplies gathered by other charities before letting them through to satisfy a process that’s in their handbook. Standardizing is generally okay. But then again this is a situation where time loss means dead bodies and everybody knows it. It’s not exactly the same as managing accounts in an office. The time spent adding traceability to a process in an office job and even using that to trace that information isn’t going to cause much of a problem because you have the luxury of as much time as you need to do that. If the cost of traceability is death, then I think honestly it’s a bit more critical to push back and say “why is it important to have a complete inventory of what First Baptist Church of Asheville is distributing when that will delay aid by a whole day and people will die without food?” Sure, there are some bits that you need to hold the line on, but trying to follow a checklist to the letter in a disaster zone just adds delay where none was needed.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I think a lot of this is down to history. Jewish history is full of “we thought we were safe, then the gentiles started forming mobs — again,” and recent Israeli history has been one filled with terror attacks, suicide bombings, shootings, etc. with a history like that, paranoia, and thus extreme reaction to threats is just part of the deal. From the point of view of Israel, if the country fails, it’s only a matter of time before they’re back in Nazi camps. And the only thing standing between Jews and Nazi camps is the Israeli security apparatus. So, unlike the USA where military forces are generally only used abroad and we haven’t had a mainland invasion since 1812, Israel has a history of exile and being victimized all the time, finally getting a state, having the surrounding countries try to kill them, nearly daily terror strikes. There’s no sense that letting up will do any good here. The US military can follow international law because it’s not at risk nor are its civilians. If we decided to fight a war with silly string instead of guns, the state still isn’t at risk. If Israel doesn’t go full bore, they risk being destroyed. So while the US military wouldn’t shoot preteens, it’s never been in the same position. They never had to think about whether the kid will grow up to try to kill them.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
The deep state isn't some nefarious ingroup. It's a useful umbrella term to capture the emergent ideology of DC's upper-middle-class bureaucracy. But that’s it. It personifies the incompetence inherent in all bureaucracy. It is as faceless as it is boring. However, Trump's rendition of the deep state is akin to a singular eldritch horror that seeks to destroy all that we hold dear. In this narrative, the deep state is held responsible for all of America's problems, and Trump is heralded as the savior.
It’s not nefarious no, but it’s also completely absurd that people aren’t allowed to distrust the organs of state that rarely serve their purposes, and quite often serve to stymie peasant attempts to better themselves economically. The organs of the deep state are finely tuned to follow procedures that protect themselves from scrutiny, and provide deniability to anyone that might be blamed if something goes wrong. It is not geared to serving its purpose and regulating without being destructive.
OSHA is supposed to protect workers, but quite often the opposite happens as rules that do little to prevent serious injury often make it difficult to impossible to run a business. Which makes it a much cheaper and often better idea to have things made in China or India so they aren’t fined because of some cosmetic problems that have nothing to do with safety.
FEMA is so regulation heavy that it’s more a hinderance than a help in a disaster. Much of the aid in Helene is getting through despite FEMA, not because of it. And because of this the people no longer want FEMA around. I can’t blame them when a bunch of construction workers with heavy equipment can rescue more people in a couple of hours than FEMA and those they contract with can manage in a week.
It’s poor customer service. The people are not getting better transportation from the department of transportation, better education from the department of education, and so on.
Of course the crazies ate it up. And given Trump's recent behavior, of course they're turning against him.
They’re not necessarily “crazy”. I think they’re wrong in the sense that these groups don’t wish them to suffer. But at the same time the deep state serves the deep state and is mostly a jobs program for elites who are otherwise unemployable who have no idea how to get things done. They follow procedures off cliffs because they are not skilled enough to know how things actually work so they can’t or won’t bend the rules to get things moving in the right direction.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
One thing I noticed about politics Now vs 2000 is that basically politics itself has become much more of a lifestyle than it used to be. There are entirely different default activities, and different fashion sense and different music and so on. And now there are political themed shopping — bulletproof coffee and the like. And I think that’s making polarization worse, as it makes almost every decision made at least potentially political. I find it kind of exhausting tbh to have so much be political when it doesn’t matter that much.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1mo ago
I think the partisanship and the entrenched powers points in the other direction— hypernormalization. The hyper-normalizing simply means that most people have simply accepted that this is how it is and ever will be because the people in charge simply have no solutions to the issues at hand. This goes for democrats and republicans, and I think it explains the Cult around MAGA and Trump. Trump is popular because he’s giving hope of a world actually better than what we have now, and doing so in a way that’s very concrete. Not “slow the growth of inflation by X% over the next Y months” but “I want you to be able to afford groceries and gasoline again.” Not “we’re going to deal with the root causes of X,” but “we’re going to actually fix this.” Not “well, we should give illegals a court date,” but “we’re throwing them out.” It’s a similar appeal to other populist candidates— they’re addressing the real needs of real people with a promise that they can actually fix it, and of course they get very popular with ordinary people who want things to be more like the past where one income would feed and house a family (in an actual house even if it was small), where social deviance was not taught as normal to elementary school kids, where walking down the streets in major cities was not an open invitation to be assaulted and robbed, and where you didn’t see drug dealers selling openly on the streets.
I don’t think any party can actually deliver on getting us back to the turn of the last century where such things were possible. It’s the slow decline of the western world into moral decadence, sloth, corruption and decay. Such has been the way of every other civilization to exist. We’re in the late empire stages of decline. And unless we right the ship, she’s going to sink into darkness until some other civilization pulls up from the ashes of the Rules Based International Order to create something brand new.
I think the idea you’re looking for is apprenticeship. And I think they did start teaching kids to do useful things early. But it seems at least from my reading that the activity started at 7 and didn’t get serious until later.
More options
Context Copy link