Trump to win?

[wayiwalk]

Re: Trump to win?

In case anyone missed it, here is a summary of the debate for dummies.

Thanks for sharing - a throwback to parodies when both sides were skewered equally.

Funny, tasteless, and hits the spot.

[jk]

Re: Trump to win?

Au contraire mon frère. It may not be as apparent as the GOP's, but you can be absolutely certain that the knives are being sharpened, the recriminations are being formulated and trenches are being dug. The powder keg will explode when the contradictions reach critical mass.k.

instead of looking at the games and conflicts among the party elites, let's look at the demographics with the help of a little caricature:

the gop- the "reagan democrats" and evangelicals [now mostly identified as whites without college educations] used to be coopted by appeals to religion and cultural conservatism. they are now interested in economics and suddenly realize that their interests are not the same as those of the country club republicans, well-off business people who are primarily interested in tax policy along with gov't fund flows.

the dems - the college educated whites/professional class social liberals are still allied with the minorities- african-americans and hispanics. the millennial bernie bros are having a hard time climbing on board, but their social views along with some appeasement re student loans and such should eventually assuage them. the first time i voted, it was for eldridge cleaver.

i know you opted for political nihilism and hope that both party structures are blown to pieces, but i don't think that's happening, not to BOTH. and in u.s. history, did realignment ever happen simultaneously, with 2 mainstream parties simultaneously morphing into 2 OTHER mainstream parties? i can't recall an instance, but my knowledge of history is shallow.

[Woodsman]

Re: Trump to win?

...i know you opted for political nihilism and hope that both party structures are blown to pieces, but i don't think that's happening, not to BOTH. and in u.s. history, did realignment ever happen simultaneously, with 2 mainstream parties simultaneously morphing into 2 OTHER mainstream parties? i can't recall an instance, but my knowledge of history is shallow.

This season everybody has opted for political nihilism. I'm just more open about it, is all.

Has it ever happened before? I don't know and would doubt it anyway. And sure, it may not happen to both right away or at all. I have no crystal ball. Just an opinion, like you doctor.

Maybe I'm making too much of all those "never happen" events that have been happening with uncanny regularity over the past months months?

Has the media ever before been in perfect coordination with one candidate and in lock-step agreement that the other is a priapic Hitler? Have the Democrats ever before accused the Russians of helping the Republicans?

And when was the last time the White House and security agencies (with the Feebs conspicuously absent when such a thing would otherwise be in their wheelhouse) timed an appearance to allege suspicions that Russia is hacking emails precisely when such damaging emails are being released?

Have we had a chance to read insider emails of the sort now available, emails that confirm prior suspicions of their nefarious behaviors?

The future is emergent and time will tell. We will have to let events take their course.

[jk]

Re: Trump to win?

on the unprecedented gender gap, from fivethirtyeight

Women Are Defeating Donald Trump

i am by no means confidant about the polling data. brexit and the columbia-farc votes were contrary to the polls, and there have been other surprises like the strong performance of afd in regional german elections. i also periodically remind myself of the fact that african-american candidates typically get 5% fewer votes than their polls predict. in a similar way i could see trump getting 5% more than his poll numbers, and that is precisely the deficit he shows in the polls right now.

i will by no means be thrilled to see hillary win. she will continue all that is odious in the status quo. but i don't think she is dangerous in the ways i think trump could be.

[jk]

Re: Trump to win?

and from a chat about the conflicts within the republican party:

... Is this what it looks like when a party falls apart?

natesilver: It’s just a flesh wound!

[Woodsman]

Re: Trump to win?

and from a chat about the conflicts within the republican party:

... Is this what it looks like when a party falls apart?

natesilver: It’s just a flesh wound!

Funny. They think's it's just one party falling apart instead of an entire polity.

MAGA! GO TRUMP! JAIL HILLARY! GO TRUMP! MAGA!

MAGA! GO TRUMP! JAIL HILLARY! GO TRUMP! MAGA!

[jk]

Re: Trump to win?

i'd still like your thoughts on the demographic alliances and conflicts. i think those are the real elements of any realignment. either subgroups as we currently conceptualize them are rearranged, or the electorate is divided along some different lines entirely.

as i said, the democratic coalition looks relatively stable at this time.

but just spitballing ideas, you could have the country club republicans give up on social conservatism, and align their economic interests with those of the professional classes. but then i don't see the non-college whites aligning with blacks and hispanics, so that won't work unless the minorities stay with the democrats. actually, this is kind of what's been happening, with all the neocons and other republican apparatchiks endorsing hillary. i don't see the koch brothers getting on board, however.

how do you imagine the populace being redivided?

[jk]

Re: Trump to win?

IMG954430.jpg

[Woodsman]

Re: Trump to win?

Shhh, please. Watching The Donald.

[jk]

Re: Trump to win?

Shhh, please. Watching The Donald.

i fixed it, there's an image now, but it has to be clicked to expand. btw, still interested in your thoughts on demographics of the new order.

[vt]

Re: Trump to win?

We already have the demographics: I've posted this before. All we need is the right leader with the right message:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/188096/de...ical-lows.aspx

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Trump to win?

McCarthyite red-baiting baloney and I think you know it is Lake. I'd say shame on you but since you might be acting here in a "professional" capacity I understand that orders are orders.

Nonetheless, you have zero evidence. Total bovine scatalogy spook crap.



Boris Badenov and Natasha are more convincing, but hardly more laugh out loud funny than this Russian plot bull. Folks need to read this one again to inoculate themselves from this spy vs. spy nonsense. This isn't Italy 1948 and there's no Red Menace to scare Americans into submission. Y'all are going to have to come up with a new script.

Did you REALLY go there Woodsman? REALLY?

I've posted here for nearly a DECADE with thousands of posts and direct professional contact with quite a few forum members, including EJ....several thousand hours invested...but in reality I'm actually masquerading as "The Man"(that's sarcasm, please don't let this feed your unhealthy delusions).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1_nUVRcxNU


So I guess the Russians don't have ANY troll farms for online information operations directed at the US/West?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/ma...ency.html?_r=0

There's an additional dozen or so reputable sourced in depth articles on the same topic.

As far as direct Russian government involvement and/or direct sponsorship of cyber espionage and information operations there is a ton of credible content and evidence to be found on:

Blogs of War/Covert Contact Podcast by John Little who has outstanding balanced analysis

Black Hat Briefings Podcasts for techside

Krebs on Security website and interviews for techside

Info Ops HQ Podcast (led by Nicole Matejic, well worth googling her)

Cyber Wire Podcast, highly regarded in the industry and clearly divergent to you

War On the Rocks Podcast and website content

I can't compete with you anymore Woodsman, I'm no match for your brains:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_eZmEiyTo0

However, I will continue to watch you in your leadership role in dragging this forum further down the gurgler of irrelevance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vp--AlWBrU

Sadly, I can't seem to look away from this trainwreck, and I'm not referring to the election.

For someone who appear to be so well read on such infamous names as James Angleton, you might want to re-read the parts where he was legendary for his intellectual inflexibility and terminal case of paranoia.

No offense woodsman, but you're not worthy of "The Man's" time to actively undermine you.....you're simply not as important as you strangely seem to think you are....and besides...you're doing a brilliant job scaring everyone away all by yourself.

Please.....continue.

[vt]

Re: Trump to win?

Lake,

You just don't get it. Do you really believe the DNC smear machine accusations of the Russians of trying to influence this election in collusion with Trump??

Where have you been? In a time warp?

This entire election is about the final political realignment that has been going on for well over a decade. Americans are angry with 60% wanting to fire every politician! All of them.

What do you think the Sander's campaign was about? The DNC emails plainly tell of the plot to get rid of Bernie.

Trump is the beginning of the end of the Republicans.

Woody is a well spoken messenger. You would do well to listen to him.

And to do a bit of research yourself:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/188096/de...ical-lows.aspx

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Trump to win?

Lake,

You just don't get it. Do you really believe the DNC smear machine accusations of the Russians of trying to influence this election in collusion with Trump??

Do I "believe the DNC smear machine"?

I believe neither the DNC nor the GOP. I see them and their ilk as little different from Orwell's 1984 or real world examples like the Nazi Ministry of Propoganda and Communist Party Central Committes.

Where have you been? In a time warp?

Far from it. I've been getting tutored on and monitoring a broad spectrum of alleged(as well as proven) Russian information operations in recent weeks.

My feed includes a broad spectrum of niche open source info-sec and info-ops news, and a few SMEs. The rise in Russian cyber operations(disruption/disinformation) has put even the massive persistent Chinese cyber espionage threat on the back burner chatter wise.

Russian cyber ops have been rising(very aggressively in the last 2 years) for a decade starting with the attack on Estonia in 2007. https://ccdcoe.org/index.html

That's indisputable by anyone credible in these niche communities.

Have a look around. A good look around: http://thebostontribune.com

Attribution?

That's admittedly hard. But it does possess indicators.

You may wish to ask Woodsman why it's OK to go with accusations and lack of legal attribution for US based political/covert action, but the same standard doesn't apply with others.? hmmm. Funny that.

Has Russia(formerly the Soviet Union) ever engaged in active measures to undermine the West during the initial chapters of the Cold War? Without question.

Just as the US brought down the Warsaw Pact in 1989, and ultimately the Soviet Union via clandestine/covert means(mostly non-kinetic).

People seem to forget that Putin was a KGB Colonel in the waning days of the initial Cold War and surrounds himself with people of similar education/work experience.

Yet I'm a DNC stooge and/or a "spook" by simply taking a clinical look at cyber over the last decade and repeatedly displaying my disdain for the DNC and Hillary in particular.

This entire election is about the final political realignment that has been going on for well over a decade. Americans are angry with 60% wanting to fire every politician! All of them.

What do you think the Sander's campaign was about? The DNC emails plainly tell of the plot to get rid of Bernie.

Bernie was a Democrat for about as long as Italy's Prime Ministers average tenure since WWII...which would be measured in months not years. NO ONE takes kindly to new comers.

Trump is the beginning of the end of the Republicans.

Both parties are being disintermediated due to both communication technology and their horrid behaviour. Your "research" at the bottom indicates that nicely, and equally.

Iteration 1.0:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLAh3pui-CI

There will be as many iterations as it takes to disrupt the machine.

Woody is a well spoken messenger. You would do well to listen to him.

You've obviously drunk the Kool-Aid in mass quantities, so it's unlikely you would see or even acknowledge Woodsman's consistently one-eyed paranoid world view attacking anyone/everyone who fails to follow his rigid "US is Evil" doctrine.

The guy actually accused me of being a spook.....seriously?

And it's not the first time.

Sorry, there's lots of blame to go around. As well as lots of well motivated and capable players that fall outside of Woodsman's very limited and inflexible vision.

And to do a bit of research yourself:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/188096/de...ical-lows.aspx

Your "research" says nothing any of us don't already know.

Americans are equally embarrassed(margin of error making it rough parity) at being associated with either major political party.

Here's some research that says everything if you can see the forest thru the trees:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/1597/conf...titutions.aspx

[touchring]

Re: Trump to win?

The U.S. will continue to do fine for the next 30 years as fortress America and technology keep the economy afloat and positive demographics speed up growth.

I've no doubt that technology will keep some parts of America afloat, but it could be a double edged sword. States like California will do exceedingly well, but the US is not just California, and having some states doing much better because they can export technology only increases the wealth divide.

Asia? Well parts of it will do well.

But remember Japan and Russia are demographically deceased and China has worse demographics than the U.S. by far. India is the future of Asia and southeast will do well.

I'm not sure if you are aware of the progress that is happening in Asia in the past 20 years. China is advancing rapidly and catching up very fast on technology.

India is also progressing very well as is parts of South East Asia, particularly Indonesia. Chinese companies are investing hugely in Indian companies - http://knowstartup.com/2016/10/alibaba-paytm/

A lot of MSM new is hype and focuses only on the present, when what is more important is the rate of change. They simply can't tell the truth otherwise Americans will revolt.

China in 1996 vs 2016 is a huge difference in terms of living standards, let alone compare with 1986 when they are not much better than the North Korea today, and in comparison the rest of the developed world was better off in 1996 than 2016.

The demographics issue in China is the biggest problem that China will face, but I think is not insurmountable for the following reasons:

1. Unlike Japan, cultural wise, China has no problems letting in foreigners to work or live in China, the way the UK does. It doesn't do that now because there's no need to - there's simply too many people in major Chinese cities and many Chinese fresh college graduates are unemployed. Unless you highly connected or a well known business man, you can't even get a permanent residence permit in China, all foreigners need to be employed and must be authorized by the government to stay and work in China. If China relaxes the regulations and becomes more pro-migration, it won't be difficult to see a million people migrating from Europe and America to work in China within a couple years.

2. China is starting to relax the one child policy - it is still not too late if you consider the huge population.

3. Medical care in major Chinese cities are already more advanced than in the West, combining TCM, healthy lifestyle like taichi and modern medicine. China isn't held hostage to the healthcare industry, at least at this moment.

A video says it all..

Shanghai in 1992

23 years later

China is not stopping still at 2015, the change is in fact accelerating, the changes over the next 10 years will look nothing like what happened over the last 20 years.