I still remember some of the idiots here calling Tucker 'controlled opposition' because he said that Sidney Powell had not proven her claims. Total fantasyland.
As another poster pointed out, it primes the pump for widespread scrutiny of the process, and civil unrest if it happens again. Normal people are slow to move out of the inertia of daily life and into action, but years of prodding and goading will do it.
Hell, look at Ukraine for a topical parallel, Russia stole some of their shit and the rest of the country spent 6-7 years being told Russia were coming to steal more. Now they've done it again and this time you have octagenarians and graphic designers queuing up to collect their machine guns and shoot at helicopters. There's lots of other factors involved, not least of which being shoving your first down the jaws of death being a Slavic cultural past-time, but years of forewarning about injustice seems to have lessened the reluctance to do something crazy and dangerous.
Complaining constantly about the election being stolen is in a small way to reinforce election tampering deterrents. If people are still talking about it by the time the next election comes, they will have worry about the insurrection of their fantasies becoming reality, if anything shady comes to light. In the same way cities had to worry, if someone black got shot by the cops, about BLM demolishing their economy with people who have said/been told for years that racist cops are taking black guys lives for fun.
As another poster pointed out, it primes the pump for widespread scrutiny of the process, and civil unrest if it happens again.
More likely, this will not appeal to 2/3 of people and make it more likely that he will loses - which will then be blamed on 'fraud' again. More excuses for the regime to crack down on dissent.
The people he was going to convince, are convinced, and the rest would probably be amenable to improved election security. Not this though.
There's lots of other factors involved, not least of which being shoving your first down the jaws of death being a Slavic cultural past-time, but years of forewarning about injustice seems to have lessened the reluctance to do something crazy and dangerous.
The difference is that "don't invade Ukraine" is a 95-5 proposition there. This 'election fraud' claim 33-66 or something.
If people are still talking about it by the time the next election comes, they will have worry about the insurrection of their fantasies becoming reality,
Not a chance. Such claims are always made completely cynically, as an excuse to crack down on dissent. Not for a moment to they believe that the most heavily militarized state in human history could be 'overthrown' by an unarmed group of overweight boomers.
In the same way cities had to worry, if someone black got shot by the cops, about BLM demolishing their economy with people who have said/been told for years that racist cops are taking black guys lives for fun.
BLM is enabled by the media. You do not control the media. The problem is that they will claim that it didn't happened no matter what, and Trump supporters will claim fraud even if he loses legit. That is not exactly a deterrence.
The deterrence isn't the chance of being called fraudulent, which can happen regardless, it's the chance of actually being caught with a smoking gun. Yeah some people will claim election fraud based on nothing more than losing. But if they claim election fraud with actual evidence of tampering then it gets serious for a lot more people. And if they have evidence of tampering large enough to shift the outcome then shit gets real. The more people are riled up beforehand the more people will be going out of their way to scrutinize the actual voting process for shady maneuvers, and the greater the risk of being caught if you do decide to actually fuck with the results.
The media are an institutional giant, but they don't actually have a total monopoly on communication. It doesn't matter who they hear it from just so long as they hear it. Sure most people heard about BLM through the mainstream media, but that's not the only model you can build.
The people he was going to convince, are convinced
Not at all, the general populace is forgetful and fickle, there are many people who might even be 100% convinced right now but if talk stopped they would probably forget those convictions long before voting started for the next election. Actual change in behaviours with large populations involves constant, tiresome reinforcement over long periods. Stop focusing on it too quickly and they tend to spring back to old behaviours once the pressure is off, or flip to whatever the next social pressure encourages. Doesn't matter if it has the opposite effect on you, the evidence is that overall for the general population repetitive hammering of a point ad nauseam works to keep them primed to pay more attention when new developments do occur.
The difference is that "don't invade Ukraine" is a 95-5 proposition there.
That's not the proposition I was talking about. The proposition I'm talking about is "would you, an relatively affluent, untrained and ineffectual civilian like to take this gun and go die for this government, rather than begrudgingly accept that new, invading government?". It's hard to put a number on how that's splitting, but it sure seems higher than you'd expect if they hadn't had 6 years of priming to fight.
Not for a moment to they believe that the most heavily militarized state in human history could be 'overthrown' by an unarmed group of overweight boomers.
Yeah, I know, they weren't even really trying to, that's why I said it's their fantasy. Doesn't mean that if a portion of the population decided it was time to seriously try, perhaps based on evidence of organized election fraud comprehensive enough to practically count as a coup, that it wouldn't be extremely costly and something to avoid. They don't need to have a good chance of success, they just have to be mad enough to go all-in. Like a civilian taking up arms against against an army that their own country's professional military couldn't stand up to.
He is not playing to you, you are not his audience. This is like asking "Why are all these dicks flopping about in this gay porno?"
That is what most people don't get about American culture. We don't vote upon issues, we vote upon slogans that strike a chord with our understanding of the world around us, usually significant historical events. It's not stupidity, like many are willing to dismiss it as, but a primitive call and response form of communication that is part of every human's psychological makeup. It's how we passed on knowledge before the written word.
What good is complaining about it going to do?
I still remember some of the idiots here calling Tucker 'controlled opposition' because he said that Sidney Powell had not proven her claims. Total fantasyland.
As another poster pointed out, it primes the pump for widespread scrutiny of the process, and civil unrest if it happens again. Normal people are slow to move out of the inertia of daily life and into action, but years of prodding and goading will do it.
Hell, look at Ukraine for a topical parallel, Russia stole some of their shit and the rest of the country spent 6-7 years being told Russia were coming to steal more. Now they've done it again and this time you have octagenarians and graphic designers queuing up to collect their machine guns and shoot at helicopters. There's lots of other factors involved, not least of which being shoving your first down the jaws of death being a Slavic cultural past-time, but years of forewarning about injustice seems to have lessened the reluctance to do something crazy and dangerous.
Complaining constantly about the election being stolen is in a small way to reinforce election tampering deterrents. If people are still talking about it by the time the next election comes, they will have worry about the insurrection of their fantasies becoming reality, if anything shady comes to light. In the same way cities had to worry, if someone black got shot by the cops, about BLM demolishing their economy with people who have said/been told for years that racist cops are taking black guys lives for fun.
More likely, this will not appeal to 2/3 of people and make it more likely that he will loses - which will then be blamed on 'fraud' again. More excuses for the regime to crack down on dissent.
The people he was going to convince, are convinced, and the rest would probably be amenable to improved election security. Not this though.
The difference is that "don't invade Ukraine" is a 95-5 proposition there. This 'election fraud' claim 33-66 or something.
Not a chance. Such claims are always made completely cynically, as an excuse to crack down on dissent. Not for a moment to they believe that the most heavily militarized state in human history could be 'overthrown' by an unarmed group of overweight boomers.
BLM is enabled by the media. You do not control the media. The problem is that they will claim that it didn't happened no matter what, and Trump supporters will claim fraud even if he loses legit. That is not exactly a deterrence.
The deterrence isn't the chance of being called fraudulent, which can happen regardless, it's the chance of actually being caught with a smoking gun. Yeah some people will claim election fraud based on nothing more than losing. But if they claim election fraud with actual evidence of tampering then it gets serious for a lot more people. And if they have evidence of tampering large enough to shift the outcome then shit gets real. The more people are riled up beforehand the more people will be going out of their way to scrutinize the actual voting process for shady maneuvers, and the greater the risk of being caught if you do decide to actually fuck with the results.
The media are an institutional giant, but they don't actually have a total monopoly on communication. It doesn't matter who they hear it from just so long as they hear it. Sure most people heard about BLM through the mainstream media, but that's not the only model you can build.
Not at all, the general populace is forgetful and fickle, there are many people who might even be 100% convinced right now but if talk stopped they would probably forget those convictions long before voting started for the next election. Actual change in behaviours with large populations involves constant, tiresome reinforcement over long periods. Stop focusing on it too quickly and they tend to spring back to old behaviours once the pressure is off, or flip to whatever the next social pressure encourages. Doesn't matter if it has the opposite effect on you, the evidence is that overall for the general population repetitive hammering of a point ad nauseam works to keep them primed to pay more attention when new developments do occur.
That's not the proposition I was talking about. The proposition I'm talking about is "would you, an relatively affluent, untrained and ineffectual civilian like to take this gun and go die for this government, rather than begrudgingly accept that new, invading government?". It's hard to put a number on how that's splitting, but it sure seems higher than you'd expect if they hadn't had 6 years of priming to fight.
Yeah, I know, they weren't even really trying to, that's why I said it's their fantasy. Doesn't mean that if a portion of the population decided it was time to seriously try, perhaps based on evidence of organized election fraud comprehensive enough to practically count as a coup, that it wouldn't be extremely costly and something to avoid. They don't need to have a good chance of success, they just have to be mad enough to go all-in. Like a civilian taking up arms against against an army that their own country's professional military couldn't stand up to.
He is not playing to you, you are not his audience. This is like asking "Why are all these dicks flopping about in this gay porno?"
That is what most people don't get about American culture. We don't vote upon issues, we vote upon slogans that strike a chord with our understanding of the world around us, usually significant historical events. It's not stupidity, like many are willing to dismiss it as, but a primitive call and response form of communication that is part of every human's psychological makeup. It's how we passed on knowledge before the written word.