Elections 2020: Do the people elect, or do the Brahmandarins select?

There is a YouTuber who goes by the pseudonym Razorfist. His main beats are video gaming and heavy metal music, but when he veers into politics, he is a very astute analyst even when I don’t agree with him. Normally he is potty-mouthed at South Park level. The opening of this video is the first time ever I’ve seen him be dead serious, without profanities or obscenities. He actually starts off by saying “allow me to deactivate the Razorfist app”.

I was immediately reminded of a professor I knew. An upper-class Briton who had spent many years in Australia, he developed ‘protective coloring’ including a vocabulary that Tom Sharpe would have envied, let alone Amy Schumer. But when he stopped this shtick… you knew he was being dead serious. And if he started criticizing your work without lapsing into anatomy or bodily functions, you knew you had really messed up. I could not help being reminded of this.

Dear reader: this isn’t about Trump anymore. He is now just the object. This is about whether the US is a representative republic that democratically elects its chief executive — or an oligarchy where a Nomenklatura of party power brokers, Big Tech barons, and financiers get to select the candidate that is most congenial to them and, when they fail to stampede you into voting their choice, will retroactively ‘correct’ this. Where they get to run the federal election the way they run the “Democratic” primaries. [EDIT: see this post by my friend Tom Knighton, The Tyranny of the Technocrats.]

Left-wing Rolling Stone journalist Matt Taibbi, who does not like Trump one bit, refers to the election as “a vomit milkshake” and to Joe Biden’s party as “democratic in name only”:

Hmm, what’s the acronym of “democratic in name only”: DINO? I can see some similarities:

More evidence that this is not just about Trump anymore: 59% of those polled concerned about fraud with mail-in voting. Party breakdown: 36% of Democrats, 86% (!) of Republicans.

On Twitter, I saw this one:

Adam: “Abel’s dead, we need an autopsy.”
Cain: “Why? Just accept he’s dead. Hold a funeral.”
Adam: “I want an autopsy to know if he was murdered.”
Cain: “It was a natural death.”
Adam: “Maybe, let’s have an autopsy to be sure.”
Cain: “The Serpent has already spoken his eulogy.”

And David Harsanyi: “”It’s pretty transparent. When Democrats win the presidency, we are treated to solemn calls for national restoration and political harmony, and to the expectation that, for the good of the nation, the opposition will embrace decorum and pass legislation they oppose. When Republicans win elections, grown women put on knitted hats depicting their reproductive organs and stomp around Washington protesting, all to a hero’s welcome.”

If they were that confident they had won fair and square, they would be the first to welcome audits. Instead, they actually want to run blacklists of people who “deny” President-Select [sic] Biden has won.

And via Powerline, the Pravd… er, New York Times “For the conservatives who are mad about this: yes, it is possible for a story to be factually accurate *and* for it to be part of a misinformation campaign aimed at undermining confidence in an election.”

This is the sort of manipulation usually lambasted by critics of fundamentalist religions (or Marxism, BIRM). “Even if the facts are true, they are false”.

John Hinderaker continues:

At the New York Times, indisputable truth is “misinformation,” and must be denounced as such, if it doesn’t advance that newspaper’s political agenda. Truthful information, in Timesspeak, is what helps the Democratic Party. “Misinformation” is what could harm the Democratic Party. As, very often, the facts tend to do. I have been saying for a while that the principal job of journalists these days is to block Americans from receiving information that they are better off (in the opinion of the Left) not knowing. Journalists don’t so much report the news as cover it up. This is an excellent example of that sick phenomenon.

ELECTED OR SELECTED, WINSTON?

HOW MANY FINGERS, WINSTON?

ADDENDUM: a cyber security expert explains in detail several ways how, if somebody wanted to ‘hack the vote’, it could be done:

UPDATֵE: With stupefying cluelessness, media criticize conservative tech refugees for fleeing censorship

Also, must-read: Larry Correia gives a LONG compilation of their answers from people to whom he reached out, to “One quick question, only answer if you have worked in auditing/stats/fraud/investigations/or other data analysis type fields. In your entire career, have you ever seen a case that threw up this many flags that DID NOT turn out to be fraud?”

In case you missed it: Tucker Carlson, “We heard you. It’s hard to trust anything. Here’s what we know.“

And breaking news: “A judge in Pennsylvania has ruled in favor of the Trump campaign after concluding that ballots received after 8 p.m. on Election Day that were segregated should not be counted.[…] The judge also determined that Kathy Boockvar, the Pennsylvania secretary of the Commonwealth, lacked the “statutory authority” to change election law days before the election.”