Election fraud proven in fulton county

Author: Wylted

Posts

Total: 83
#61
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
This is the tell tale sign of somebody who thinks they are part of the establishment.   To be so stupid as to think that their are no deeply entrenched Washington elite is stupid. You have whole dynasties like the Bush's, Clinton's and Kennedies and other long time politicians 
I agree that there is such thing as an establishment but also agree with Double_R that your usage sounds ominous without actually bringing any meaning.

The Establishment is "a term used to describe a dominant group or elite that controls a polity or an organization. It may comprise a closed social group that selects its own members, or entrenched élite structures in specific institutions. One can refer to any relatively small class or group of people who can exercise control as The Establishment. Conversely, in the jargon of sociology, anyone who does not belong to The Establishment may be labelled an "outsider"

Literally, anybody in power can correctly be called establishment.  You use the world as just another doubleplusungood in your context-free lexicon.  You have stated outright that you think that the establishment is a race of reptilian bipeds wearing jew suits who are controlled by an evil magic spirit.  Therefore, you have zero credibility on the subject of who is establishment.  You think that Trump who was born the son of the largest landlord in New York City, who dodged the draft and inherited hundreds of millions of dollars is not establishment or elite and Biden who was born the son of a used car dealer is establishment and elite.  In other words, you define those words however Trump tells you to define them.

Biden for example has been deeply entrenched in Washington for years and so many of them have lost touch with the average person. And denying this exists and no "establishment" are real is retarded. 
Biden rode the Amtrak home every night for 30 years, shaking hands with everyone and learning the names of the regular commuters.  Trump flies by helicopter and refuses to shake hands on account of germs.  You don't know what establishment means- you only believe what you are told to believe.

The establishment is real wherever you go,
Even in a family, Mom and Dad are the establishment.  Churches and schools are establishments  When you say establishment you're really whining, "why aren't I in charge?" implying you have merited such responsibility, for which claim I  have seen no evidence.

Topic's author
#62
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
you are over generalizing the word. It doesn't merely mean who is in charge. Not every senator is part of the establishment. It would mostly be the limousine liberals and neocons, but their ideologies are not what make them establishment. It is an elite Washington clique. 

Being a billionaire does not make you the establishment. Clearly Trump or Paul Mitchell or Vince McMahon are not part of the establishment.

In congress and the senate, not all people are part of the establishment.

AOC is not, nor is Ted Cruz or even Bernie Sanders. 

So no, you can't just label somebody one because of the office they hold.

I lived in Delaware long before Biden was president. Even being around the college his wife worked at. I never once met the guy and that is a small area. Wilmington Delaware, Newark those spots, I ran into people I knew every day. I never saw Biden. Seems to me he just hung out in DC, in his ivory tower. I knew some people who claimed to have known his children or faced them, but I never saw the guy. He never shook my hand. I did meet a senator there, but it wasn't him. The senator I didn't interact with much, because I hate politicians, but he seemed down to earth. 

I also don't interact with people who claim to be foster care parents, for similar reasons. I hate foster parents as well.

It's a weird thing. I really help the republican party in the area, but when they bring politicians around and try to get me to meet them, I avoid it. Fuck those guys. 

Those guys atheist try to meet me though. Biden, I lived in his town. I was around masons and he was also, and yet I never met him. I can only think it's because he is too stuck up to meet me. 
#63
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
Oro just used the genetic fallacy. 

Person a has religious ties and I don't like their religion, so those people cannot possibly have information that is accurate. 
False.

The genetic fallacy (also known as the fallacy of origins or fallacy of virtue) is a fallacy of irrelevance that is based solely on someone's or something's history, origin, or source rather than its current meaning or context. This overlooks any difference to be found in the present situation, typically transferring the positive or negative esteem from the earlier context. In other words, a claim is ignored in favor of attacking or championing its source.

The fallacy therefore fails to assess the claim on its merit. The first criterion of a good argument is that the premises must have bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim in question.  Genetic accounts of an issue may be true, and they may help illuminate the reasons why the issue has assumed its present form, but they are not conclusive in determining its merits
However, I have based claim on merits that bear directly on the truth or falsity of the claim.

My claims are that when discussing election fraud in Maricopa County

  • Maricopa County newspapers  and local reporters are more reliable than websites based on secretive walled-in compounds in upstate New York that have no reporters on the scene.  Eye-witness reports and in person interviews are inherently more reliable than accounts that have none.
  • Likewise, US citizens are more likely to provide pro-American perspectives than foreign establishments
  • Likewise,  Free citizens are more likely to provide accurate information than citizens who have no control over their internet access, medications, sex life, etc.  It is reasonable to assume that these web posters are likewise controlled concerning content.
But you dropped all of those arguments on the merits regarding sadolite's sourcing, lazily arguing that if only you can find some likely-sounding fallacy (and there is always a likely-sounding fallacy for every argument) then you can simply drop all of my excellent points.  My argument stands unrefuted by you or anybody else.

If a cult leader tells oro that lions are heading for him and he sees lions heading for him in the distance, he will dismiss it as untrue because he doesn't like the cult leader 
If a cult leader hiding behind a walled compound in New York sends me an email telling me that lions are attacking me and I look around me and see it isn't so I am going to believe my eyes and ears before the cult leader.  I know that doesn't make sense to you because  if a source of information has confirmed your biases on a subjects like politics or vaccinations or Jews then you feel an obligation to believe anything that source of information tell you.  So- even though you see no lions and it is not rational to believe that lions are attacking you, you believe anyway and quickly start inventing increasingly elaborate explanations for why you haven't been eaten yet.   Just as Trumpists invent ever increasingly elaborate explanations for why Trump lost the election.   I trust  and free and local information over corrupt and biased information.  You trust that which confirms your worldview over free and local information.  My way learns the truth far more reliably than yours.

#64
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
I have defined ESTABLISHMENT and you have not.  If you are going to tell me that my definition is false, you must come up with a definition that is supported by some dictionary and also contradicts my dictionary definition.  Otherwise, your definition of ESTABLISHMENT is your alone and no public argument is bound to respect it.
Topic's author
#65
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
I feel like your definition was accurate, but your interpretation inaccurate. 

I was focusing on the part of the definition itinerary referring to closed social groups. Referring the establishment as a sort of elite Washington clique that is hard to Penetrate. Senate  is a relatively small group of people and at the top of the social hierarchy. 

Here is what happens. They get elected promising to take on the establishment. Then they make friends with other politians become part of the in group, and become a part of the ivory tower. Ideally they go to Washington and instead of becoming part of these social cliques, they remain true to their constituents. 


#66
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
I feel like your definition was accurate, but your interpretation inaccurate. 

I was focusing on the part of the definition itinerary referring to closed social groups. Referring the establishment as a sort of elite Washington clique that is hard to Penetrate. Senate  is a relatively small group of people and at the top of the social hierarchy. 
But you are highly selective of which groups qualify as closed social groups.  By every account, Trump's White House was run by a very small group of people divided into two camps fighting over access to the president- the Kushner Group and the Giuliani Group. But his closed social group is not establishment.  By all accounts, the Jan 6th insurrection was planned and orchestrated by a small closed group of radicalized Representatives and Senators- Hawley, Cruz, Gosar, Biggs, Brooks but these are not establishment in your book.  Mitch McConnell has been running the Senate for the last six years but your prefer to think of out of power Senators as establishment.  There's no consistency or value to your accusation, its just another doubleplusungood word you apply without semantic content to people who don't conform to your world view, like socialist or elitist.


#67
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
Here is what happens. They get elected promising to take on the establishment. Then they make friends with other politians become part of the in group, and become a part of the ivory tower. Ideally they go to Washington and instead of becoming part of these social cliques, they remain true to their constituents. 
But as we have established elsewhere, you have a highly radical and irrational perspective on compromise.  You believe that all compromise is corruption when America was explicitly built to run on compromise alone.  And this is reflected in your political perspective.  You have said multiple times that you think American Democracy is weak and evil and that authoritarianism is the only effective form of government.  You don't believe in parliaments or elections or the right to vote. 

You critique democratic power cliques but you would replace them with establishments of one- Kings and dictators who might kill all those Jews you are so worried about.   The fact that some dictators might rather kill you never seems to occur.
Topic's author
#68
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
not every closed social groups is "the establishment" . 

Those are just cliques. They may have gained some temporary power. The real danger is the people with entrenched power over the American government and American institutions.  

It's possible that trumps team could become the establishment. There is some evidence liberalism is dead and lefties or reactionaries will inherit the throne. 

I doubt Trump and company could become the establishment though. He is literally part of a movement that will immediately usurp his thrown after power is obtained. Only Kushner has the political acumen to maintain sizeable power after the transfer of power. Maybe a few other behind the scenes manipulators. 

The same reason of AOC became the face of leftist and took the throne, it would be unlikely her group would maintain power, and leftists are worse than reactionaries because so many groups would make overt power grabs as opposed to the more gentlemanly way, that reactionaries vie for power 
Topic's author
#69
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
You critique democratic power cliques but you would replace them with establishments of one- Kings and dictators who might kill all those Jews you are so worried about.   The fact that some dictators might rather kill you never seems to occur.
I feel like I am more likely to be killed by a democratic institution.  I've been reading a lot of leftist propaganda as well as seeing moves like cellphone conversations being monitored so the government can have fact checkers checking texts.

Big tech seems to be the fist of the left. Monitoring unapproved opinions and giving them no platform.  

The atta kS on free speech on campus by literally atta king conservative speakers.

I'm conservative oromagi.  I don't think the country will be safe for me once the leftists are in charge, nor for my children. I feel like I have to support some sort of fascism or become a victim of leftists.  

I saw them going after businesses, burning them down. They have advocated for taking these riots to the suburbs, which I Don't live in but no it means take the riots to conservatives. 

If a reactionary does not come to power, I'll probably be fighting for survival. It's life or death. If the leftists don't kill me, then they'll turn America i to Venezuela, and I'll want to be dead anyway
Topic's author
#70
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
also I feel like a support of democracy is the same thing as support for the big corporations who own politicians and their Washington  cliques 
Topic's author
#71
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
I can't in good co science support the evil things the American government has engaged in.
#72
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Wylted
To be so stupid as to think that their are no deeply entrenched Washington elite is stupid. You have whole dynasties like the Bush's, Clinton's and Kennedies and other long time politicians 
What you are describing is an inherent part of human nature, there will always be some clique or group of individuals with a high amount of power and/or influence, and that group will often become well established. That’s not a bogeyman to fight against. The establishment is a baton. You don’t eradicate it, you just replace it. So to say that this is what you’re fighting against is not only absurd but it’s intellectually dishonest. You have no problem with the establishment when it’s working for you, so instead of pretending that this is really what you care about, why not focus on the actual issues?

…Because labeling something as “the establishment” is easier. Not because it makes actual sense, but because it appeals to people’s emotions and particularly people’s sense of inferiority. Everyone wants to hate those who are in charge or those whom they see as above them. It’s just resentment, which is always easier to conjure up and capitalize on than making a valid argument.
Topic's author
#73
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Double_R
Because labeling something as “the establishment” is easier. Not because it makes actual sense, but because it appeals to people’s emotions and particularly people’s sense of inferiority. Everyone wants to hate those who are in charge or those whom they see as above them. It’s just resentment, which is always easier to conjure up and capitalize on than making a valid argument
This is simply not true. I have managed plenty of teams of people and have been loved. Being hated is a mark of bad leadership. Not because you should strive to be liked, but because your policies should bring everyone up.
#74
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@oromagi
This is a lie.

Trumpeteers do not lie, unless they plan to repeat the same lie over, and over, and over, to make people doubt the truth, facts and evidence.  

Do you see any Trumpeteers repeating this same lie over and over and over?

#75
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,166
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@oromagi
Point proven, Lets just say we agree to disagree on every single subject that the human mind can think of and leave it at that. No need to respond to each others posts as we already know to just think the opposite of what we each say. Kinda like me and my wife.
#76
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Wylted
This is simply not true. I have managed plenty of teams of people and have been loved. Being hated is a mark of bad leadership. Not because you should strive to be liked, but because your policies should bring everyone up.
This is completely irrelevant to everything I just said. 
Topic's author
#77
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Double_R
Everyone wants to hate those who are in charge or those whom they see as above them. It’s just resentment, which is always easier to conjure up and capitalize on than making a valid argument.
It's relevant. 

It is fine to criticize the current establishment that has ran Washington forever. 

Replacing a bad establishment, with a good establishment should be everyone's priorities, and calling the establishment out, is not about creating a bogey man. 

They are called out, because we want them to know that the working class man matters. That working class people need to be their priority, instead of them being sell outs to their lobbyist friends and other millionaires they hang out with all day in Washington. 

Calling them the establishment, let's them know we know they have forgotten their responsibility to their constituents and have focused on their elitism.  

It's meant to get them to realize they need to step aside, so some outsider can come clean up their messes or they need to start focusing on working for the people, instead of for the professional lobby class. 
#78
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
I'm conservative oromagi. 
Sorry, buddy, but you are not a Conservative.  No Conservative could possibly endorse Trump.

Conservatism is" the aesthetic, cultural, social, and political outlook that embodies the desire to conserve existing things, held to be either good in themselves, or better than the likely alternatives, or at least safe, familiar, and the objects of trust and affection.  The central tenets of conservatism may vary in relation to the traditional values or practices of the culture and civilization in which it appears. In Western culture, conservatives seek to preserve a range of institutions such as organized religion, parliamentary government, and property rights.  Adherents of conservatism often oppose modernism and seek a return to traditional values"

But you hate parliamentary government.  You hate the institutions of government and the establishments of power.  A real Conservative likes the establishments, like the conservation of power in traditional roles, perhaps even traditional families. If you are going to say that don't think America should be democratic that it should be autocratic (as you have claimed)  than there is no American Conservative of any generation who will let you in the door.  You use the word but you don't understand its meaning.

I feel like I am more likely to be killed by a democratic institution.  I've been reading a lot of leftist propaganda as well as seeing moves like cellphone conversations being monitored so the government can have fact checkers checking texts.
But your feelings are not facts and we've established that you exhibit bad judgement and deep ignorance about most subjects.  I don't think anybody should be persuaded by your feelings.

I don't think the country will be safe for me once the leftists are in charge, nor for my children. I feel like I have to support some sort of fascism or become a victim of leftists.  
Well, the 20th century was chock a block with fascist experiments that ended in the greatest death tolls in history.  Not sure why'd you conclude you'd be safer with those retards.

Leftists are in charge right now and the excess mortality rate has dropped remarkably from the moment they did.  I think your fears are totally groundless and  quite silly.




#79
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@sadolite
@oromagi
Point proven, Lets just say we agree to disagree on every single subject that the human mind can think of and leave it at that. No need to respond to each others posts as we already know to just think the opposite of what we each say. Kinda like me and my wife.
I have found that I share some points of agreement with everybody on this site.  I am sure we can find some overlap- perhaps outside of politics.
#80
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,166
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@oromagi
I seriously doubt it.
#81
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
Calling them the establishment, let's them know we know they have forgotten their responsibility to their constituents and have focused on their elitism.
That’s my point. There’s nothing about being in “the establishment” that requires one to be guilty of this. It’s an intellectually lazy way to attack someone without making any case as to why that group or individual deserves such criticism by blaming them for collective results which they may or may not have contributed to.

299 days later

#82
Danielle
Danielle's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 2,049
3
3
4
Danielle's avatar
Danielle
3
3
4

Where is Wylted? I signed on to share this with him. The lawsuit against the Gateway Pundit (his fave lol) is still ongoing but nearing a similar conclusion. 
#83
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Danielle
I wonder if this was a condition of the defamation lawsuit?