Why didn't the NWO rig the US election?

[Travis]

Clearly the NWO, who run everything, only pretend to rig things for their own amusement. After all the whole thing was outlined and agreed on in 1926.

 

[Cobalt]

We DID rig the election, you poor sheep!

I bet you really think W is a moron, yes? Fool! He's been acting under orders the whole time. His intellect is far superior to anyone's here!

It's really quite simple. You see, in order to shape the country the way we wanted, we needed to make one side look so bad that the victory for the other side would be inevitable! And we succeeded in that, oh, did we ever.

The fact of the matter is, we could have let W fix everything on his own! He could easily have fixed the entire world had we let him. But, where would the fun be for us in that?

Enter Barack Obama, a man the people would become enamored with for no clear reason. Enter John McCain, a hero who would only pretend to put up a fight. Enter Sarah Palin, who was more or less there to give us a good chuckle. She was under orders too, of course.

So naturally, "our" man won! What nobody realizes is we couldn't lose.

We know all, we see all, we control all. Now...sleep.

 

[tanstaafl28]

My dad is a conspiracy theorist...

He told me that they couldn't fix this election because it wasn't close enough for their various voter fraud tactics to tip the balance.

Supposidly, the theory goes that the last two elections were far closer, therefore they were easier to fix.

 

[INRM]

The best explanation so far I've heard is that Obama and McCain if they got in, would have more or less done the same thing.

In other words it would not have mattered.

As for Kerry, there were claims that he was sort of a Manchurian Candidate, or at least becuase of his loyalty to Bush and the Skull and Bones (who swear a lifetime pledge to give each other a leg-up) and deliberately got the election close enough so that the Diebold machine would swing the election.


It's not entirely the best explanation sure...

 

[RedIbis]

I think the question is a legitimate and interesting one, but I might have phrased it differently. First, if you have any suspicion that voter fraud was very real in 2000, and that Karl Rove and the Republican party did everything in their power to influence the elections, you might wonder why it didn't happen in 2008, as I've wondered.

My opinion is that the real Neo Con power behind the Republican machine did not get behind John McCain and Sarah Palin. With the mood of the country overwhelmingly against the Bush administration and the Republican party, combined with the enormous popularity of Obama, the military-industrial complex (or NWO, as you've termed it), took a pass and will use these four years to evaluate their position and relaunch for 2012 when Jeb Bush sweeps in as the right wing, neo con savior.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

With the mood of the country overwhelmingly against the Bush administration and the Republican party, combined with the enormous popularity of Obama, the military-industrial complex (or NWO, as you've termed it), took a pass and will use these four years to evaluate their position [...]

It's amazing how how an unseen force can do anything you want it to do, or not do, isn't it? It's almost as if it's this chunk of clay that you can mold into whatever form you see in your mind.

 

[LightinDarkness]

I think the question is a legitimate and interesting one, but I might have phrased it differently. First, if you have any suspicion that voter fraud was very real in 2000, and that Karl Rove and the Republican party did everything in their power to influence the elections, you might wonder why it didn't happen in 2008, as I've wondered.

My opinion is that the real Neo Con power behind the Republican machine did not get behind John McCain and Sarah Palin. With the mood of the country overwhelmingly against the Bush administration and the Republican party, combined with the enormous popularity of Obama, the military-industrial complex (or NWO, as you've termed it), took a pass and will use these four years to evaluate their position and relaunch for 2012 when Jeb Bush sweeps in as the right wing, neo con savior.

Please tell me you are being sarcastic with this. Just in case you aren't:

Of course, to believe in THAT you would have to flat out IGNORE the fact that if one is going to believe in some massive NWO/NeoCon plot that it doesn't really matter who wins, since the person elected is ultimately controlled to begin with.

And in case you didn't notice, both sides engage in absolutely massive election fraud every single cycle. The democrats make the dead rise and vote, and encourage their supporters to vote early and often in every state that has lax or non-existent voter identification laws. They also slash the tires on RNC get out the vote vehicles. This year the black panther's patrolled and intimidated anyone who looked like they weren't voting Obama at the polls, and a judge working for the DNC in Pennsylvania had the RNC poll watchers thrown out of several districts where the DNC was planning to engage in fraud tactics (leaving only DNC poll watchers, of course).

For their part, the republicans usually engage in preemptive and post-election legal challenges with arsenals of lawyers in attempts to suppress districts where they expect the DNC turnout to be very high.

Also, isn't the NWO supposed to be all powerful and all knowing? Couldn't they just have spun the media coverage as positive for the past 8 years? Or could it be that the DNC tactic of pounding on blaming Bush for everything from erectile dysfunction to bad hair days worked after doing it non-stop since 2000.

 

[Gangularis]

2004 wasn't close, Kerry wasn't ever going to win, he simply was not a credible candidate.

You're joking, right? Kerry won the popular vote. It was the first time in history where a president won the electoral votes but lost the popular vote..

The best explanation so far I've heard is that Obama and McCain if they got in, would have more or less done the same thing.

In other words it would not have mattered.

Yes, that is the consensus among CTs

They also believe that there's a good cop, bad cop routine that's being played out. They believe this was done when Clinton was put into power, as well.

And in case you didn't notice, both sides engage in absolutely massive election fraud every single cycle. The democrats make the dead rise and vote, and encourage their supporters to vote early and often in every state that has lax or non-existent voter identification laws. They also slash the tires on RNC get out the vote vehicles. This year the black panther's patrolled and intimidated anyone who looked like they weren't voting Obama at the polls, and a judge working for the DNC in Pennsylvania had the RNC poll watchers thrown out of several districts where the DNC was planning to engage in fraud tactics (leaving only DNC poll watchers, of course).

For their part, the republicans usually engage in preemptive and post-election legal challenges with arsenals of lawyers in attempts to suppress districts where they expect the DNC turnout to be very high.

I gotta disagree with you there. The so called voter fraud of democrats doesn't come close to touching the efficiency in voter suppression the republicans came up with. Two black panthers were filmed at one voter site, and it was on fox news.. I don't know of anywhere else where this was taking place. If it was going on someplace else, it wasn't happening on a large scale.. Also, I did not see them stopping anyone from voting. More likely than not, they wanted to stop those that try to disenfranchise blacks during every election. Also, registering dead people or mickey mouse to vote does not mean they actually get to go in and cast a ballot. That's voter registration fraud; not vote fraud.

 

[Slayhamlet]

You're joking, right? Kerry won the popular vote. It was the first time in history where a president won the electoral votes but lost the popular vote..

No, Kerry did not win the popular vote in 2004. You're thinking of Gore, who won the popular vote in 2000. He wasn't the first presidential candidate to win the popular vote but fail to secure the majority of votes in the electoral college, either. Samuel J. Tilden had the popular vote in 1876, for example, but lost to Rutherford B. Hayes by a single electoral vote.

 

[LightinDarkness]

I gotta disagree with you there. The so called voter fraud of democrats doesn't come close to touching the efficiency in voter suppression the republicans came up with. Two black panthers were filmed at one voter site, and it was on fox news.. I don't know of anywhere else where this was taking place. If it was going on someplace else, it wasn't happening on a large scale.. Also, I did not see them stopping anyone from voting. More likely than not, they wanted to stop those that try to disenfranchise blacks during every election. Also, registering dead people or mickey mouse to vote does not mean they actually get to go in and cast a ballot. That's voter registration fraud; not vote fraud.

Then your DNC colored glasses are doing their job very well. There is wide scale election engineering, fraud, and illegal practices on both sides of the spectrum. Again and again when academic journals like Electoral Studies look at close elections, they find that the portion of double voting and election fraud comes from both sides of the aisles. Each party simply has its specialty. The DNC is excellent at committing fraud in registration pre-election with registration and absentee ballots, and with voter intimidation. The RNC is excellent at using post-election tactics to throw the vote through legal challenges.

I saw the Black Panthers all over the place in my own district - are you going to tell me I work for Fox News? I also saw a DNC operative telling people in my overwhelmingly conservative district that due to high turn out they would be voting the next day.

Please explain to me how it is that the dead voters who vote every election always have a democrat party affiliation? And how, magically indeed, the dead always seem to rise to vote only in highly contested districts where the democrat vote squeezes through just barely.

 

[jhunter1163]

No, Kerry did not win the popular vote in 2004. You're thinking of Gore, who won the popular vote in 2000. He wasn't the first presidential candidate to win the popular vote but fail to secure the majority of votes in the electoral college, either. Samuel J. Tilden had the popular vote in 1876, for example, but lost to Rutherford B. Hayes by a single electoral vote.

Also, Grover Cleveland won the popular vote in 1888 but lost the electoral vote to Benjamin Harrison.

 

[Gangularis]

No, Kerry did not win the popular vote in 2004. You're thinking of Gore, who won the popular vote in 2000. He wasn't the first presidential candidate to win the popular vote but fail to secure the majority of votes in the electoral college, either. Samuel J. Tilden had the popular vote in 1876, for example, but lost to Rutherford B. Hayes by a single electoral vote.

oops.. damn, i thought for sure that was Kerry.
I still thought that was a pretty close election..

Then your DNC colored glasses are doing their job very well. There is wide scale election engineering, fraud, and illegal practices on both sides of the spectrum. Again and again when academic journals like Electoral Studies look at close elections, they find that the portion of double voting and election fraud comes from both sides of the aisles. Each party simply has its specialty. The DNC is excellent at committing fraud in registration pre-election with registration and absentee ballots, and with voter intimidation. The RNC is excellent at using post-election tactics to throw the vote through legal challenges.

I saw the Black Panthers all over the place in my own district - are you going to tell me I work for Fox News? I also saw a DNC operative telling people in my overwhelmingly conservative district that due to high turn out they would be voting the next day.

Please explain to me how it is that the dead voters who vote every election always have a democrat party affiliation? And how, magically indeed, the dead always seem to rise to vote only in highly contested districts where the democrat vote squeezes through just barely.

You work for fox news! Told you!! ahahaha

I think the more important point is, who's fraud tactics are really working? Turning away and disenfranchising blacks works incredibly well.. So does rigged numbers from evoting machines by Diebold..

Double voting? eh.. not so much. Double votes usually get caught and filtered out.. Also, it would require a considerable amount of people to get involved in double voting to actually have an impact in most elections. Did the black panthers stop you from voting, or anyone else from voting? Again.. not a very effective tactic.. Did anyone actually leave and come back to vote the next day? If so, you have some pretty gullible people in your overwhelmingly conservative district. I hope you did your duty to point out that fraudulent DNC representative... or did you just let people listen to this person? It's obviously in the nature of conservatives to take what DNC members say at face value, right?

 

[LightinDarkness]

You work for fox news! Told you!! ahahaha

I think the more important point is, who's fraud tactics are really working? Turning away and disenfranchising blacks works incredibly well.. So does rigged numbers from evoting machines by Diebold..

Double voting? eh.. not so much. Double votes usually get caught and filtered out.. Also, it would require a considerable amount of people to get involved in double voting to actually have an impact in most elections. Did the black panthers stop you from voting, or anyone else from voting? Again.. not a very effective tactic.. Did anyone actually leave and come back to vote the next day? If so, you have some pretty gullible people in your overwhelmingly conservative district. I hope you did your duty to point out that fraudulent DNC representative... or did you just let people listen to this person? It's obviously in the nature of conservatives to take what DNC members say at face value, right?

Fox news IS the NWO masonic central, so I guess its fitting

I am now a PhD student, but in a previous career I was a paid consultant for both political parties on economic development and government performance measurement. I ended up working for both because those topics are fairly a-political in the current environment and they'll hire anyone who has the educational credentials and professional background to advise intelligently on it. In a few cases my office was in the state party headquarters in the year up to the election.

I have seen fraud and election engineering on both sides. The most violent stuff I saw was done to the RNC HQ - slashing tires, death threats, intimidation, etc. I saw a lot of RNC attempts at election engineering, but it was never "disenfranchising blacks" or rigging machines. It was always with lawyers and law suits.

Earlier in this thread I cite a study from Election Studies, a academic journal (which of course leans toward the left), which cites that in close elections that require ballot counts Democratic candidates have the highest proportion of double voting and these often get ignored/unchallenged.

Yes, if you tell 90 year old retirees that they aren't voting today, they will leave. Democrats have also been caught call canvassing to do that because its safer than sending someone to stand outside the polling place (although this year they were quite ballsy about it). And yes, I got his license plate number and reported it to my state's voter fraud office.

I think its a sign of incredible bias and blindness to think that one party or the other is somehow better and engineering fraud than the other. Both are experts at it, and the impact ultimately ends up canceling each other out.

 

[iiwo]

2004 wasn't close, Kerry wasn't ever going to win, he simply was not a credible candidate.

Considering this the fact that it was even close made me think "incumbent vs. poor candidate...", isn't the incumbent supposed to have a relatively easy time? What happened?

Then I got over it and waited for 2008.

 

[timhau]

oops.. damn, i thought for sure that was Kerry.
I still thought that was a pretty close election..

As far as I can recall, there was a time on election night when it looked like there was a non-zero chance of Kerry pulling off a narrow surprise win in Ohio, which would have just barely given him the needed 270 electoral votes. By the time the talking heads on TV pondered this, it was already clear that Bush will get the popular vote.

 

[jhunter1163]

Samuel J. Tilden had the popular vote in 1876, for example, but lost to Rutherford B. Hayes by a single electoral vote.

The people who complain about today's election fraud should research this one. The election was literally stolen from Tilden. The popular vote wasn't that close (51.0% to 48.0%), and only wholesale fraud in four Southern states put Hayes in the White House.

 

[Bobert]

"They tried. They will keep trying. They'll never stop trying...The fascists, that is. The NWO isn't a straight path. It's not one group. Fascism is the most dangerous as we all have just witnessed."
."

Wait a second!
I was under the impression that Alex Jones KNEW EXACTLY who the NWO was/is?
What happened?

 

[se7ensnakes]

If you have vast amounts of money it is easy to rig an election. People only vote from two parties. of the two parties you need to just show someone face on television over and over again. Give him/her the ultimate media exposure. People only choose from the candidates on contant televison. Only a minority will actually do research and study the issues.

 

[Corsair 115]

People only choose from the candidates on contant televison. Only a minority will actually do research and study the issues.

It's sometimes simpler than that. There's at least some percentage of American voters who simply look for the (D) or (R) after the candidate's name. Anything other than that (D) or (R) is not important.