[ExI] ok, so prove it

Thu Nov 10 21:01:10 UTC 2016

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 12:37 PM
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Subject: Re: [ExI] ok, so prove it

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 1:39 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net <mailto:spike66 at att.net> > wrote:

>>… Vladimir had the means and damn sure had the motive. 

>…Vladimir certainly has the motive, I'm sure he's delighted with the election outcome, but I don't think he has the means…

OK good.  This is a perfect chance to increase our confidence in the system.  Let’s prove it.

> >…Had it come out the other way, would not the other party have been squawking?  Ja. 

>…Yes it's odd isn't it. Before the election Trump kept talking about a rigged election, but he hasn't said much about that lately for some reason…

He told us he would accept the result, if he won.  He did.  But I don’t.

>… I don't think anyone was more surprised by the outcome of the election than Donald Trump, I saw him on TV today, I thought he looked a bit dazed. He would never admit it but I bet at this moment he feels like he's gotten in over his head…

Anyone elected to that job is over his head.  We have tacked on a bunch of duties to that office which never should have been there to start with.  I agree however, to some extent.  I think he started the whole process as a stunt or something to draw attention, but he was the recipient of votes from cross-dressing other-party members, who were advised a long time ago the party already had its candidate, so register as the other party and vote in the primaries for the most odious of the bunch.  He was that guy.  He won.  That cross-dressing strategy is risky.

If anyone here is a primary cross-dresser, I do advise voting for someone we can accept, rather than someone your party can beat.  Your chosen one might not beat the worst guy in the other party.

> >…The party currently in the WH has nothing to lose, ja?

>…The Democrats know the election wasn't rigged…

But I don’t.  Let’s prove it.

>…and that half (well nearly half) of the population is just deplorable…

I disagree.  The yanks I know are plorable sorts.

>…making a stink about it now would serve no purpose…

It isn’t a stink, it’s a pleasant aroma: trust but verify.  It would increase confidence in the process and decrease risk of what might have happened had it gone the other way.  It will decrease the risk next time, which might be as contentious as this time, if not more so.

>… and things are screwed up enough as it is… John K Clark 

This would be the first step to unscrewing things, and would be a perfectly logical step.  

In court, evidence is weighed.  Hearsay evidence is feather light.  States are telling us who they say won but not showing us the receipts.  Our trust in government is at rock bottom and still digging.  So… trust but verify, let’s see it, let’s prove it.

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20161110/18f2e73c/attachment.html>