Biden's re-appointment wasn't plausible

Well, I mean, obviously, there's not a question about whether or not they have, free and fair elections in The United States. Why would they? Why would you think that they did? They interfere with elections all around the world. They interfere with the election, just recently in South Africa.

They interfere with elections in Georgia. They interfere with elections everywhere they go. They they they subvert democracy all around the world. What makes you think that they wouldn't, subvert democracy, right there at home? Of course, they do.

But I think that they, interfere, and subvert democracy, in their own country, more effectively and more comprehensively than they're even able to do it in other countries, and we know that they're able to do it in other countries extremely well and extremely effectively and get the results that they want. So do you think that they're not gonna ensure that they get the results that they want in their own country? Of course, they do. You'd be naive to think that they don't. They didn't just find out that Joe Biden has experienced cognitive decline.

They didn't just find out that the man has dementia. All of those people in the Democratic party who were pushing for him to, step down or pushing for him to not seek reelection, They've been interacting with him, they've been talking to him, they know perfectly well that the man has lost his mind, and they've been knowing that for four years and they didn't mind. This isn't about, wanting him to step down or wanting him to step aside because they think that he's not competent. No one ever thought he was competent. What it's about is that, you know that when your own people, your own Democrats, your own Liberals are making fun of Joe Biden online, on social media, on television, in the mainstream media, and so on, the man has become a laughingstock.

That means that him winning in a rigged election wouldn't be plausible. No one would believe that. It was barely believable even in 2020. So there's no way that you could get people to, actually believe that Democrats turned out in significant enough numbers to give Joe Biden a victory in 2024. He was, asked to step down or asked to step aside, because the Democratic party knows that if they want to sell their appointed president, to the public as if they were democratically elected, there has to be some degree of plausibility to that.

You see, if they could have, they would have given the, democratic alliance in South Africa the full victory, but it wasn't plausible. So there has to be some degree, of believability. I don't think Kamala Harris is any more popular than Joe Biden, and she's not much of a better speaker. You have a you it's a choice between, Kamala Harris, who always sounds like she's a little bit drunk, or or Joe Biden, who sounds like he's in a perpetual fugue state. However, with, Kamala Harris, you have certain factors that, will be very appealing to the liberal, base, to the Democratic base, that allow you to craft a narrative that makes her victory plausible, regardless of whether she gets the votes or not.

If she's appointed as the winner, in a rigged, unfree, unfair election, which is what you have in The United States because, as I say, that's what The United States tries to ensure you have everywhere else in the world, so, you better believe that they make sure that in their own country, it's just as controlled and managed a process as it is a controlled and managed process anywhere else in the world that The US has a hand in it. So when they appoint the, candidate whom they want to win, whom they've decided to win, who the oligarchs have decided should win, they need there to be some democratic plausibility to that win to make people think, either make people think that, yes, they did, this this candidate did in fact win, or you make such a, convincing and coercive manipulative narrative around that candidate that no one will admit that they didn't vote for that candidate. In other words, she's going to be the first woman president. Well, wouldn't you be ashamed of yourself if you didn't vote to break the presidential glass ceiling? She's a woman of color.

Well, wouldn't you be ashamed to say that you didn't vote for a woman of color? Well, that would make you a racist. If you don't vote for her, then the only two reasons that could possibly be is because she's a woman and she's a woman of color. So that means you're a misogynist and you're a racist. So you can you can craft a narrative around her, that everyone will want to say that they voted for her even if they didn't turn out to vote at all.

Because we're gonna hear nothing, for the next three months except how excited the Democrats are, how reinvigorated they are, and how thrilled, and breathless with anticipation the American people are, for being able to finally, achieve this first woman presidency in The United States. Everyone is excited about it. So therefore, when she is appointed as the president, if that's what happens, when she is appointed as the president, everyone can believe, that the hype got her elected, even if no one shows up at the voting booth. And when everyone starts cheering in triumph, and applauding and congratulating themselves for being so progressive and so liberal, as to elect the first woman president, the first, woman of color as president, well, no one will will be willing to say that they never voted for her. So it's a very, you you have a lot of strategies that you can use, to convince people that it's either believable that she won, or it's unthinkable that you would deny that she won.

So I don't know if that's what's gonna happen, but, I don't for a second believe that they have free and fair elections in The United States, and I think you'd be a fool to believe that. So you either have, as someone said on Twitter or X, someone said, well, whose narrative do you think is gonna win? Because that's all it comes down to is the narrative. You don't have to have a candidate, who can actually, get voter turnout. You don't have a candidate who can actually win.

You don't need that. Narratives win elections, not candidates and not policies. And what I mean by that is, not that the one who has the best narrative will win, but the one who has the best narrative that makes their win plausible. That makes people think that it could have actually happened, through a legitimately democratic process, which isn't something that occurs in The United States. So someone asked the question, whose narrative, will win in the end?

Trump's narrative of I'm bulletproof or Kamala Harris's narrative of, I'm gonna be the first black woman president. Well, the answer to that question when you're talking about American politics and American society is which narrative, will people feel ashamed not to subscribe to? I think that this election is really gonna show even more clearly than everything else that we've seen over the course of the the genocide in Gaza. I think that this election is gonna show very clearly the battle between the OCGFC, the global minded OCGFC, and the OCGFC who are affiliated with the neocons. This is a battle between the two because I think that the, globally oriented OCGFC, are more likely to support Donald Trump, and the, neocons are more likely to support Kamala Harris.

So we'll just have to wait and see, which set of oligarchs get their way.