There was a time, maybe ten years ago, when you would’ve been forgiven for insisting that right-wing lunatics calling various lefty social movements psyops and conspiracies were perhaps directionally correct but wrong on the details…
“This can’t be top down! Occam’s razor! Hanlon’s razor!” They might have said.
But it is by now beyond any doubt the most cynical explanations are the most parsimonious, the most coherent, and supported by the preponderance of hard evidence.
And every “conspiracy” you insist may be merely “directionally true” now but far too cynical and beyond the capacity of state agents to attempt or carry out will be demonstrated as literally true in due time.
People who are right have a tendency to continue being right.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The most important finding here is the analysis of the ~170k *excess* Wisconsin voters claiming indefinitely confined status. Wisc determined that each of these voters had to be investigated individually to null their ballot, which was an impossible task
Braynard’s group managed to look at 1000 of the 170k to at least establish a baseline. The results are pretty much as expected.
This was probably the most egregious example of the covid election scams. Claiming indefinitely confined status meant not having to show up at the polls, not presenting any ID or any verification at all, and requiring only a “witness signature”
There may be some risk to it, but Masters and Vance should run under a unified banner. Formalize their candidacies as occupying the nationalist populist position. Encourage other co-ideologues to run under this banner as well
I don’t mean to break off from GOP. It is premature for that and neither are charismatic enough to go the full distance. But in effect you are signaling a new consolidated vision to compete, internally, with old dead GOP, which voters want.
Thiel determines which other candidates bear the label via endorsements. He is quasi figurehead. That is fine. No reason to hide that. Voters will follow if the message is sufficiently uncompromising and sufficiently cohesive among the candidates. Let them speak as one voice
You could practice pretty tight opsec on the assumption that even if some rogue Twitter employee had access to login info, they’d have to coordinate with an email provider, who’d have to coordinate with an isp or etc to actually ID you. That is an increasingly unsafe assumption.
And of course “white supremacist to right wing extremist militias” is so capacious as to include literally anyone. And also of course this routes around any semi-formal privacy or free speech protections since these are all private companies.
Much of it is a recapitulation of broader critiques, namely that there can’t be anything like a sustained conservative victory—on anything, even the most basic interests like law and order and homelessness—because Cthulhu, after all, eventually always goes left
(It’s worth asking why conservatives can’t use the same strategies they’ve used to win on gun rights on other important issues. Is it because the people who care most about guns, might actually be willing to use their, ya know, guns to defend their interests? Don’t answer that.)
The flip side of the shitlib yokel is the would-be coastal striver class-traitor who has lived through the ravages of prog rule and foresworn his shitlib inheritance for hardened reactionism. Think Stephen Miller.
Many in this sphere fall into this category. Born into and expressing all the outward trappings of shitlibbery but “mugged by reality” as it were, or perhaps always sensing something rotten and self-defeating at the core of the progressive heart, have whipsawed back to the right
There is a lot of insight that comes from this perspective, including if one has lived first hand through the destruction of a place like California, a window into the future through which to demonstrate to a Red America what awaits it