Dan Warnick

U.S. Presidential Elections Status - Electoral Votes

Recommended Posts

Here is an exercise for you.

Start at the beginning with post 1 and go research the questions in the order they are presented. 

https://qalerts.app/

You are spouting nonsense. The main issue is that you do not have a legal option to see the evidence because having a copy of a pedo event or cannibalistic one are illegal, publishing the names or pictures of pedo victims is illegal. So all the evidence you can find without risk to yourself. 

Starting out, i only knew of pedophilia as an extortion and blackmail mechanism practiced by the Bolshevik billionaire's allies in the secret services, most known  of all  as a method of creating unity and compliance  in the communist and Nazi leadership

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 0R0 said:

Here is an exercise for you.

Start at the beginning with post 1 and go research the questions in the order they are presented. 

https://qalerts.app/

You are spouting nonsense. The main issue is that you do not have a legal option to see the evidence because having a copy of a pedo event or cannibalistic one are illegal, publishing the names or pictures of pedo victims is illegal. So all the evidence you can find without risk to yourself. 

Starting out, i only knew of pedophilia as an extortion and blackmail mechanism practiced by the Bolshevik billionaire's allies in the secret services, most known  of all  as a method of creating unity and compliance  in the communist and Nazi leadership

Anyone remember the "shootout" with the FBLie in Florida recently? Several agents shot, two dead that I know of. Once upon a time that would qualify as headline news but Meghan complaint about racism is clearly more important. Ostensibly they were there about "child pornography", but that story only rings true if you believe in pixie dust and fairy farts. Pretty confident they were there to kill a Q anon and got their azzes handed to them. Notice the radio silence about the whole event? That's always a good clue. 

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Boat said:

The socialist forces? Lol And an old man like you wants to attack them? Lol So does this mean more beating of police with American flags? Does your constitution allow for the hunting and killing of the Vice President? 
If Mike Pence sets the bar for your violence, does that mean you want to kill off 2/3 of the US population so you can enjoy freedom? Step away from the edge of reason Ron. The crap you believe does not meet the minimum requirements of a civilized society. Get over it.

 

7 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Anyone remember the "shootout" with the FBLie in Florida recently? Several agents shot, two dead that I know of. Once upon a time that would qualify as headline news but Meghan complaint about racism is clearly more important. Ostensibly they were there about "child pornography", but that story only rings true if you believe in pixie dust and fairy farts. Pretty confident they were there to kill a Q anon and got their azzes handed to them. Notice the radio silence about the whole event? That's always a good clue. 

We are living in crazy times, I find ORO postings on the edge of absurd. Yet at the same time the US armed forces are in a complete stand down for 90 days I believe. The nation's capital is under Gaurd and wire fencing. 

Major news networks have become the progressive left messaging medium. As we speak they are now fostering racism with the oriental community on a grand scale. 

Two major social media networks have engaged in free speech silencing, our southern borders are being assaulted by people from across the world during a pandemic we just now getting a handle on.

The US government is in chaos, this new president signs over 40 executive orders within weeks. Both our Congress and Senate are shredding the rules of debate and lawful procedures in a effort to pass radical laws.

The list could go on quite spectacularly, there are times I am beginning to accept ORO postings. What a time in the US.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

 

We are living in crazy times, I find ORO postings on the edge of absurd. Yet at the same time the US armed forces are in a complete stand down for 90 days I believe. The nation's capital is under Gaurd and wire fencing. 

Major news networks have become the progressive left messaging medium. As we speak they are now fostering racism with the oriental community on a grand scale. 

Two major social media networks have engaged in free speech silencing, our southern borders are being assaulted by people from across the world during a pandemic we just now getting a handle on.

The US government is in chaos, this new president signs over 40 executive orders within weeks. Both our Congress and Senate are shredding the rules of debate and lawful procedures in a effort to pass radical laws.

The list could go on quite spectacularly, there are times I am beginning to accept ORO postings. What a time in the US.

 

C3E7F7C7-3992-41DA-B16D-13B902F7E194.jpeg

38DD859A-8256-496F-90CC-2D6D7FF02A3D.jpeg

  • Haha 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

 

 I am beginning to accept ORO postings. What a time in the US.

That is because you are mentally weak and susceptible to these paranoid conspiracies. You also seek approval of the foolish for some odd reason.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

 

C3E7F7C7-3992-41DA-B16D-13B902F7E194.jpeg

38DD859A-8256-496F-90CC-2D6D7FF02A3D.jpeg

Cheap photo effects impress you?  Simpleton.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Anyone remember the "shootout" with the FBLie in Florida recently? Several agents shot, two dead that I know of. Once upon a time that would qualify as headline news but Meghan complaint about racism is clearly more important. Ostensibly they were there about "child pornography", but that story only rings true if you believe in pixie dust and fairy farts. Pretty confident they were there to kill a Q anon and got their azzes handed to them. Notice the radio silence about the whole event? That's always a good clue. 

Supporting murder of federal agents now?

New low.

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, Symmetry said:

That is because you are mentally weak and susceptible to these paranoid conspiracies. You also seek approval of the foolish for some odd reason.

Same ole big E...perhap's a career change?

 

how-occam-razor-works.jpg

EYd_1ZuXQAA13kU.jpg

Edited by Eyes Wide Open
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/18/2021 at 6:48 PM, 0R0 said:

The Q narrative and the analysis you are pointing to are far apart from each other. Q posts are is a set of questions and a set of allusions to then current events and most of all projected future events coded with markers to indicate where you would be at various points in the future. Communications are through specific social media messages and high profile persons or military accounts dropping references to posts via time stamps, images on the comms and keywords that lead to particular Q posts. The stated aims are to have us start the "great awakening" to what we now call the "cabal" and their exploits through the centuries and particularly now. To call our attention to the criminal activity, political manipulation and control, and pervasive corruption and tyrannical aims of the cabal and its partners. 

Outside of the pedophile and satanic worship angle of the narrative, the basic facts Q questions point to were well familiar to me 20 odd years ago. 

The "future proves past" method shows up the general trustworthiness of the narrative and "the plan' it projects into current time and the near future from up to 3.5 years ago are playing out as sketchily projected. Though some clues are really easy to misinterpret. 

Yes, that "proves" a lot.

Probability 101:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Coincidence#Birthday_paradox

probability (I'll define this loosely as chance)  and causality (what causes what) can be a head scratcher, especially on the internet, where you are probabilistically in the midst of someone else's controlled experiment (or many of them). There is a reason why people switched from classical cryptosystems since they are extremely easy to game (amplify the messaging of) on a digital computer. 

See also:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20515484/icadeclass16mar21.pdf

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, surrept33 said:

Yes, that "proves" a lot.

Probability 101:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Coincidence#Birthday_paradox

probability (I'll define this loosely as chance)  and causality (what causes what) can be a head scratcher, especially on the internet, where you are probabilistically in the midst of someone else's controlled experiment (or many of them). There is a reason why people switched from classical cryptosystems since they are extremely easy to game (amplify the messaging of) on a digital computer. 

See also:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20515484/icadeclass16mar21.pdf

The Q "decoders" are supposed to look for sufficient matches to preclude the probability of a coincidence. It is the method promulgated by Q. 

Looking through the Q "looking glass" (look up that skunkworks project) much of the absurdity of today makes much more sense, though not reducing the degree of absurdity.  

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Eejit can't grok this

69A78104-EB0C-49FA-A4DD-595446433789.jpeg

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

The Eejit can't grok this

69A78104-EB0C-49FA-A4DD-595446433789.jpeg

 

Let's look at something Eric Schmidt (former CEO of Novell and Google) prophesized a long time ago (in 2013) about changes in media in the midst of the mobile phone, social media, and internet revolutions, especially with the amount of change that seemed to happen overnight in the developing world.

I think in hindsight, his "crystal ball" were correct (and besides, we both agree that the Economist is a excellent source of pragmatic diverse news from around the world).  

 

Quote

The Reporting Crisis

Where we get our information and what sources we trust will have a profound impact on our future identities. What’s in store for the news in the Internet era is well-covered ground, and the battles we see today over monetization strategies and content syndication will continue to play out in the coming decade. But as technology lowers entry barriers in every industry, how will the media landscape as we know it today change?

It is manifestly clear that mainstream media outlets will increasingly find themselves a step behind in the reporting of news worldwide. These organizations simply cannot move quickly enough in a connected age, no matter how talented their reporters and stringers are, and how many sources they have. Instead, the world’s breaking news will continually come from platforms like Twitter: open networks that facilitate information-sharing instantly, widely and in accessible packages. If everyone in the world has a data-enabled phone or access to one—a not- so-distant reality—then the ability to “break news” will be left to luck and chance, as one unwitting civilian in Abbottabad, Pakistan, discovered after he unknowingly live-tweeted the covert raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

Reporting duties will become more widely distributed than they are today, which will expand the scope of coverage but probably reduce the quality on a net level. The role of the mainstream media will primarily become one of an aggregator, custodian and verifier, a credibility filter that sifts through all of this data and highlights what is and is not worth reading, understanding and trusting. Particularly for the elite—the business leaders, policymakers and intellectuals who rely on established media—validation will be critical, as will the media’s ability to provide cogent analysis. In fact, the elite will probably rely more on established news organizations simply because of the massive swell of low-grade reporting and information in the system. Twitter can no more produce analysis than a monkey can type out a work of Shakespeare (although a heated Twitter exchange between two smart, credible people can come close); the strength of open, unregulated information-sharing platforms is their responsiveness, not their insight or depth.

Just as they do today with charities and business ventures, celebrities will look to starting their own media outlet as a logical extension of their “brand.” (We are using as broad a definition of “celebrity” as possible here: We mean all highly visible public figures, which today could mean anyone from reality-TV stars to famous evangelical preachers.) To be sure, some of these new outlets will be solid attempts to contribute to public discourse, but many will be vapid and nearly content free, merely exercises in self-promotion and commercialized fame.

We will see a period in which people flock to these new celebrity outlets for their novelty value and to be part of a trend. Those that stay won’t mind that the content and professionalism are a few notches below those of established media organizations. Media critics will decry these changes and lament the death of journalism, but this will be premature, because once the audience shifts, so too will the burden of reporting. If a celebrity outlet doesn’t provide enough news, or consistently makes errors that are publicly exposed, the audience will leave. 

Loyalties are fickle when it comes to media, and this will only become truer as the field grows more crowded. If enough celebrity outlets lose the faith and trust of their audience, the resulting exodus will lead back to the professional media outlets, which will have undergone their own transformations (more aggregation, wider scope, faster response time) in the interim. Not all who left will return, just as not all who take issue with the mainstream media will jettison familiar information sources for new and trendy ones. Ultimately, it remains to be seen just how much impact these new celebrity competitors will have on the media landscape in the long term, but their emergence as players in the game of accruing viewers, readers and advertisers will undoubtedly cause a stir.

People who try to perpetuate myths about religion, culture, ethnicity or anything else will struggle to keep their narratives afloat amid a sea of newly informed listeners. With more data, everyone gains a better frame of reference. A Malawian witch doctor might find his community suddenly hostile if enough people find and believe information online that contradicts his authority. Young people in Yemen might confront their tribal elders over the traditional practice of child brides if they determine that the broad consensus of online voices is against it, and thus it reflects poorly upon them personally. Or followers of an Indian holy man might find a way to cross-reference his credentials on the Internet, abandoning him if it is revealed that he misled them. 

Governments, too, will find it more difficult to maneuver as their citizens become more connected. Destroying documents, kidnapping, demolishing monuments—restrictive and repressive actions like these will lose much of their functional and symbolic power in the new digital age. Those documents would be recoverable, having been stored in the cloud, and the pressure that an active and globalized Internet community can produce when rallied against injustice will make governments think twice before snatching anyone or detaining him indefinitely. 

Ideally, all people would have the self-awareness to closely manage their online identities and the virtual lives they lead, monitoring and shaping them from an early age so as not to limit their opportunities in life. For any would-be professional, particularly one in a position of trust, will have to account for his past if he is to get ahead. Would it matter to you if your family physician spent his weekends typing long screeds against immigrants, or if your son’s soccer coach spent his twenties working as a tour guide in Bangkok’s red-light district? This granular level of knowledge about our peers and leaders will produce unanticipated consequences within society. Documented pasts will affect many people in the workplace and in day-to-day life, and some citizens will spend their entire lives acutely aware of the potentially volatile parts of their lives, wondering what might surface online one day.

Public acceptance for youthful indiscretions documented on the Internet will move a few paces forward, but probably not until a painful liminal period passes. In some ways, this is the logical next stage of an era characterized by the loss of heroes. What began with mass media and Watergate will continue into the new digital age, where even more data about individuals, from nearly every part of their lives, is available for scrutiny. The fallibility of humans over a lifetime will provide an endless stream of details online to puncture mythical hero status.

In democratic countries, corruption, crime and personal scandals will be more difficult to get away with in an age of comprehensive citizen engagement. The amount of information about people that enters the public domain—tax records, flight itineraries, phone geo-location sites (global-positioning-system data collected by a user’s mobile phone) and so much more, including what is revealed through hacking—will undoubtedly provide countless suspicious citizens with more than enough to go on. Activists, watchdog groups and private individuals will work hand in hand to hold their leaders to account, and they’ll have the tools necessary to determine whether what their government tells them is the truth. Public trust may initially fall, but it will emerge stronger as the next generation of leaders takes these developments into consideration.

When the scope of such changes becomes fully realized, large portions of the population will demand government action to protect personal privacy, at a much louder volume than anything we hear today. Laws will not change the permanence of digital information, but sensible regulations can install checks that will ensure some modicum of privacy for citizens who seek it. Today’s government officials, with a few exceptions, don’t understand the Internet—not its architecture or its manifold uses. This will change. In ten years, more politicians will understand how communication technologies work and how they empower citizens and other nongovernmental actors. The result will be public figures in government who can lead more informed debates on issues of privacy, security and user protection.

While all of this digital chaos will be a nuisance to democratic societies, it will not destroy the democratic system. Institutions and polities will be left intact, if slightly battered. And once democracies determine the appropriate laws to regulate and control new trends, the result may even be an improvement, with a strengthened social contract and greater efficiency and transparency in society. But this will take time, because norms are not quick to change, and each democracy will move at its own pace.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump to launch his own social media platform in three or four months. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

5 minutes ago, Roch said:

Trump to launch his own social media platform in three or four months. 

Shall we add that to the list of wrong predictions this thread is full of?

Trump is broke, in legal trouble, has crappy legal teams, and you think he can take on Facebook and Twitter?

The left controls the internet.  Losers like trump are silenced.  The only desire he would have to form a media site is for him to have a voice again.  Big ego, big mouth, no microphone, no listeners.

Edited by Symmetry
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, surrept33 said:

once democracies determine the appropriate laws to regulate and control new trends,

Yup, Schmidt the controller in chief set Google well on its path away from "Don't be evil".

29 minutes ago, Symmetry said:

Shall we add that to the list of wrong predictions this thread is full of?

Trump is broke, in legal trouble, has crappy legal teams, and you think he can take on Facebook and Twitter?

The left controls the internet.  Losers like trump are silenced.  The only desire he would have to form a media site is for him to have a voice again.  Big ego, big mouth, no microphone, no listeners.

And again your stupidity is duly noted. Not only did I predict exactly this, I predicted it multiple times. How many leftist reporters have been fired since Xiden got elected? Hundreds? Leftists not doing so well in media now that everyone has moved on. Meanwhile how's that radio station setup to compete against right wing radio doing? Oh yeah, failed miserably, just like you every time you try to go toe to toe with me in an argument. Conservatives vastly outnumber leftists in this country, which is why there's such a strong audience for conservative platforms. Morons need not apply so needless to say, no Eejits. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

 

And again your stupidity is duly noted. Not only did I predict exactly this, I predicted it multiple times. How many leftist reporters have been fired since Xiden got elected? Hundreds? Leftists not doing so well in media now that everyone has moved on. Meanwhile how's that radio station setup to compete against right wing radio doing? Oh yeah, failed miserably, just like you every time you try to go toe to toe with me in an argument. Conservatives vastly outnumber leftists in this country, which is why there's such a strong audience for conservative platforms. Morons need not apply so needless to say, no Eejits. 

Your prediction is noted. Set a time-frame for this to occur; when will I be able to register and use a Trump run social media platform?  After which point, if the social media platform is not operational, will you accept your error?  You can't have it opened ended such that the prediction is useless.  "Someday the sky will fall!  If it hasn't fallen yet just wait longer!"

Logic, try it sometime.

 

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

24 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Conservatives vastly outnumber leftists in this country, which is why there's such a strong audience for conservative platforms. Morons need not apply so needless to say, no Eejits. 

No, they don't.  Even if they did, it doesn't matter - the weak are controlled by the strong and the truth does not care about popularity.

The majority of people believed the earth was flat and was the centre of the universe... they were all wrong; the liberal visionaries told them the truth only to be persecuted.

Insult me more!  It is expected when one spreads the truth. 

 

Edited by Symmetry
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Symmetry said:

No, they don't.  Even if they did, it doesn't matter - the weak are controlled by the strong and the truth does not care about popularity.

The majority of people believed the earth was flat and was the centre of the universe... they were all wrong; the liberal visionaries told them the truth only to be persecuted.

Insult me more!  It is expected when one spreads the truth. 

 

 

such-is-life-b4bfff2c3b.jpg

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

More proof of election skulduggery

 

 

7CC08A8C-2C83-4044-B3F2-05DF93F0CE25.jpeg

Edited by Ward Smith
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To Ward breaking up high, medium, and low security traffic / data is "skulduggery."  In reality, it is good practice and very common.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/21/2021 at 3:39 PM, Ward Smith said:

 

And again your stupidity is duly noted. Not only did I predict exactly this, I predicted it multiple times.

You won't set a due date for your "prediction" to come to fruition so it is exactly worthless.  

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

42 minutes ago, Symmetry said:

You won't set a due date for your "prediction" to come to fruition so it is exactly worthless.  

Uhh Ohh looks like Mr. Orange is busting a move here....2022 here he come's...Rumor Has It....

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-slams-biden-border-crisis-migrant-surge-destroying-country

 

Former President Trump slams Biden for migrant surge: ‘They’re destroying our country’

Trump To Return To Social Media On His Own Platform Within Three Months, Senior Advisor Says

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanponciano/2021/03/21/trump-to-return-to-social-media-on-his-own-platform-within-three-months-senior-advisor-says/?sh=118ff8ba35dd

 

 

52mo81.jpg

Edited by Eyes Wide Open
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

40 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Uhh Ohh looks like Mr. Orange is busting a move here....2022 here he come's...Rumor Has It....

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-slams-biden-border-crisis-migrant-surge-destroying-country

 

Former President Trump slams Biden for migrant surge: ‘They’re destroying our country’

Trump To Return To Social Media On His Own Platform Within Three Months, Senior Advisor Says

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanponciano/2021/03/21/trump-to-return-to-social-media-on-his-own-platform-within-three-months-senior-advisor-says/?sh=118ff8ba35dd

 

 

52mo81.jpg

nobody cares what trump says.

So you on record for these poor predictions? Don't deny crap later like always.

Working trump-run social media platform in 3 months; 2022 speaker of the house.

 

 

Edited by Symmetry
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Symmetry said:

nobody cares what trump says.

So you on record for these poor predictions? Don't deny crap later like always.

Working trump-run social media platform in 3 months; 2022 speaker of the house.

 

 

 

and-just-like-9797683163.jpg

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.