Post: #1

While this thread deals with the 2016 US presidential election, I thought it better to consider it as a standalone for more focused discussion.

In the thread on the Dallas police shootings, I originally posted on my growing suspicion that we are seeing the United States entering the early stages of disintegration. Briefly summarized, it seems as if the United States is more polarized and divided than at any time since the 1960's, and potentially since the Civil War. I mentioned the probable immediate outcome of a Trump victory as wide-scale urban unrest in major US metropolitan centres, instigated by BLM/LaRaza/SJWs.

I didn't consider the possibility of what might happen if Clinton were to win, and what the reaction might be amongst Trump supporters, Republicans, and right-wing Americans in general. There are murmurs in establishment media about the potential for the right wing of America to essentially reject any consent to be governed by Hillary Clinton, regardless of the notional election result: http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/08/08/roun...oses-ugly/

Some choice excerpts from the article:

Quote:What if, the day after the election — among working class whites and regions of the South and West — a squeaker Clinton victory causes such a surge of outrage and disbelief about the “stolen” election that many refuse to accept the results?

Quote:[The] next step is local active resistance, to which the federal government does not have the will or ability to respond. What happens if regions of the country just decide to start taking over areas of authority previously reserved to the federal government? It’s not hard to imagine Texas and Arizona taking control of their borders with Mexico. They already have, to some extent. Some folk there have made it abundantly clear how they wish to deal with unlawful immigration. The only thing standing in their way is the U.S. Department of Justice. Pick whatever flashpoint you like in which active regional take-over might become the norm. Abortion. Income tax collection. Environmental law. Federal lands. Income inequality. Islamic State sympathizers. Muslim immigrants. Prayer. The schools. Gay rights. The proper place of women. Race relations.

Quote:Then again, perhaps this is what “Fort Sumter 2017” looks like.

Nov. 9: Trump denounces election results, calls them “questionable,” vows to “take this to the Supreme Court and beyond.”
Nov. 12: Pennsylvania and Virginia decline to entertain Trump suits contesting narrow Clinton victories.
Nov. 13:Trump calls election results “illegitimate.”
Nov. 18: Governors of Arizona and Texas question election results.
Nov. 20: Louisiana, Georgia, and Mississippi say they want to review election numbers.
Nov. 22: North Carolina begins throwing out votes from majority black counties.
Dec. 8: Trump announces plans for a “Two-million-person march on Washington” to coincide with the planned inauguration.
Dec. 14: Several Idaho counties say they “cannot legally recognize the authority of so-called President-elect Clinton.” By inauguration day, the majority of rural counties (but not population) in 13 states have issued similar statements.
Jan 20: President Clinton’s inaugural address is drowned out by the revving of thousands of motorcycles around the Capitol. The black-clad riders call themselves the “American Restoration Militia,” or ARM.
Jan. 22: The federal courthouse in Dallas is bombed.
Jan. 24: In Wichita, ARM occupies the U.S. courthouse, the U.S. Internal Revenue building, and the U.S. General Services Administration building. Kansas State Police decline to remove them.
Jan. 25: Clinton nationalizes Kansas National Guard.
Jan. 27: Some 40 percent of the Kansas National Guard soldiers decline to mobilize. Trump applauds them, and encourages ARM militias “to follow these heroes.”
Jan. 28: The Army removes the commanding general of the Kansas National Guard when he says “as a matter of conscience I cannot compel soldiers to violate their own consciences.” The brigadier general then crosses picket lines and joins the “Occupy Hillary” protestors in the Wichita federal courthouse.
Jan. 29: Supreme Court rejects all Trump suits.
Feb. 1: A federal judge’s car is bombed in Birmingham, Alabama.
Feb. 4: South Carolina announces a state convention to consider “our future relationship with the federal government.”

We've already seen the precursors to a right-wing civil uprising in the United States (the Bundy ranch standoff, the Malheur Wildlife Reserve occupation, refusal by some counties to issue same-sex marriage licenses post-Obergefell.) I can't honestly believe that the prospect of a Clinton presidency - with its stacked Supreme Court, its eventual evisceration of the Second Amendment, its full-scale imposition by force of the social values of the Degenerate Left, its wholescale refusal to enforce US immigration policy for partisan political purposes, and its ultimate subordination to globalist interests - would not inspire some sort of civil disobedience by the multitude of right-wing patriot militias. Especially when you consider the sheer revulsion many Americans have towards Clinton, and the potential that Trump could denounce the results as rigged, and thus deprive Clinton's presidency of any shred of legitimacy in the eyes of a significant minority of Americans. Hell, I can't personally think of a better moment for them to make any sort of a move. I'd be willing to bet they've been waiting for such an opportunity. Already there have been elected officials in various states that have openly praised such actions.

I'm not an American, so I ask the US-based membership of this forum - do you think civil unrest in the US post-election on this scale is likely, or even inevitable?

Post: #2

I'm just thankful that when I clicked in this it wasn't created by someone with three posts.

This is also something I've been thinking about. Several states have already taken the first steps to secession, most notably in my opinion being Texas with moves towards minting their own gold and silver currency.

The US Federal government is increasingly becoming a paper tiger. The more SJWs and affirmative action hires they fill their ranks with the less talented and capable of holding power they become. As is is, the old federal guard of genuine "America first" patriots is dying off or retiring and being replaced with people that fundamentally hate America and want it altered beyond recognition.

In the end the east and west coast have become utterly incompatible with the landlocked states. I can't see any future in the union whatsoever.

In direct response to the OP, I think that people will start rebelling in their own way. Going from dodging tax to not paying any at all. Sabotaging federal buildings and vehicles. In the end it wouldn't take much to tip the union over. It now relies entirely on the assumption of continuity. Spark unrest and the global creditors will stampede to the exits. After that Hillary will be emptying the waste paper baskets in the Oval Office herself.

Post: #3

interesting theory. I don't think it would happen, but if it did, it would surely start somewhere in the west, or southwest where there has been bundy ranch type stuff before. Any success would embolden other states and then eventually the south/former confedereacy.

Liberals/SJWs would freak the fuck out online before it was shut down and they were ovverun by a 3rd faction rising up from the inner cities. There most certainly would be a non-aligned factions just out to loot/cause chaos as per LA riots/baltimore/ferguson pushing the hippies out and conservative militias pushing them in from the rural areas.

Post: #4

The issue I have with this suggested scenario is its source. Foreign Policy is rightly considered to be politically equivalent to the ADL in its aims for both the US and beyond. These organizations have been using the "Right Wing Revolt" scenario to encourage anti-Right propaganda and policy for decades now, ignoring that most crime and all revolution has come from the Left.

It's hypnosis. Tell the story in the right way and it becomes probable reality for a lot of people as they create the images in their mind. Action follows.

I view these stories as bigoted. Switch out the scenario for a publication writing about probable Jewish revolt in France, a possible Black revolt in New York, or a possible Muslim revolt in Detroit. It would be denounced as racist fear mongering. But spinning these tales of the revolutionary White threat in the MSM is okay.

It's these fuckheads that require worrying over, for the sake of the nation.

Post: #5

BLUF: Probability? Low. There has never been a better time to be a patriot, or a worse time to be the govt.

This topic seems to come up around election time, most notably toward the end of Bush II's terms after continuity of govt plans were exposed to the new generation of scared sheepus americanus. If the left's dream was to clamp down on freedom in this country, Obama has done more to harm that goal than anyone since FDR. He pushed too far too fast, now too many people are on to him/them.

First to clarify a couple definitions as I see them:

Insurrection: Active, armed resistance against govt assets.
Disobedience: Willful disregarding of laws, taxes, regulations.

Above stated, I think the most likely outcome may be localized armed disobedience just short of that which would cause a kinetic federal response.

Greater preparedness - Lets not forget that over Obama's terms there have been record setting sales of guns, ammo, and professional training. If there is any type of armed insurrection it won't be hunters with deer rifles, it will be pissed off citizens, veterans, patriots, etc armed with the tens of millions of AR-15 style rifles that have been sold. Training has evolved from simply individual weapons handling to small unit tactics, E&E, and communications.

Govt Fallibility - Bundy Ranch and Malhuer provided the precedent that when confronted with even a haphazardly formed "resistance", the govt can and will fold. This says nothing about elements in the 2A/patriot circles that are actually organized, trained (i.e. SOF), and have the support of their locales. In a situation with nationwide, connected and random unconnected events they will simply be overwhelmed with the noise. They know it. We know it. They know we know it. Detente.

Erosion of trust - We all "know" and suspect that the govt is corrupt. But now with the DNCLeak, BernieBetrayal, ClintonLeaks, CrookedMedia, etc even the kool aid drinkers on the left are realizing it. While they will not likely take an active role in any of this, they may just turn a blind eye which is all they really need to do for such acts to succeed. They screwed the young left badly this go round. The fedgov does not have the numbers or even the tech to control the entire country, or even most of the cities save for the major liberal enclaves. Thus they will rely on local LEO to carry out their diktat. How do you think LEOs are feeling about the fedgov after the past 12 mo?

Controlling the narrative - Continuing the above, the media's credibility is fast approaching zero. The rise of the alternative media is casting light on the misinformation perpetrated the establishment. What was the samizdat vis now legit. Alex Jones interviewed the Republican nominee for President! Alex fucking Jones! If you've been following alt-anything you know he has been seen as a kook for a long time, but now the things he said have come home to roost for the establishment. Combine that with the speed of communication, which is orders of magnitude greater than even 10-15 years ago. I wonder how popular opinion would have been shaped if Ruby Ridge, Waco, and OKC were covered the way Cernovich covered the DNC? We can also look to real world examples such as Egypt's and Libya's insurgences that were no shit fought via Twitter. The only way for this to be countered is to ruthlessly and completely suppress all forms of un-sanctioned communication. By then all will know the balloon has gone up.

My glasses aren't rose colored by any means, either to the chances of success for such an event, or our ability to prevent it altogether through threat of arms. But rather they are tinted by objective knowledge and experience in how the fedgov operates. They are a hammer, we are nails, nuts, bolts, screws, etc. They use force and expect submission in return, receiving force instead screws up their calculus. What is more likely is a soft or de facto succession where states or regions do what they want and the govt looks or gets paid to look the other way (i.e. we'll give you your tax money, but we're keeping our guns).

Post: #6

Nov. 9: Trump denounces election results, calls them “questionable,” vows to “take this to the Supreme Court and beyond.”
Nov. 12: Pennsylvania and Virginia decline to entertain Trump suits contesting narrow Clinton victories.
Nov. 13:Trump calls election results “illegitimate.”
Nov. 18: Governors of Arizona and Texas question election results.
Nov. 20: Louisiana, Georgia, and Mississippi say they want to review election numbers.
Nov. 22: North Carolina begins throwing out votes from majority black counties.
Dec. 8: Trump announces plans for a “Two-million-person march on Washington” to coincide with the planned inauguration.
Dec. 14: Several Idaho counties say they “cannot legally recognize the authority of so-called President-elect Clinton.” By inauguration day, the majority of rural counties (but not population) in 13 states have issued similar statements.
Jan 20: President Clinton’s inaugural address is drowned out by the revving of thousands of motorcycles around the Capitol. The black-clad riders call themselves the “American Restoration Militia,” or ARM.
Jan. 22: The federal courthouse in Dallas is bombed.
Jan. 24: In Wichita, ARM occupies the U.S. courthouse, the U.S. Internal Revenue building, and the U.S. General Services Administration building. Kansas State Police decline to remove them.
Jan. 25: Clinton nationalizes Kansas National Guard.
Jan. 27: Some 40 percent of the Kansas National Guard soldiers decline to mobilize. Trump applauds them, and encourages ARM militias “to follow these heroes.”
Jan. 28: The Army removes the commanding general of the Kansas National Guard when he says “as a matter of conscience I cannot compel soldiers to violate their own consciences.” The brigadier general then crosses picket lines and joins the “Occupy Hillary” protestors in the Wichita federal courthouse.
Jan. 29: Supreme Court rejects all Trump suits.
Feb. 1: A federal judge’s car is bombed in Birmingham, Alabama.
Feb. 4: South Carolina announces a state convention to consider “our future relationship with the federal government.”
Feb. 8: President Clinton declares state convention treasonous and orders military into South Carolina to arrest and imprison state government officials.
Feb. 9: A large proportion of military personnel refuse and defect to join widespread rebellion.
Feb. 10: President Clinton issues emergency executive order ordering all military personnel to undergo mandatory castration in order to ensure obedience. Soldiers are told their testicles will be frozen and reattached once their term of enlistment is complete. Testicles actually sold to Chinese by Clinton Foundation for 100 billion dollars. Chinese profit immensely from new line of Traditional Chinese Medicine aphrodisiacs.
Jul. 19: Civil War has raged across continental United States for months now. Rebel soldiers excel in ground engagements but suffer crippling casualties from drones piloted by elite guard of eunuch video gamers funded by Mark Zuckerberg.
Nov. 9: One year after election, Federal government is in economic collapse. Unable to pay for fueling drone strikes, the rebels close in on Washington DC.
Nov. 10: On eve of rebel victory, in a last ditch effort to prevent Hillary's capture and execution, a cabal of Jewish sorcerors led by George Soros finally succeed in summoning the Great Old One (((JEWBILEX))) into our plane of existence. Enormous tentacles, noses, and toothy maws erupt from the ground worldwide consuming all life on Earth in a matter of minutes before the entity withdraws back into its own dimension, leaving the Earth a shattered barren husk.

Post: #7

Bortimus, the only thing wrong with all of that is that it seems totally plausible right now, right down to the castration.

I think a lot of guys will just bail instead of stay and fight.

Post: #8

Sorry to pop your bubble, but as much as I want him to, Trump isn't going to win. Even if he somehow manages to get more supporters than Hillary Clinton, the elites will obviously twist the results.

The more likely outcome is that Clinton will just win straight out, because most Americans are happy to submit to the rule of globalism which I find really sad.

The only way I can see Trump winning is if he tones down some of the more outrageous stuff, and absolutely ruins her in the debates (which is reasonably likely) without a major backlash.

On the bright side, you guys could always cross the pond and join us. We've just rejected globalism and will have a right-wing government until at least 2025.

Post: #9

(08-09-2016 03:45 AM)britchard Wrote:  Sorry to pop your bubble, but as much as I want him to, Trump isn't going to win. Even if he somehow manages to get more supporters than Hillary Clinton, the elites will obviously twist the results.

The more likely outcome is that Clinton will just win straight out, because most Americans are happy to submit to the rule of globalism which I find really sad.

The only way I can see Trump winning is if he tones down some of the more outrageous stuff, and absolutely ruins her in the debates (which is reasonably likely) without a major backlash.

On the bright side, you guys could always cross the pond and join us. We've just rejected globalism and will have a right-wing government until at least 2025.

We aren't throwing in the towel just yet, though Trump is getting slaughtered in the polls. Hillary may not even make it to the election with her health.

Post: #10

(08-09-2016 03:45 AM)britchard Wrote:  Sorry to pop your bubble, but as much as I want him to, Trump isn't going to win. Even if he somehow manages to get more supporters than Hillary Clinton, the elites will obviously twist the results.

The more likely outcome is that Clinton will just win straight out, because most Americans are happy to submit to the rule of globalism which I find really sad.

The only way I can see Trump winning is if he tones down some of the more outrageous stuff, and absolutely ruins her in the debates (which is reasonably likely) without a major backlash.

On the bright side, you guys could always cross the pond and join us. We've just rejected globalism and will have a right-wing government until at least 2025.

Funniest shit I read all day, you brits sure got a different way of looking at things.

Post: #11

^^^

He's 18 or something. Don't be too harsh on him.

Post: #12

Adonis holds the torch in this thread so far IMO. The kicker could be if the federal government is exposed as being the emperor with no clothes and accordingly the federal debt market implodes. Considering that the only real leverage the Feds have is selective bribery, once that disappears then so does the Federal Government, or at least its ability to alter the lives of those outside of DC.

Let's say the American Dollar tanks to the value of toilet paper. Suddenly martial law is declared and the military starts rolling in. Nobody is quite sure whether the military is propping up the federal government or whether they're replacing the old order in favour of a do-over. The grunts in the street are just grunts. They hear rumours but nothing solid.

What then?

p.s. Apologies for delving outside of the OPs parameters.

Post: #13

Yes but not as a result of the election. In 2017 social security payouts become unsustainable, and many pension funds have a payout schedule that will cause them to go broke in 2017.

Bad combination. People are now extremely dependent on handouts....right in time for them to blow up. Once the EBT card stops working people will get desperate and nasty.

Best thing you can do right now is to try to locate yourself in areas where there is a low percentage of the population living on benefits.

Post: #14

What are the chances that if/when Trump gets in, the 'higher ups' pull strings to tank the economy, hike up interest rates significantly and position Trump as the scapegoat? I'm going to be extremely disciplined with my spending in an effort to put as much away as an emergency fund as possible in the next few months.

Post: #15

(08-09-2016 10:26 AM)TrifeLife Wrote:  What are the chances that if/when Trump gets in, the 'higher ups' pull strings to tank the economy, hike up interest rates significantly and position Trump as the scapegoat? I'm going to be extremely disciplined with my spending in an effort to put as much away as an emergency fund as possible in the next few months.

Bet on it. A Trump presidency will herald a shitstorm, but a necessary shitstorm that's the better alternative to a slow slide into eternal slavery.

Post: #16

(08-09-2016 10:26 AM)TrifeLife Wrote:  What are the chances that if/when Trump gets in, the 'higher ups' pull strings to tank the economy, hike up interest rates significantly and position Trump as the scapegoat? I'm going to be extremely disciplined with my spending in an effort to put as much away as an emergency fund as possible in the next few months.

They will shit can all their own extreme wealth. This is the one thing I am really uncertain of. Will the elites take a HUGE financial hit to preserve power or will the continue to flex to maintain wealth. Which one is most important to them?

Post: #17

People who say "sorry to pop your bubble" are never sorry to pop your bubble.

Post: #18

(08-09-2016 12:26 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  People who say "sorry to pop your bubble" are never sorry to pop your bubble.

I do genuinely think that some of the guys on here can only see a Trump win, and that anything else won't happen. Not necessarily OP, but I've seen it.

I just hope that everyone knows a Trump win is extremely unlikely. I'm actually tempted to put a large bet on a Clinton win, so I'll be happy whatever the result.

Clinton's odds are 1/4. The only thing that gives me hope about that is that the 'remain' referendum outcome was also 1/4.

Post: #19

Fair enough.

But that doesn't change the fact that you don't sound very sorry.

I stand by my bubble analysis.

Post: #20

(08-09-2016 04:45 PM)britchard Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 12:26 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  People who say "sorry to pop your bubble" are never sorry to pop your bubble.

I do genuinely think that some of the guys on here can only see a Trump win, and that anything else won't happen. Not necessarily OP, but I've seen it.

I just hope that everyone knows a Trump win is extremely unlikely. I'm actually tempted to put a large bet on a Clinton win, so I'll be happy whatever the result.

Clinton's odds are 1/4. The only thing that gives me hope about that is that the 'remain' referendum outcome was also 1/4.

Talk about a defeatist attitude.

Do you tell yourself the same thing when you have a hot piece of ass in front of you that you're gaming ?

Hey Britchard, sorry to pop your bubble, but you'll never fuck that hottie.

Or you think, "Man I'm never going to the fuck this hot girl that's talking to me"

That's negative man, sure you can be a cynic or realist, it's all negative energy.

I'm all in on the Trump train, people are freaking about ((((polls))) - guess who controls those polls, the MSM and Hillary's friends.

Stop living in the clouds, get your boots on the ground, jump in trenches with us, fight the good fight and go out and talk about Trump, defend your ground, fight them back with common sense, fight them with facts, logic, evidence.

That's how you start to get the ball rolling.

If you looked at the first page of the Trump thread you'd of seen yours truly say this:

Quote:The republicans are continually splintering their vote, this is a fucking joke.

It's turning into a circus, there needs to reformation in the party.

Fuck him and the 2 party joke of a system.

Funny how things change eh ?

Post: #21

(08-09-2016 04:45 PM)britchard Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 12:26 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  People who say "sorry to pop your bubble" are never sorry to pop your bubble.

I do genuinely think that some of the guys on here can only see a Trump win, and that anything else won't happen. Not necessarily OP, but I've seen it.

I just hope that everyone knows a Trump win is extremely unlikely. I'm actually tempted to put a large bet on a Clinton win, so I'll be happy whatever the result.

Clinton's odds are 1/4. The only thing that gives me hope about that is that the 'remain' referendum outcome was also 1/4.

If the odds were so TERRIBLY wrong on Brexit why will they be accurate on Clinton? You don't think your information through.

Post: #22

(08-09-2016 06:40 PM)Samseau Wrote:  ...
If the odds were so TERRIBLY wrong on Brexit why will they be accurate on Clinton? You don't think your information through.

Brexit gave me pause to think that rigging an election can be a dicey and difficult proposition. It's not like you can tally all the votes, change the outcome and then declare victory. You have to play it incredibly smart because much of the rigging takes place while the counting is in progress, so if you rig too hard you might risk making the winning margin seem ridiculous and unbelievable.

This is what I believe happened with Brexit. I think they took their best guess about precisely how much they had to skew the vote to win, and in the end they simply underestimated the swing towards Brexit and were pipped at the line.

No doubt Hillary's team are facing a similar dilemma. Rig a little and risk a loss, or rig a lot and risk losing all legitimacy.

Post: #23

(08-09-2016 07:13 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 06:40 PM)Samseau Wrote:  ...
If the odds were so TERRIBLY wrong on Brexit why will they be accurate on Clinton? You don't think your information through.

Brexit gave me pause to think that rigging an election can be a dicey and difficult proposition. It's not like you can tally all the votes, change the outcome and then declare victory. You have to play it incredibly smart because much of the rigging takes place while the counting is in progress, so if you rig too hard you might risk making the winning margin seem ridiculous and unbelievable.

In this election the swing states need to be watched very closely..more than ever. Those are the weak points where the most fuckery can take place. Rigging won't be national they will probably try to bump a few swing states in favor of Hillary through local state connections and bribery. If it comes down to a dead heat then things will get very shady.

When Obama was mocking Trump about the possibility of rigged elections you'll notice Obama addressed the public like they were stupid and didn't know how elections worked. Obama claims that rigging can't happen at the federal/national level. No shit. That's why most of the actual rigging happens at the swing state and even specific county level.

Any competent campaign advisor has swing state counties carefully mapped out and they know generally what the sentiment is and what hot spots to watch for. If they know specific counties that will swing a certain way then they can go down to the very local municipality level politics to corrupt those officials in charge of those areas.

It's beating a dead horse but most likely the U.S. has already been through a rigged election. The most notable was the Florida debacle which put W in charge. Very shady business and it's definitely something the neocon establishment will or has done before.

Post: #24

Rigged elections? Here's an interesting bit of information: http://blackboxvoting.org/fraction-magic-1/

Post: #25

I am doubtful of "insurrection", but for the first time in my life, I can see a case for civil war.

I don't think it likely, just possible.

The reasons are overall declining standards of living, a general malaise, and a media that has a habit of intentionally inciting civil unrest, and nowadays even terrorism, as a pretext for change. Then one day they're going to incite something they can't control. It will go on one-sided for a long time, until a small and well-armed faction of the other decides that it has had enough, and engages.

The trigger could be a Venezuela-style economic meltdown. Which, ultimately, is inevitable. Followed by an inflammatory media blitz encouraging certain classes of people to blame other classes of people.

I suspect this scenario has already been foreseen, and is one reason for a renewed push for, ultimately, comprehensive gun control.