Of course now you’re just paraphrasing, among others, Vladimir Lenin.
Just out of curiosity, did he have elections back then to rig? 
Score one for democracy?
washingtonpost.com/opinions … Fstory-ans
[b]'Because the crush of President Trump’s corruption and wrongdoing has been so relentless, it often can seem like media scrutiny and congressional oversight have been reduced to nothing more than dead letters.
'But in the case of Postmaster General Louis DeJoy’s operational changes to the U.S. Postal Service, the scrutiny might actually be having a real impact:
[i]"The U.S. Postal Service will halt its controversial cost-cutting initiatives until after the election — canceling service reductions, reinstating overtime hours and ceasing the removal of mail-sorting machines and public collection boxes, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy announced in a statement Tuesday.
The declaration comes as lawmakers prepared to question DeJoy and USPS board of governors Chairman Robert M. Duncan in a Friday hearing in the Senate and at a Monday hearing in the House on those policy changes, which have caused mail slowdowns and threatened to jeopardize ballot collection during the November election."[/i]
'This is to no small degree a good development. The statement from DeJoy looks like a real climb-down, one that was brought about by relentless media and public pressure.[/b]
Of course a Trump stooge saying he is going to do something does not mean that anything will actually get done. There has to be a way to know for sure that the claims are being carried out.
Anyone here care to take on that task?
Also, anything from conservatives yet on the Biden campaign’s efforts to rig the election?
Well I pushed a radical conspiracy theory I once had about how they’re all in it together, how they put trumpf in office to destroy the west’s trust in conservatism. Trumpf is a socialist puppet and a propaganda tool. A purposeful idiot who is supposed to be a complete buffoon, ruin conservatism, and make way for the transformation into state capitalism. In the theory, I mean.
Yushimosho Shushagunyen also had a similar theory.
K: ok, where is the evidence that anyone pushed IQ45 into being a “socialist puppet”
when in fact, it is quite clear he is a radical conservative who has bitten into
the various conspiracy theories that the right wing live on…
Kropotkin
I dont have any evidence, pete. That’s why its called a radical conspiracy theory. Duh!
K: one of my many failings is sometimes I take things very, very literal…
I often find myself in trouble because I quite often take statements as a literal
statement…my bad…
Kropotkin
No you’re good. I just tried to make a funny.
You might be a highly functioning autistic though. Senses of humor are very difficult for those folks.
… or I could just be a terrible comedian.
Buh dumb tshirt
Damn auto correct.
Buh dum tshh
(See like that)
K: I have been told I am, in person, funny enough to have become
a standup comedian… that is my story and I’m sticking to it…
Kropotkin
The postal predicament.
nytimes.com/2020/08/19/opin … e=Homepage
[b]'The threat to the 2020 election’s legitimacy finally broke through into everyday conversation last week. People who pay little attention to politics started talking about whether President Trump was looking to mess with the United States Postal Service to slow down the receipt of mail-in ballots.
‘Mr. Trump was not shy about it. He told Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business Network last Thursday that he was pushing back against Democrats’ demand for further U.S.P.S. funding in the latest Covid-19 relief bill: “Now they need that money in order to have the post office work, so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots …. But if they don’t get those two items, that means you can’t have universal mail-in voting, because they’re not equipped to have it.”’[/b]
In some respects, there are those who insist that this is precisely the sort of thing that attracts them to Trump. He cuts through all the ludicrous high school civics text idealism…all the talking head bullshit…and notes how power actually does manifest itself re the Washington/Wall Street nexus. And, sure, there’s that cynical part of me that can appreciate this too. But my own political prejudices still yank me in the direction of wanting him to fail here. So, once again, drawn and quartered.
Then this part:
‘The end game here is a bit curious because Republicans traditionally have relied on mail-in balloting to get out the vote, and there are already signs that Republican turnout might be hurt by his rantings. How else to explain the president seeking to distinguish between good “absentee” voting and bad “mail-in” balloting and urging Floridians to vote by mail? And how else to explain the president not only repeatedly voting by mail but using a third person — what Mr. Trump refers to as “ballot harvesting” — to deliver his own ballot to election officials in the Florida primary on Tuesday?’
That’s the thing with political idealism: it always comes down to context. Who knows, one day it might be to the Democrats advantage to slow down the mail around an election.
It’s like liberals bitching about the Electoral College. Then one day down the road it’s a Democrat who loses the popular vote but wins in the EC.
In other words, it is ever and always about political power. And doing whatever it takes to win.
Or, perhaps:
‘If Mr. Trump is not really concerned about fraud, what’s the real end game? His unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud may be aimed at sowing chaos during the election and depressing turnout to help his side win election. Worse, it could be calculated to delegitimize the election results, which could allow Mr. Trump to contest a close election or weaken a Biden presidency.’
Here then it revolves around how events regarding the coronavirus and economy play out between now an November. If they make the election a close one, Trump is far more able to, say, suggest endless recounts, or to re-do the election, or to take the squabble to the Supreme Court.
The “worst case scenario” scenario…
nytimes.com/2020/08/18/opin … e=Homepage
[b]'Here is a sentence I never in a million years thought that I would ever write or read: This November, for the first time in our history, the United States of America may not be able to conduct a free and fair election and, should President Trump be defeated by Joe Biden, have a legitimate and peaceful transfer of power.
'Because if half the country thinks their votes were not fully counted due to deliberate sabotaging of the U.S. Postal Service by this administration, and if the other half are made to believe by the president that any mail-in vote for Biden was fraudulent, that would not result in just a disputed election — not another Bush v. Gore for the Supreme Court to sort out — that would be the end of American democracy as we know it. It also isn’t hyperbole to say it could sow the seeds of another Civil War.
The threat is real.'[/b]
Uh, define “civil war”?
But point taken.
For some, the thing about mail-in ballots is that it is just easier to imagine the possibility of fraud…of things being “rigged”. Especially given the reality of the coronavirus. After all, suppose the dreaded “second wave” hits well before the election. Spurring people in droves to opt for the mail. All Trump need do then is to make enough people believe in the possibility of fraud to make his argument stick.
I see IQ45 as being the boy who cried wolf… far too
many times before…You sort of learn to tune him out…
Kropotkin
The Facebook factor…
nytimes.com/2020/08/21/tech … e=Homepage
[b]'SAN FRANCISCO — Facebook spent years preparing to ward off any tampering on its site ahead of November’s presidential election. Now the social network is getting ready in case President Trump interferes once the vote is over.
'Employees at the Silicon Valley company are laying out contingency plans and walking through postelection scenarios that include attempts by Mr. Trump or his campaign to use the platform to delegitimize the results, people with knowledge of Facebook’s plans said.
‘Facebook is preparing steps to take should Mr. Trump wrongly claim on the site that he won another four-year term, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Facebook is also working through how it might act if Mr. Trump tries to invalidate the results by declaring that the Postal Service lost mail-in ballots or that other groups meddled with the vote, the people said.’[/b]
It speaks volumes given my own political prejudices that the largest slice of our pop culture “social media” can actually become an important factor in electing the president of the United States.
What does that tell us in and of itself about the “dumbing down” of American politics. For some, it’s not a question of intelligent voters only being “one of us”, but of just how unsophisticated literally millions and millions of American citizens seem to be in regard to grappling with the issues of the day. It goes beyond things like the Jaywalking clips from the Tonight Show. It’s the appalling shallowness of the stereotypical thinking that come to the surface time and again whenever one or another voter is interviewed on one or another newscast.
[b]'The preparations underscore how rising concerns over the integrity of the November election have reached social media companies, whose sites can be used to amplify lies, conspiracy theories and inflammatory messages. YouTube and Twitter have also discussed plans for action if the postelection period becomes complicated, according to disinformation and political researchers who have advised the firms.
'The tech companies have spent the past few years working to avoid a repeat of the 2016 election, when Russian operatives used Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to inflame the American electorate with divisive messages. While the firms have since clamped down on foreign meddling, they are reckoning with a surge of domestic interference, such as from the right-wing conspiracy group QAnon and Mr. Trump himself.
In recent weeks, Mr. Trump, who uses social media as a megaphone, has sharpened his comments about the election. He has questioned the legitimacy of mail-in voting, suggested that people’s mail-in ballots would not be counted and avoided answering whether he would step down if he lost.'[/b]
my emphasis
stay tuned…
This dumbing down is an example of the politizitation of intelligence, in general, that includes main street and the highest levels of the intelligence community.
That the slack is being taken up by an AI simulation, should not surprise anyone, the basic distrust with which have not yet been satisfactorily ironed out.
Namely, what is involved in this conspiratorial effect, is the actual movement toward world government, and here the edges blur. Russia has as much right to interfere as China , where the US’s interference of overt control over economic tensors, has no need for such subliminal control.
The tit for tat could, conceivably be hidden by Silicon Valley’s far more advanced state of covert espionage.
This whole issue is becoming mute by the second. Only remotely passed up outmoded deified political processes have interests that they may presume to result in significant difference, on the long run.
The rest of it is simply theater for it’s own sake.
From a Nick Anderson political cartoon:
[b]Reporter: Mr. President, why is the postal service driving out good people, failing to deliver on promised benchmarks, offering poor service, chaotically managed and virtually bankrupt?
Trump: Well, I promised to run government like I run one of my businesses.[/b]
Could that be the actual explanation? 
Then this part…
washingtonpost.com/politics … Fstory-ans
[b]'More than 30 years ago, a Republican Party program that dispatched off-duty police officers to patrol polling places in heavily Black and Latino neighborhoods in New Jersey triggered accusations of voter intimidation, resulting in a federal agreement that restricted for decades how the national GOP could observe voting.
'Now, two years after those limits were lifted, President Trump has revived the idea of using law enforcement officers to patrol polling places, invoking tactics historically used to scare voters of color.
'In an interview Thursday with Fox News host Sean Hannity, Trump described law enforcement officers as part of a phalanx of authorities he hopes will monitor voting in November.
‘“We’re going to have everything,” the president said. “We’re going to have sheriffs, and we’re going to have law enforcement, and we’re going to hopefully have U.S. attorneys and we’re going to have everybody, and attorney generals. But it’s very hard.”’[/b]
And if “law enforcement officers” aren’t enough?
Maybe the National Guard? The Army?
Still, it’s less what he says he might do and more the actual behaviors of those he orders to do it.
'Trump’s remarks are part of a pattern of comments in which he has suggested he is willing to take actions to impede how people cast their ballots this fall. He has repeatedly sought to undermine confidence in the November vote, making false claims about the integrity of mail-in balloting and raising the specter of widespread electoral fraud. Earlier this month, he floated the idea of withholding election money from states and refusing funding for the U.S. Postal Service so as to curtail the use of voting by mail. ’
How far will he go here? And how will those he “commands” do his bidding?
[b]'The president has limited authority to order law enforcement to patrol polling places. Sheriff’s deputies and police officers are commanded at the local level, and a federal law bars U.S. government officials from sending “armed men” to the vicinity of polling places.
‘But civil rights advocates said they feared Trump’s words could inspire local officials to act on his behalf. And they said even the threat of encountering police officers at the polls could be frightening to some voters, particularly in communities of color where residents are distrustful of the police.’[/b]
Stay tuned…
Yawn?
washingtonpost.com/politics … Fstory-ans
[b]'The New York attorney general is investigating President Trump’s private business for allegedly misleading lenders by inflating the value of its assets, the attorney general’s office said Monday in a legal filing.
'In the filing, signed by a deputy to Attorney General Letitia James, the attorney general’s office said it is investigating Trump’s use of “Statements of Financial Condition” — documents Trump sent to lenders, summarizing his assets and debts.
'The filing asks a New York state judge to compel the Trump Organization to provide information it has been withholding from investigators — including a subpoena seeking an interview with the president’s son Eric.
‘The attorney general’s office said it began investigating after Trump’s former lawyer and “fixer,” Michael Cohen, told Congress in February 2019 that Trump had used these statements to inflate his net worth to lenders.’[/b]
Who really knows where the hell “this one” will all end up. But it’s just one more Trump episode that, once he leaves office, may or may not lead to legal consequences that may or may find send the crooked bastard to jail.
Try to even imagine the reality of a U.S. president being sentenced to prison!
But with each new scandal comes an increasing need on Trump’s part stay in office. More and more less and less options are not going to be considered.
So, how ominous might it all become?
You know, if your not Wendy Darling?
K: it is interesting that the right wing has already chosen dictatorship
and totalitarianism…that is their preferred method of government…
see Nazi Germany for further evidence…
the question arises, why does the right prefer to have dictators
and totalitarianism? what drives the right to make this choice?
being on the left, I don’t see the reason for this choice… dictatorships
don’t favor anyone outside of the ones who benefit from the dictatorships…
perhaps the right believes that they will somehow benefit from this state
of affairs?
in reading history, no, no dictatorship has ever lasted that long…
it winds up destroying itself fairly quickly…
the Soviet Union was a dictatorship, nothing more and it lasted
a long time for a dictatorship, it lasted 73 years… whereas Nazi Germany
lasted only 12 years… and other dictatorships lasted slightly more or slightly
less…but no dictatorship has ever gone very long… which suggests to me that
dictatorship are inherently unstable and going to, to collapse quickly…
so why choose a failed political philosophy that will only last a few years…
short term gains that have no lasting influence …that is a dictatorship
very definition…a short term gain with no lasting influence…
at least monarchies, which I don’t like, at least they last far longer
then any dictatorship ever has…
so, ask yourself, why a dictatorship which has no lasting value over
a democracy which our current method is, which has lasted 230 years,
far longer then any dictatorship ever has… why must we go to something
inherently unstable when we already have something far more stable,
in a democracy?
Kropotkin