A Conspiracy Realist’s Framework for Predicting the US Elections

HighImpactFlix on X

The voting ritual is a ridiculous pantomime. It’s worse than that because in panto, both the audience and actors know they’re acting. In elections, the politicians know they’re acting but the audience don’t. So you’re being humiliated. They’re very good at that, as we know.

I now see it quite clearly as yet another form of ritual humiliation. As a voter in the panto called Voting for the Uniparty, you’re not even an actor with a role that matters and yet you’re made to believe it’s all about you, the voter. You’re actually a bloody extra – a nice-to-have, but not needed. The movie will still get shot, whether you turn up or not, and the actors – the brigands you vote for – will get paid. For the next four years. It’s a fact. You will be governed whether you play the game or not. Can someone point me to something in the US Constitution or electoral law here in the UK that makes an election void if some specified minimum turnout is not achieved? Theoretically, if only one person in each state/constituency turned up, that would be job done for Bastards Inc. It’s all been very carefully thought out.

The Aussies closed any loopholes for low turnout by very democratically ensuring that opting out of ‘democracy’ is not allowed – it’s illegal not to vote there. Democracy is all about freedom and, in Australia, they’re gonna secure your freedom even if it means they have to jail you for not participating in the ‘democracy’ ritual!

A truth that ought to be universally acknowledged but isn’t is that voting does nothing other than give free rein for another four years to a slightly new bunch of thieves, liars, fools, cowards, gluttons, drunkards, misers, calumniators, debauchees, fanatics, and hypocrites.[i]

Nothing has changed in my assessment of Trump following his starring role in “How to Win Friends and Influence People While Not Getting Assassinated”. If anything, I’m more convinced that he’s done his deals with The Establishment and pretty much every single sensible commentator in the panto audience is now screaming at the MAGA crowd from the rafters – “look behind you!” But like all good panto actors, or extras, they’re staring straight ahead, MAGA caps screwed on tightly. Many of them can hear everyone screaming and they understand why. But they feel damned if they do, and damned if they don’t, so they’re just going to vote. Again. Only harder this time.

As with all elections across the ‘free’ world, both teams have the stamp of approval from the puppet masters running the show – the Zionist, Bankster, CIA, military, Wall Street nexus. We can call this nexus The System, aka Owners and Controllers of Global Financial Capital (OCGFC), or The Establishment. It’s exactly how elections in Iran work. A council of the Supreme Leader shortlists candidates and then voters pick from the shortlist. But it’s more honest there, and a bit better organised. It also costs a lot less. So, if both teams up for selection in the US will work equally well for the US’s Supreme Leader – The System – the title of this piece doesn’t make sense, right?

Both Iran and the US give their voters a ‘choice’, so it’s the illusion of choice that lubricates the whole charade. The mere creation of the illusion of choice implies that both sets of voters want different things. The complexity of human deception surfaces in recognising that the organiser of the Uniparty system knows it’s a false choice, but the punters don’t. So for the deception to work, the ‘winners’ have to be made to feel that they got what they wanted and the losers have to be made to feel that they lost fair and square, to ensure that they come back to play the next time. This has worked since 1789.

In the voting game, as long as everyone agrees to play by the rules, then everyone has to accept the results of the game. That’s the deal, unless enough voters feel the game was so rigged that they flounce off and refuse to play. All control systems fear that the voters will stop playing along with the charade and, if that happens, the game is up. At which point things could get ugly for The Establishment. They could impose a dictatorship, which is a far trickier proposition than fake democracy. Or they could agree to ‘reform’ the system. And so the game continues.

This layered deception means that The System will have a preferred choice within this false choice paradigm. This is not because either of the selected teams themselves can’t deliver The System’s agenda, but because the voter base of each team presents different risks that reflect The System’s ability to make the winning camp think that they will get what they want, and the losing camp accept the result. In other words, both camps must be prevented from flouncing off and refusing to play.

As dispassionate observers of the spectacle, we could, if we can be bothered, ask ourselves what The System’s preferred choice is, and hope that it gets it wrong, with the result being a mass flounce. Implicit in the idea of a preferred choice for the organiser of the whole deception is that they might be incentivised to then influence the outcome of the deception they’ve created in the first place. Unlike the voter who is faced with a choice between the lesser of two evils, The Establishment is faced with a choice between the better of two goods.

So the aim of this piece is to rationalise the System’s preferred choice and then muse on how that might pan out for us.

But before we do that, we have to address a key implicit question: how far would The Establishment go to influence the outcome of the false choice it has presented? Most people familiar with this sort of blog would accept that The Establishment is Machiavellian enough to arrange the whole Uniparty / false voting choice – by now that seems obvious enough – but some don’t think it would go the whole nine yards to get what it thinks would be a preferred outcome.

So let’s ask the unspeakable question.

Election rigging? Shurely shome mishtake!

If push came to shove, how might The System massage things to ensure that its first choice made it over the line? The Unspeakable Answer is of course vote rigging. There. I said it. Vote rigging. How to make this bitter pill go down? Firstly I would say that, in the great scheme of things and looking at all the State Crimes Against Democracy the US has racked up since 1945, vote rigging is good clean fun by comparison.

If you don’t think the crime of vote rigging is an option for the US Establishment, let’s take stock of some of the crimes the US has engaged in since 1945. It ended WWII by needlessly dropping atomic bombs on innocent civilians in Japan just to demonstrate to Moscow that it had The Bomb. It engaged in 70 Cold War regime changes. It killed millions in the Korean and Vietnam Wars. It assassinated its own President in 1963. It killed 3,000 of its own citizens on its own soil in the 9/11 false flag operation of 2001. An estimated 4.5 million deaths have resulted from post-9/11 wars in the Middle East, with the US to blame for most of it. NATO orchestrated terror attacks across Europe in Operation Gladio. The CIA isn’t even slightly embarrassed about its MK-Ultra mind control experiments, which you can read about on its website. Operation Paper Clip involved the integration of more than 1,600 Nazi scientists into US government employment immediately after World War II in what Wikipedia helpfully explains was a project to harness “a wealth of scientific talent”, although it admits that “most were former members and leaders of the Nazi Party.” Whoops. In 2020, the US-led transnational Deep State spearheaded lockdowns and forced ‘vaccination’ of billions across the planet as the opening gambit in implementing a bio-digital totalitarian technocracy. Virtually all Western governments, with the US at the forefront, are spraying their populations with undisclosed chemicals, without consent, in a global geoengineering experiment.

Readers could easily point out 500 other major crimes I’ve missed off this list, which is not intended to be exhaustive, because it can’t be. When a compendium of all US crimes is eventually compiled, a revolutionary digital technology will be required to store and access this library.

Now, providing this overview of the US’s and its NATO empire’s depravity is not in itself evidence that it rigs elections on US soil. There is a possibility, albeit remote in my mind, that the US Establishment, while undeniably violent, dishonest, and generally psychopathic in all its dealings, is uncharacteristically honest and irreproachable in its conduct of US presidential elections. But I firmly believe you can be forgiven for asking the question: if it could do all these terrible things around the world, why would it not engage in a bit of pain-free cooking of the electoral books at home? Let’s face it: erecting a mental block to US vote rigging is basically admitting that the US would do anything for power, but it won’t do that? In the face of the true nature of the US empire, clinging to the belief that the voting ritual is unsullied is in fact irrational.

I put it to you that clean US elections are in fact a very delicate thread holding the now transparent fig leaf of ‘democracy’ in place. Clinging to the belief that both the thread and the fig leaf are real might be a manifestation of Stockholm Syndrome.

Reading this 2017 article by an associate professor of political science at Marquette University gives the strong impression that voter irregularities, including outright fraud, are actually quite commonplace in US elections. The question for me is not whether there is fraud, but how much. In December 2020, Sharyl Attkisson, an investigative reporter whom I personally take very seriously, published “A (fairly) complete list of (some of) the most significant claims of 2020 election miscounts, errors or fraud.” She states clearly that the list is not intended to validate or disprove each claim. When allegations were being made in 2020 and people were trying to post evidence of claims on the platform formerly known as Twitter, they were censored. So that’s a clear sign of a story The System was keen to suppress. Attkisson’s objective was to collate as many claims as possible so that the public could form their own view – something a functioning media would do if it existed. Take a look for yourself and see if there’s a smoking gun shooting democracy in the face.

Or how about the curious incident of the highly statistically anomalous vote updates in the early morning hours of November 4^th 2020 in Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia that suddenly flipped the total count from red to blue. With Trump leading comfortably in these states up to that moment, these updates bucked the trend of the other 8,950 updates. The margins of victory in the updates were also significantly greater than the overall margin of victory in all three states. That was crying out for investigation, but wasn’t investigated.

In Georgia, one of the states in question, video footage emerged of a location in which Republican observers were told that vote counting had stopped for the night, only to show that hours later, counting had continued. The video showed that, after the main group had left, “a small remnant of about four workers began pulling trunks containing thousands of ballots from underneath a table with a long tablecloth and running them through machines.” This video, which includes the actual damning footage of the irregular counting, shows a lawyer testifying in a Georgia Senate Judiciary Subcommittee Hearing, describing what took place. I’ve watched the video and if I were a candidate in the 2024 elections, Red or Blue, I’d be insisting on independent election observers from the African Union as they have extensive experience in the field of election fraud.

For those still clinging to the idea that it couldn’t happen in America, dig into this list of 2020 election anomalies that don’t pass the smell test. If even a quarter of them indicate problems, then you’ve got a problem.

To be clear, I don’t have a dog in any of these races, and nor are these election shenanigans consistently directed at one party. The System is an equal opportunities fiddler, as demonstrated when it favoured the Republican Party in the Florida hanging chads saga of 2000. The Establishment nearly always has a preferred choice; that choice just depends on prevailing exigencies.

The Elections through the Lens of The System

Let’s return to the question of what The System’s preferred choice is. As far as I’m concerned, the only guiding principle is to look at the voter base to see which one poses the most risk to The System of flouncing off and not playing the game. I’ve ruled out the possibility that either team has any capacity to implement the policies that might seriously conflict with the Establishment agenda.

When they’re not angsting about what pronoun would best match the outfit they’ve chosen for that day, the average Democrat is far more willing to invite the UN and the WHO into their living rooms to receive their marching orders for Agenda 2030. However, the average Republican is more of a bulwark against Great Reset agendas, and therefore poses a greater flounce risk if they lose. They need more careful management and hoodwinking, and it is for that reason that The System probably needs to switch to Trump and the MAGA team, very ably managed by the Vance/Thiel team on matters digital, and Blackrock on matters financial. Trump himself continues to double down on how much he and the Democrats love a good mRNA vaccine, so no troubles on that score. RFK Jnr is anti-vax decoration for the campaign. My money is on a quiet RFK sidelining if Trump wins. Either that, or he'll have to stop waxing unlyrical about the vax. He’s not exactly a Braveheart so he’ll do as he’s told.

Many people who are voting for Trump are doing so on the lesser-of-two-evils principle. The problem with that is that Trump as the pied piper of Thiel’s digital gulag may actually succeed in corralling both Democrats and Republicans (and by extension, the rest of the West) into it. Like Obama before him, he may end up being the more effective of the two evils, not the lesser. I think that in terms of Great Reset agendas, the flounce factor is reduced under a Trump presidency, which is one reason to believe he would be the Establishment’s preferred choice.

Gerald Celente predicts that Harris will win. The polls, if you put any stock in them, show a very tight race. He hasn’t, to my knowledge, mentioned the possibility of rigging, so his prediction is based on a fraud-free process. Or free enough not to change the outcome. It is quite possible that The System would let the chips fall where they may by allowing a fair vote tally. That would imply a high degree of indifference to the flounce risk, now and future, of each voter base. It implies they’ve got a plan to manage it.

Celente bases his prediction on a single voter demographic – women and the abortion issue. Trump doesn’t do well with women. Chuck Baldwin speculated that Trump might actually be trying to lose the election by being consistently offensive to women. The gaffes he makes seem to make no sense, even for someone as unimpressive as Trump. If Celente is right, then a Harris/Democrat presidency increases the flounce factor for the red half of the country.

While I maintain that Trump is the best choice for The Establishment to manage the expectations of both voter bases, a Harris presidency might be what The System wants. They could use the rage that would erupt in conservative America from a Democrat victory to further advance their agenda through a strategy of tension – conservatives would increasingly become ‘far-right’ terrorists subject to domestic terror laws. But my view is that this intuitively feels like a messy last resort.

So the final big question is why should sophisticated, non-ideological freedom-lovers who read A Plague On Both Houses care which result The System gets? Well, the paragraph above would suggest that it would be better for the Democrats to take the managerial reins so that the other half of the country, instead of resting on its laurels, continues to huff and puff and blow the whole Davos house down.

On the other hand, if Trump were to win, I’m hoping that Great Freeset Republicans won’t be that easily hoodwinked by Papi Warp Speed speaking out of both sides of his mouth. It therefore might be better for Great Freeset Republicans to put Trump in the White House and to then have the scales fall from their eyes as he tries to roll out Thiel’s, Blackrock’s and Pfizer’s dystopia. The sooner they see Trump for the dissembling egomaniac he is, the better. In addition to this Trumpian revelation for MAGAs, you may even get a reasonable chunk of Democrats opposing a disguised Trumpian Great Reset simply because it’s Red not Blue.

That’s my conspiracy realist’s framework for predicting who will win the election. But it’s not the prediction itself! I’ll let you, the reader, do the predicting!

---

[i] Thank you Voltaire (Candide).