October 14, 2016

Block out media to avoid demoralization during home stretch

First the media immediately ignored the second debate, where Trump savaged Clinton on a range of substantive issues as well as her track record. Now they are ignoring the WikiLeaks emails revealing all sorts of goings-on from the Clinton campaign and other things -- such as Crooked Hillary knowing that Saudi Arabia and Qatar were supporting radical Islamic terrorist groups.

There is no discussion of any issue whatsoever -- trade, immigration, healthcare (big Dems now admitting Obamacare is a disaster), terrorism, foreign policy / war... absolutely nothing.

It is clear that for the entire rest of the election season, the media's intent is to focus solely on personal matters, and hoax stories at that, targeting only Trump. The goal is simply to demoralize the voters into staying home. Having to watch so much bullshit saps their energy, let alone having to debate pointless shit with others on social media or in person.

Even if a Trump voter scores on Hillary's personal track record, it's a Pyrrhic victory because debating which one is evil and which one is decent is not what people want to be thinking about as they collect their thoughts ahead of Election Day. It takes the focus off of the referendum nature of elections -- Obama for two terms has not been good, especially the past four years, and Crooked Hillary would be far worse than Obama. Trump is the change agent on trade, terrorism, foreign policy, corruption, healthcare, and more. "Make America Great Again."

The battle over personal stuff is not exciting or energizing, and we have the natural enthusiasm advantage big-league. We need to keep that for Election Day when turnout matters.

With that in mind, shut off any TV media and internet media from now until the election, and recommend others to do likewise. If you want to catch Trump rallies on YouTube or Facebook, or follow a handful of Twitter accounts, or check the Drudge Report for anything important, that's fine. But anything more than that is going to suck you out of issues mode and into character debate mode, which will be 100% full of bogus inanities.

You're not going to feel pumped up to go out and vote or spread the gospel about populist nationalism when all that your mind has been stewing in is related to the hoax du jour about Trump.

It seems like the thing that's in the news and could be more on people's minds right now is Syria and a potential war with Russia. No real American gives a damn what goes on in the Middle East, and we're supposed to hurtle ourselves toward nuclear war with Russia over Syria? I don't think so. Trump is for peace, Clinton is for endless and pointless war.

Also ties into the other newsworthy stories about WikiLeaks -- not just the revelations about what we've been doing over there, and what Clinton knew about the US being on the side of ISIS, but also the constant propaganda about how Russia is in charge of WikiLeaks and the Trump campaign. Normal people see that it's transparently crazy BS. The media narrative about Russia only discredits them further, and makes it clear to the people that it's Trump vs. the lying press.

It makes for a natural bridge to Independents, former Bernie voters, or even Stein voters. Stein herself has gone on the record saying that while she doesn't like either Trump or Clinton, Trump is clearly the peace candidate in this election, while Hillary would launch us toward nuclear war with Russia over Syria.

An intervention that would morph into yet another Iraq War, plus nuclear war with Russia? We'd have to be insane to choose that path. Let people know they can vote however else they want down the ballot, or in the future for President. But in 2016, it's either Trump and survival, or Clinton and extinction.


  1. what if hillary pays another 11 women to tell nytimes that trump groped them? and this can go on and on ....every day. 11 women*25 days = 275.

  2. trump should pay 10 black women to tell fox news that hillary clinton called them n*****s.

  3. Random Dude on the Internet10/14/16, 7:14 AM

    I agree with your blackout strategy but the 'controversies' are becoming self parodies now. Nobody believes this endless parade of women who now claim to be sexually assaulted by Donald Trump. In many ways, it's best that the media go 100 miles an hour in this direction, decimating whatever little trust they have with the public. Let it burn.

    The topics have been revealed for the third debate and they are mostly in Trump's wheelhouse, including the big one, immigration. Not a single question will appear to discuss the parade of victims from The Octopus/The Donald unless Chris Wallace brings it up. My guess is that by Wednesday the 19th, these topics will have been long since stale and have already introduced a backlash.

    I see Trump is down again in the USC polls and once again, it appears to be men who are the culprit. His support among women has remained statistically consistent. It's pretty clear that women just aren't buying this but men, thanks to a couple generations of feminism, have been taught to reflexively run away from anyone who is remotely controversial with women, even if it is getting to be blatantly false. Me saying that these women are likely making it up would likely make me a social pariah, even with conservative friends. I guess feminism did its job but this has a short shelf life as well. The internet of course is already finding giant holes in their stories. I hope this will all fizzle out by the debate and then Trump can have a strong finish.

    In more positive news, 245,000 registered Democrats switched their ballots to Republican in Pennsylvania. The conversion of blue collar white Democrats to Republicans is happening and it may be enough to flip states like Pennsylvania. Fortunately Trump isn't giving up because he is still very much likely to win this thing.

  4. Good advice. The media is in full psychotic Defcon 1 propaganda mode now, and will be for the next few weeks (to Trump's great credit, he's hammering them on it too. His FL speech was extremely high energy). Their sole goal is to blackpill the Trump movement, so don't give them the chance.

    I have some co-workers who are down on Trump (though I've never actually heard them say anything positive about Hillary), and if they want to get into it over these smear jobs I'm just gonna say "I get it, you think my candidate is a Nazi, and I think yours is a criminal and rape enabler. Let's agree to disagree" and leave it at that.

  5. What was clever was how they selectively reported Colin Kaepernick's statement of why he was protesting the national anthem, it wasn't just "oppression" and police violence, he also said Hillary would be in jail if she was anyone else. Of course he also said that Trump is rayciss, but that's beside the point. Now, I think CK is a childish fag, but it's a good case study: they want blaqs to be angry, but not to connect any dots.

  6. Random Dude on the Internet10/14/16, 11:34 PM

    The latest controversy is Trump calling Lil Jon an Uncle Tom. So this is the big "n-word" bombshell we've been hearing for the past several days.

    Also many of the stories of Trump's sexual assaults are unraveling fast as they're not holding up under any kind of scrutiny. I'm sure the left is shocked, just shocked that people are questioning these brave women. You have to think about the sociological impact of this and how the pendulum is starting to swing in the direction of being against political correctness. It's like UVa and Mattress Girl unfolding at a national level: millions of people are seeing the "rape culture" narrative being shattered in front of them. This all ties into the death of identity politics on the national stage.

    One of the more interesting things on the USC poll is how rock solid Trump's female base is. Despite the narrative from the media, women don't seem to be changing their minds about this. This obviously distresses the media and Clinton, who continues to parade more women around, which generates no movement, which they must interpret that as meaning they need to find more women to parade around. It must all be very distressing for them.

  7. His support only fell among the weak submissive cucks who look to Romney and Ryan as their avatars.

  8. Anonymous Lurker10/15/16, 12:21 AM

    Seems like this 11th hour attack on Trump is designed to have two possible outcomes. The Dems and the media are hoping that it is the knock-out punch that finally takes down Trump. If that fails, they are hoping for a year or two of endless fodder for controversy that would distract a President Trump from following through on his agenda. So even if it's a desperate gamble, it is pretty much their only play unless they would just give up Romney-style.

  9. "What was clever was how they selectively reported Colin Kaepernick's statement of why he was protesting the national anthem, it wasn't just "oppression" and police violence, he also said Hillary would be in jail if she was anyone else. Of course he also said that Trump is rayciss, but that's beside the point. Now, I think CK is a childish fag, but it's a good case study: they want blaqs to be angry, but not to connect any dots."

    Ever since Ellis Island people's descended on America, things have been getting a more and more left wing slant from Hollywood, the Media, etc. primarily due to the influence of non-founding stock agitators who also have exploited the naivete and good faith among WASPs and Teutons.

    Even in the ostensibly wholesome mid-century, the leeches in do-gooder clothing (among whom Jim Jones of all people resided) willfully distorted the concerns of traditionalists and tried to conceal the communist and anti-American character of left wing agitation. For example, a study of male blue collar Wisconsin voters sympathetic to George Wallace found that they were primarily concerned with neighborhood safety and the well-being of their wives and children. They weren't motivated by malice towards blacks or a penchant for whacko Nazi stuff. But how often were the concerns of lower class whites presented fairly? Jews and Communists were the biggest pushers of civil rights; how often has that been presented in a way that's unflattering (but quite true) to the forces involved? Only a lonely few have bothered to expose this stuff (like Ann Coulter) while mainstream discourse does not permit one to ever acknowledge how toxic hardcore Leftists and Neo-Cons (who are disproportionately Jewish)are to the founding father's conception of America.

    Jared Taylor has a great line about diversity. If it's so great, then why must we be bludgeoned with homilies and platitudes about it's greatness. Truly beneficial things don't need a steady stream of blatant lies to be supported.


You MUST enter a nickname with the "Name/URL" option if you're not signed in. We can't follow who is saying what if everyone is "Anonymous."