How Elon Musk Helped Steal The 2024 Election

[Essence Lumin]

Frankly, there's a lot of "quit" on the D side.

D's: "I heard Candidate X said a thing about a thing in 1982 -- I'm gonna have to sit this one out."

R's: "I'm voting for Used Condom-R, because R! 'murica!!"

Good lord, there are still D's bitching about Bernie Sanders.

Yeah, with some notable exceptions they seem to be watching the country burn along with the rest of us.

 

[Noodles]

Frankly, there's a lot of "quit" on the D side.

D's: "I heard Candidate X said a thing about a thing in 1982 -- I'm gonna have to sit this one out."

R's: "I'm voting for Used Condom-R, because R! 'murica!!"

Good lord, there are still D's bitching about Bernie Sanders.

The problem is, as Beebo said, the Rs are "playing the long game."

But the Rs have been making progress in their goals.

Progressives have been playing the long game too, because there isn't a real choice. But there isn't any progress. The Ds, which are just "the least Conservative of our two parties." Are not really DOING anything. Its just a waiting game of "Maybe this time we will get actual meaningful policy movement.... Oh... No... Nevermind... Maybe next decade...

And at this point, I think a lot of people are just... Done.

We had Trump, there was hope that people realized how much of a bunch of crops the GOP are, then the mass population just went, running back.

Despite everything, the country went running back tomits abuser. With more energy than the first time, with more energy than when it left in 2020.

At some point you just have to throw your hands up and say fuck it and watch the world burn.

 

[Jopsy Pendragon]

The Ds, which are just "the least Conservative of our two parties." Are not really DOING anything.

The fundamental problem with our current two party system is that DEI is difficult. Dems -are- diverse and inclusive. Which means a lot of competing special interests and priorities, many of which require compromise to advance. And nobody wants to give up their progress in order for someone else to get some.

The other party isn't trying to please multiple groups of people... it's trying to please one person. And the more stupid, inconsistent/capricious, demanding that person is, the more they struggle to give him the loyalty and power to get what he demands, because he doesn't care about the issues, he cares about the power. He tells them what he wants, and because it's him, they're immediately on board with it, even if tomorrow it's a complete 180, again.

This radical anti-DEI push is strategic. By alienating anyone who might have a different set of ideals, different background, special consideration, a systematic history of being treated unfairly due to immutable characteristics, etc... that's all too much focus on the cogs, and it distracts from the solidarity of pleasing the 'Great Leader'. So they're driving them across the aisle, knowing that more diversity will just make the democratic platform even more diverse / decentralized and ineffective.

The authoritarian/hierarchy party will continue to shed outliers. It's a self-policing motivational tool. Knowing that at any point they may be the next 'diversity' to be cast out, they work harder to earn their place and constantly keep an eye out for someone else they can throw under the bus in their place. (not rich enough, not connected enough, not attractive enough or not under the protection of someone high enough). They're too busy trying to hang onto their place in the hierarchy to worry about the ethics/morality/wisdom of the things they're being told to believe/pursue for the leadership.

At some point they'll shed too many people, who will be bitter and vengeful for being cast out... some will never switch parties, others will recognize that maybe they'd be better off in political ideology that's fundamentally built upon DEI in the first place. Either way, votes will shift.

The horrific question that remains is whether or not anyone will bother actually counting the votes when it happens.

 

[Noodles]

I had very high hopes last elections that the Democrats, fed up with the clear scam that is the GOP would sweep.

Like, super majority sweep, effectively ending the GOP, allowing the Democrats to split into a proper Conservative and Progressive party, even if it took a few years of Democrat Majority rule.

At this point, I have little doubt that we will never ever annunrigged Russia style election again, and I doubt the Democrats can scoop up enough undecided non voters to make up for people defecting to the GOP like you described, much less defeat the massive amount of gerrymandering and "no more mail in votes" and blah blah blah that is going to be going on by Midterms.

 

[Jopsy Pendragon]

Another one?

A strikingly apt metaphor for The U.S. under Musk's management:

Several people in the Bahamas witnessed debris from a SpaceX rocket flying overhead

Several people in the Bahamas witnessed the explosive wreckage of the failed Starship rocket as it flew across the sky.

apnews.com

 

[Beebo Brink]

Progressives have been playing the long game too, because there isn't a real choice. But there isn't any progress.

Except that's simply not true. Dems are notorious for voting in presidential elections but not being engaged enough to vote in primaries and off-year elections. Whereas Republican vote every single one time.

Dems haven't focused on local elections -- school board, city council, mayor -- with the same dedication that Republicans have.

Long game means participating in all the boring, tedious practical details of running government from the grass-roots up, not just showing up at the voting booth every four years. It means accepting less than you wanted this time around, and trying for more the next time around, not just flouncing off because you didn't get what you wanted this time around.

 

[GoblinCampFollower]

Except that's simply not true. Dems are notorious for voting in presidential elections but not being engaged enough to vote in primaries and off-year elections. Whereas Republican vote every single one time.

Dems haven't focused on local elections -- school board, city council, mayor -- with the same dedication that Republicans have.

Long game means participating in all the boring, tedious practical details of running government from the grass-roots up, not just showing up at the voting booth every four years. It means accepting less than you wanted this time around, and trying for more the next time around, not just flouncing off because you didn't get what you wanted this time around.

All of this, and also things like school boards and any other way to reach out to young people. Many on the far left seem to think any kind of "recruitment" is pointless. If you're not already left, you're scum. The far right is actually very eager to reach out to young people.

 

[Jopsy Pendragon]

All of this, and also things like school boards and any other way to reach out to young people. Many on the far left seem to think any kind of "recruitment" is pointless. If you're not already left, you're scum. The far right is actually very eager to reach out to young people.

I don't have kids and never intend to. However making sure the fucking (un)Intelligent Design zealots stay off the local school boards is probably the main reason I never skip any elections. And the bastards can be really stealthy sometimes because they know they're not wanted.

 

[Free]

The French have decided they have a case against Musk for election interference.

France turned its probe of Elon Musk and X into a criminal investigation

A probe targeting Elon Musk and his social network X $TWTR 0.00% has been upgraded to a criminal investigation by French cybercrime authorities, the Paris prosecutor's office announced Thursday.

Neither Musk nor former X CEO Linda Yaccarino complied with summons requiring them to appear before French authorities on April 20, the Paris prosecutor's office said.

At the heart of the case, which traces back to a request by French Member of Parliament Éric Bothorel in early 2025, are complaints that X deployed algorithmic tools to meddle in French politics, alongside allegations that Musk and X were aware that the AI chatbot Grok was being used on the platform to produce and circulate Holocaust denials and sexually explicit deepfake imagery created without subjects' consent.

 

[Cristiano]

 

[Soen Eber]

I found a channel that's pretty informative, which ties things together about (mostly) Europe. There's a moderate amount of deep diving here, enough to show the research, but with a short run time he prioritizes creating an understandable narrative. I've viewed several episodes and have been impressed each time, letting me understand complex issues in a short time.

 

[Cristiano]

This video features Kyle Kulinski of Secular Talk discussing explosive new claims from Ashley St. Clair regarding Elon Musk's potential involvement in influencing the 2024 U.S. presidential election.


Key takeaways from the video include:

• Allegations of Interference: Ashley St. Clair, a former MAGA insider, claims Elon Musk shared details with her about utilizing his satellite technology and advanced data metrics to sway the election outcome (0:55 - 2:54).
• "The Secret" and Real-Time Data: Kulinski highlights several instances where Donald Trump and Elon Musk alluded to a "secret" or technological advantage leading up to election day, including claims that Musk had access to real-time voting data (6:47 - 8:20, 9:35 - 10:10).
• Incentive for Trump to Win: The video points to a clip of Musk appearing to suggest he would face prison if Trump lost, creating a personal incentive for the outcome (8:24 - 9:32).
• Contextual Skepticism: Kulinski balances these claims by mentioning reporter Greg Palast, who previously argued that while systemic voter suppression and "Jim Crow" tactics exist, he remains skeptical of theories that Musk hacked the election via satellite technology (4:59 - 6:25).
• Trump's Future Rhetoric: The episode concludes by analyzing Trump’s repeated comments about "fixing" the system so voters won't have to vote again and his suggestions regarding a potential third term, which Kulinski frames as a pattern of projecting his own anti-democratic ambitions onto opponents (11:06 - 13:00).