Joshe

Elon: I think this is the last election, if Trump doesn't win, this is the last election. Rogan: I think you're right. I think you're right. Rogan is an absolute fucking sellout. I think he and Elon have been colluding this entire time to get Trump elected. It's why Rogan put out a clip a 1-2 years back saying that he thinks Elon is the smartest person alive and he's been slobbing his knob since. Posting things like "The great and powerful Elon Musk. If it weren't for him, we'd be fucked." They've been working on this shit for a while. Rogan intentionally held off on doing the Trump interview just before the election. Rogan has been bought. It'll be interesting to see if this hurts Rogan in the long run.

I'm not super educated on SD but here's a few thoughts: I think I went through stage green on my own without ever joining green communities. I've always had very yellow characteristics but I was very much orange in my teens and 20's and as I developed morally, on my own, outside of any group-think, I started to care for and love life and the world. This is the only way I can make sense of SD, because I was never what looks like green. I never took up stage green ways but I've never been repulsed by them either. I think it has to do with openness. If the nature of a thing is explorative, open, and fundamentally wants peace, those aspects usually override any immaturity they exhibit, although I can't be around them for very long without getting bored. I often get triggered by stupidity but one day I was talking to a happy-go-lucky, cheerful person who was absolutely stupid, and I liked him. I didn't get triggered at all by his stupidity and ignorance because his nature was positive. On the other hand, if an arrogant asshole is being stupid, it triggers me. I just see the greens as immature but their nature usually doesn't bother me. I like the company of hippies but I don't usually care about their ideas.

It is very interesting. It seems there's always another level, so long as the masses can't discern truth from falsehood. To be clear, I'm not saying the reporting is false, I'm just saying it's foolish to call it true just yet, ESPECIALLY since this has already happened once. On top of that, Russia is involved and information warfare is real.

Yeah, if you go do a search, you'll find that, along with several other obscure outlets you've never heard of reporting on it. Now that Google serves AI results at the top of the page, if you type in " Imane Khelif", you'll be flooded with all those obscure outlets saying this is true. This is useful for confirmation bias.

AFAIK, the Russian entity that claimed she's a man had incentive to do so. I'm not saying she is or isn't, I'm just saying the last time something came out about her, it was debunked, so don't be surprised if this one also gets debunked and you once again have to double down into falsehood because you're quick to believe things you want to be true.

The difference is, I don't call my suspicion a fact, thus allowing me to easily update my knowledge when more information comes out. That's the difference. What do you think about North Korea going to Russia and threatening nuclear war 2 days before the election? I suspect this is a conspiracy to help Trump win, because if people are fearful of nuclear war, they might choose a man over a woman. I'm not opposed to conspiracy theories, but when your theories are consistently wrong, it's time to ask why.

@zazen yeah yeah, the Democrats are leftists adhering to a strict philosophical code with unwavering discipline and their goal is to ultimately seize power, control, your money, and limit your ability to express yourself. Ok, ok. Stop fooling yourself. All you can see is strawmen.

The right should wait on credible news sources to report on things if they want to avoid falling for conspiracy after conspiracy, but no, they love the conspiracies more than truth. It seems highly likely this was “leaked” the day before the election to influence people on the trans issue. Now, there’s not enough time for actual news outlets to debunk it, yet again. Only biased fools would be talking as if this is a fact… as well as unbiased people who don’t understand information warfare. Look at how easy it was to make you all think something is true. You did your little search and saw several obscure outlets you’ve nerved heard of before mentioning it and that was all it took to sway you. Putin loves you.

Surely he wouldn't choose the guy who spews hate, attacks, and lies every time his mouth opens. Buy hey, you can't tell them nothin'. All the intricate, far-fetched, wishful, fantastical, and deeply fallacious justifications I've learnt about over the past few days have been eye-opening. I think I mostly figured out the phenomenon of intelligent people voting for Trump. There's something in them that likes Trump but they can't admit it for obvious reasons, even to themselves. So, they have to find a sneaky way to justify their Trump support. I've seen this occur in real time with people I know over the years, where it eventually comes out that they just like him. (This probably doesn't apply to all of them) Notice how they can only admit he's 25-50% as bad as he actually is. This is key to their self-deception. If they admitted the full 100%, their reasons for supporting him would be overtly untenable and it'd be obvious they're fools, which they can't allow. (This applies to all of them) Essentially, they've thoroughly deceived themselves to serve an unconscious bias. It's self-deception at it's finest. I used to think it was that they just really hate the left, the woke, the establishment, etc., but now I believe their stubborn refusal to see what is true is a defense mechanism designed to protect their secret, which is, they like Trump. There's no reaching them. It's clear to me now that intelligent people who support him don't have sufficient enough awareness. They're too smart to simply reason their way over to Trump. They wind up there by lacking the awareness to know they're bullshitting themselves. This is the only answer that makes sense.

Haha. Touché! The plot twist is you experiencing a synchronicity at the voting booth, which triggers visions of hell on earth right as you’re about to mark Trump, then you mark Kamala. Gotcha!

Thanks for sharing. It's an interesting perspective and worthy of consideration. I don't think it's odd. This is, after all, a spiritual existence. You and I share a common desire for the masses to wake up and evolve but we differ in what we consider potential catalysts for that to happen. I see Trump as a devolving mechanism. There is a case to be made that more people will start to take reality much more seriously by him being at the helm, but as far as him, his team, and his movement ushering in anything that will contribute to the masses awakening to spirituality and realizing our full potential, I just cannot see any logic for that. The master of lies will not usher in a world of truth. It's just absurd as far as I can tell. Care to elaborate? It seems like you want it so bad that you’re willing to take anything different, even if that thing is the antithesis of what you want. It seems like a gamble of very low odds and very high risk. I think I get the idea, but the gamble has just as much, if not more potential to ruin all chances for what you want, does it not?

Haha, is that what people are telling themselves now? He left out the potential scenario where Trump throws Elon under the bus, seizes all his assets, and has him jailed for life when he doesn't bend the knee and kiss the ring just right.

Thanks! Lastly, consider this: Imagine if we're right about Trump and you vote for him. How much would it bother you if we turned out to be right and he actually does the damage some people are worried about? At least try to steelman the position so you don't potentially find yourself in that situation. IDK the best documentary or anything but it's all out there, from the horse's mouth. This one is on Prime but not sure how good it is. Do the right thing. Vote against hate.

Yeah, see, if you think Trump is a typical human who makes mistakes just like anyone else, I can understand why you'd consider him a viable candidate. Thing is, if he was a typical human, we wouldn't be having this conversation right now. Wise people wouldn't be screaming from the rooftops about him. Dude, Trump literally operates 24/7 on con artistry, lies, and cheating. It's who he is. That's the truth and it's odd how anyone could miss it. Question: Do you believe that everyone who claims what I'm claiming here has arrived at their judgement based on faulty or biased reasoning? Have you figured out what we're saying and concluded it's inaccurate?

Ok, so, he either is or isn't. One of us is dead wrong. I know who and what he is, and it's not out of bias. It's simply reading reality for what it is. It doesn't take a genius to see it either. But again, I ask you, if the devil came up from hell and had good policy proposals and was running against Kamala, would you dismiss them outright and not consider them? Of course you would because you know the Devil's character. Now, it's easily verifiable fact that Trump is a lying, cheating, snake oil con artist. And you're considering his policies. I want to know why. You must not be able to discern the truth of what he is, or either you're operating on bias or just don't care or have fallen victim to propaganda, or a mixture of all these.

If the devil came up from hell and promised you all the things Trump was, would you consider his policies or would you instinctively know that it would be absurd to consider his policies? Also, I don't take my marching orders from Leo. lol. I just happen to agree with him here. Leo is wise. If he couldn't see the truth of Trump, he wouldn't be.

@What Am I I'm curious. You being someone who values peace and harmony, what do you make of Trump's character and someone like him being in position of the presidency? I suspect you're reasoning is it's worth the gamble that our institutions are strong enough to withstand him for another term, and since you have that to lean on, you think it's worth the risk to buck the establishment. Is that pretty much your thinking? Because if peace and harmony are some of your top values, you'd find yourself in deep shit trying to convince yourself or anyone else that your Trump vote is a vote for unity, peace, harmony, etc. Can someone please just lay out the logic. Anti-establishment is not enough. You have to demonstrate how you deal with the toxic wrecking ball that is Trump. Do you think he's just not that toxic? I remember when he first got in in 2016. It was clear to me that if you have someone like that at the head of the nation, they can do irreparable damage to the country. I imagined children at home watching him demonstrate hate, spite, selfishness, vindictiveness, attacking people and calling them names, and just the impact of that alone should be enough to let you know something isn't right. I knew that it was a huge mistake to have that in the highest office in the land and that it could produce dire, unforeseeable consequences. The risk is too great. How do you, a spiritual person, justify a vote for someone who embodies all values COMPLETELY antithetical to your stated values? He is full of hate, and you think it's a good idea to vote for him. I won't try to convince you of anything, I'd just like to understand.

Damn guys. This is just sad. In one of Leo's videos, he told you you're a fool if you try to evaluate Trump on policy... and I concur. It's the most absurd shit. The only reason you need to vote Kamala is to vote against Trump. That's it. No policy assessments needed. You simply look at reality and what has unfolded and continues to unfold, and you should instinctually know what to do. The fact that this instinct doesn't kick in for you says something... but I haven't quite figured it all out yet. It's either you can't read reality accurately, you're propagandized on some anti-establishment anti-woke bullshit, or you're just really a conservative, NONE of which, even if given their due legitimacy, would come close to tipping the scale towards Trump. But you know what my #1 theory is? It's that you have near zero ability to game out the implications of a variable. If x gets put into the highest office on the planet and if x has these attributes and this history, what scenarios are likely to play out. If you could read reality accurately, this whole assessment would answer you the question of who to fucking vote for. If you sweep under the rug all that is Trump and start talking about things he can do for you, you've LOST THE GODDAMN PLOT!

I know next to nothing about economics but I don't think Kamala has a lever she can pull to change the price of eggs and gas. Did you hear that the oil companies are raking in record-breaking profits? They are charging consumers more and they are making more profit than ever before. Why do you blame politicians for that and not the oil companies? Also, from what they say, inflation is global phenomenon and they say the US is faring far better than most other countries. Again, IDK shit about this stuff... it just seems like Fox News propaganda. Prices change over time. It's not absurd that a loaf of bread would increase by a dollar over 4 years IMO. It's been happening my entire life. Why is a large #1 at McDonald's $14 bucks when it used to be $6? Must be the Dems!

Probably not, but hopefully we'll get to find out for sure. Put yourself in the shoes of the first woman president of the US. Even if you were status-quo corrupt before, there's a chance you might care more about your legacy as the first woman president so much that you actually turn over a new leaf and transcend status-quo corruption. You get to be the first woman president, don't fuck it up. I think this is a possibility, but I guess we'll see.

Yes, but you can be wise enough to avoid those traps. You could even set up an entire team specifically to audit every decision to check against such things.

Hmm, I haven't paid much attention to her but from what I've seen, her personality seems pretty damn assertive. I get the sense that she'll do what she wants to do. She strikes me as that type of woman. You can see it in her mannerisms and her restraint. I can anyway. I get the sense that you don't actually care about this though. Why does it matter who arrives at the best decision so long as they go with it. If I were president, the vast majority of my decisions would be made from those wiser than me on the particular topic. In fact, the best president would probably be the one who stayed the most out of the way of the experts.

Funny, that's exactly what I want. I want someone intelligent enough to know they are not an expert on all subject matter and to then seek the council of those who are. Some consider that a sign of intelligence and humility, aka, maturity.

Her not going on Rogan doesn't even hint towards that, much less prove it. You could speculate that's the reason, but there are dozens of other potential reasons we could also speculate, and you can't say which reason is correct without more information. Making that big of a leap here is indicative that you're likely making similar leaps all over the place. This type of thinking is a surefire way to arrive at falsehood. Also, because a con artist can sit down and behave well enough and go off the cuff for 3 hours should not be used as a measurement of his character. Con artists know how to appear normal, ya know?