2020 Election Disputes
The 2020 Presidential Election was undecided after November 3rd election day due to mail in ballots. Many disputes have arisen about timing, legality, & fraud during the counting of these ballots post-election day. Political & legal maneuvering will continue until these disputes are cleared up or the Supreme Court decides on them. Only then will a new President be declared from the 2020 Election. It has been known since the election process was expanded to include massive mail-in ballots due to COVID, that whichever side loses will consider the election fraudulent and stolen by the other side.

Political Narratives & the 2020 Election

from The Gray Area:
The legitimacy of the 2020 Presidential Election is one of the biggest issues of 2021 and will continue to be throughout history, no matter whether the final determination is as currently written, or if other facts come to light. The media & politician spinning of this issue clearly places Americans on one side or the other. Such division is not accidental, but part of a decades old strategy. Dividing America against itself is the only chance for her enemies to defeat her. Thus every chance to create division is sought out and implemented, no matter how big or how small the issue might be. In this case, the issue is a obviously a very big one. Depending on which political side you reside, you now subscribe to one of the political narratives surrounding the 2020 Election issue:
  • the big lie, the election has been certified, the courts have not stepped in to change it, even Trump's AG bill Barr said it was all BS, and lets not forget the Capitol riot (or insurrection, depending on you political side.
  • stop the steal, the 2020 election appears to defy common sense, their is ample evidence to support this concern, and frustration abounds because the courts would not take this evidence into consideration.
Every bit of news on the issue of the 2020 election legitimacy is placed within one or the other of these political narratives. These narratives, however, are not the issues, these are the political narratives surrounding the issue. As a result, we debate publicly only the political narratives, not the political issue. If we debated the issue, we would want to look at all the facts and openly discuss their importance or impact. But, we don't. We discuss the political narratives and describe the people who support each. Those people on each side are given to name calling of each other and not to substantive debate the result of which would improve the country.

For example, the discussion of Mark Zuckerberg's nearly half a billion dollars used to affect the 2020 election in very specific and questionable ways is ignored by the mainstream media. The media is a believer in and controller of 'the big lie' political narrative. Giving airtime to the opposite narrative is of no use to the media and its supporters of that narrative. They cast off such news as categorically false or irrelevant because of their narrative, that it is a 'big lie'. We expect more from our media, but don't get it. They instead prefer to focus on another conspiracy, the National Commission on the Jan 6th Capitol Riots, to take airtime away from the other side's political narrative of the 'big steal'. Confused yet? That's the idea. Give air to one narrative and take air away from the other, and your narrative wins. As a result, any poll will tell you the media political narrative of 'the big lie' is winning. Similarly, a poll in 2017 would tell you the Russia Collusion narrative as regards the 2016 election was winning, yet it was void of any facts and has since been proven false. It was and is just a political narrative, given air by the media, about the 2016 election the Democrats lost. Still undetermined, is just how deep that conspiracy went at the time. And, still allowed airtime by the media and Democrat politicians. But, the Zuckerberg money and how it was used is a very important piece of news. Some people saw this at the time his donations were announced, and how much money he, and Michael Bloomberg, were spending on this election. How was this money to be used? In conjunction with mail in ballots and ballot harvesting efforts legalized in many swing states, this looked to be very suspicious. And, it remains so, with only media rejection. Media control of one narrative means presenting opposing evidence to the public is hard to impossible. The mainstream media even malign alternative media who try to get this information out. Social media even censors and bans it. The same social media did not censor Russia collusion narrative or ban discussion in 2016-17, and neither do they censor or ban such conversation now. See a potential conspiracy yet? Remember, you are dealing with competing political narratives here, not facts and reality. All that is important is the information I can use to support my political narrative. It is designed to confuse and leave each of us to throw up our hands, forced to blindly believe the media portrayal of one side or the other. The way out of this is to vary your news sources. One from column a and one from column b. That way you at least have both sides. Filter out the narratives and personal accusations of racist or communist, and make up your own mind as to which position on the issue makes sense to you. More From ________:


365 Days Page
Comment ( 0 )