Okay, it all makes sense now!

I know how some of us always talk about FOX news being a wolf in sheep's clothing, about how they're really nothing more than shills for the left, I know I do. Now, maybe I'm dense, but for the longest time I couldn't figure out why FOX would go so far out on a limb and call the election as early as they did. Pretty much universally FOX was calling states ahead of every other MSM network, even CNN. So you might be asking yourself...okay, then why would that ever be puzzling? Well, because if you're going to be a good wolf in sheep's clothing you wouldn't go running out in the pasture alone with a flag that says..."I'm really a wolf!"...now would you? No, you'd lay back and wait for the other wolves to run out in the pasture too. Hence my lack of understanding.

But this morning the lightbulb switched on. The answer is even more sinister than my tinfoil hat permitted at first. FOX knew the outcome. FOX knew the outcome, and they were just lubing up all the conservatives for what would follow on all the rest of the MSM networks. I mean, if FOX said it first then it would be much more believable when CNN, MSNBC (et. al) all started waving the Biden banner too, right? Soften up the enemy, demoralize them. Psyop anyone?

FOX would lead the initial charge, and by doing so they would cause all but the most hardened conspiracy mongers to throw up their hands, cut and run.

What FOX didn't know though (at the time) was, they didn't realize how blatantly obvious the corrupted process would be. Then they were in a bind. They had been exposed as the shills they are, the 'wolves' they are. They didn't realize none of the other wolves would run out in the pasture too until a long time afterwards, and they would be left alone. But now their reputation was on the line, so they couldn't back down. So they doubled down instead.

If by some stroke of luck the communist global elitist led democrats and their puppet candidate were ultimately to be defeated...it's beginning to look more and more like this may have been of the biggest political conspiracies in history!

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
... Psyop anyone? ...

I have been shouting this word for days now. PSYOP

This is exactly what we are in the midst of. I even penned a post about it here. Yes, it is a PSYOP.

The end game actually has nothing to do with who is finally declared the winner of the race. It's all a psychological game.

Merriam-Webster defines a psyop as "military operations usually aimed at influencing the enemy's state f mind through noncombative means (such as distribution of leaflets)."

Dictionary.com says, "the use of propaganda, threats, and other psychological techniques to mislead, intimidate, demoralize, or otherwise influence the thinking or behavior of an opponent."

Wikipedia has a more replete definition: "Psychological operations (PSYOP) are operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals."

The endgame here is to manipulate people into a state of frenzy on both sides. And it's working. That (what Faux News did) was the first step. You introduce confusion, uncertainty, contradictory information and you get people into a confused and highly manipulative state. It's what they've been doing all along by constantly changing positions and doling out contradictory information about the Chinese virus. Now they are doing it a with election information.

We. Are. Being. Played. People. And most are falling for it. It's quite sad to see so clearly that most humans are, on an intellectual and emotional level, nothing more than dumb sheep.
:

Fox is MSM and MSM/MSSN* has an unified agenda now.

*MSSN: "Mainstream social networking."

originally posted by: Never Despise
Fox is MSM and MSM/MSSN* has an unified agenda now.

*MSSN: "Mainstream social networking."

What do you mean by "now?"

Fox News and the MSM have always had a unified agenda. Are you familiar with the term controlled opposition?

Fox News was paid for by left-leaning media interests. It has provided an controlled outlet for the opposition view and has served to keep the us/them dichotomy alive and functioning to the benefit of the major players. They need the extremes to be alive and well in order to have a reason to exercise control and continue with their propaganda. I've said ths many times, but most people couldn't handle the truth and preferred to ignore it.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Hey, g'morn as usual. I think since I was 1967 hippie...we were trying to tell you all that.

It's ALL pysops. Otherwise known as TPTB.

Their world, not ours. Sadly...agenda, agendas, agendas...and not for now...but long-term ideals/goals.

PSYOPS and controlled opposition are realities, but in the old days FOX could disagree more openly with the other networks, and independent media wasn't being banned from Twitter or YouTube willy-nilly to the extent they are now.

Something has changed. The noose has tightened.

All MSM asctually has a definite right wing agenda cloaked in a false left/right paradigm. They are all corporatists bent on keeping the status quo. The progressive wing of the democrat party are the only ones standing up for our rights and they are very underrepresented in all msm.

a reply to: ras321

The progressive wing spent all summer smashing windows of small businesses and lecturing half the country on how the are "inherently racist." They need to cool it because this kind of thing isn't impressing anyone outside a very small circle.

The idea that that the mainline parties are both largely corrupt corporatist tools and megacorp lackeys I can agree with.

a reply to: mysterioustranger

Good morning to you as well!

In general I agree. Though I think the agenda and the balance of power associated with that agenda has changed pretty dramatically since then. At the end of the day though, the end-game (money and power) does not appear to have changed much, just the mechanisms to get there.

originally posted by: ras321
All MSM asctually has a definite right wing agenda cloaked in a false left/right paradigm. They are all corporatists bent on keeping the status quo. The progressive wing of the democrat party are the only ones standing up for our rights and they are very underrepresented in all msm.

Hmmmm, I'm not sure I can go that far. I see the progressives / liberals trying to extinguish rights, not standing up for them. They might be standing up for someone's rights, but they're not American's rights, and the media is right behind them cheering this behavior on!

If you are suggesting the progressives believe in American's rights, then I strongly suggest they find a different face and a different mouthpiece for saying this because that message is definitely NOT coming through! In fact, just the opposite is being shouted from every rooftop.

Then again, if you got rid of all those pesky conservatives once and for all, then everything would be all hunky dory, right?
Remember, it's the conservatives who are the ones standing up for things like freedom of speech, something progressives seemingly abhor unless it's "their" speech. Everyone else must be silenced.

And to the point of the OP, this is the niche that FOX was positioned to 'seemingly' fill, though it was an illusion. So if one were to go with your theory you'd have to agree all of the MSM are double agents, and FOX is therefore a "triple agent"!

Messaging is an issue. Nevertheless, the actual progressive agenda is about helping everyone out. Pretty basic stuff. Shifting wealth back from the elites and into the hands of those it was stolen from. Quality medical care for everyone. Elimination of poverty. The rights I speak of are to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. As for freedom of speech, it is a right as is it the right to shame those who use hate speech. .a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

then Trump election was fake as well and he was Never legal president .
They the news (( ???? )) only let hi win because they hated Hillary .

the news controls the world ??? ok well you heard it here must be true

a reply to: ras321

Messaging is an issue.

Well that sure is an understatement right there.

Nevertheless, the actual progressive agenda is about helping everyone out. Pretty basic stuff. Shifting wealth back from the elites and into the hands of those it was stolen from.

That'd be great all, it's just too bad it's tied into a bunch of identity politics that are incompatible with that.

The messaging from progressives has been loud and clear for a while now

time.com...

amp.theguardian.com...

www.milwaukeeindependent.com...

medium.com...@stephenablack/hey-straight-white-men-were-the-worst-514424b2d57

www.theprogress.com...

How can you sit and write that bull# progressive agenda with a straight face. It's not about equality for everybody. Progressives have been screaming for years about a specific group of people being the cause of all the problems in the world.

And you're going to sit here and tell me...no actually, none of that was happening, we totally meant equality for everybody.

This is why progressives piss me off to no end. The amount of utter hypocrisy and just I dunno retardation in so much of the things they say is just astounding.

They have the #ing memory of a goldfish. Can't remember things that happened a few months ago let alone a few years.

Take your, equality, your identity bull#, and # right off with your progressive nonsense.

originally posted by: ras321
Messaging is an issue. Nevertheless, the actual progressive agenda is about helping everyone out. Pretty basic stuff. Shifting wealth back from the elites and into the hands of those it was stolen from.

Ummm, I'm not gonna' go there (conversation for a thread in itself). Both agree and disagree, and it's shades of grey.

Quality medical care for everyone.

No argument here.

Elimination of poverty.

This is one of the great failings of the left, the notion this is even possible, and instilling it as part of their platform. You can never completely "eliminate" poverty! It exists in every single country around the globe. To suggest such a thing is even remotely possible is just foolish, and one of the things which screams "wealth redistribution" the loudest! I categorically disagree.

The rights I speak of are to life,

Okay, well, I won't bring up abortion if you don't. Personally, it's not a huge deal breaker for me one way or the other, but to some it sure is.

...liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Again, in agreement.

As for freedom of speech, it is a right as is it the right to shame those who use hate speech.

.a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Overt censorship is light years different than shaming!! I have no issue with shaming, but that knife cuts both ways!! The dems seem to keep forgetting this!

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Correct again. I do as well think there is no "balance" in power. It's entire premise is "I/me/we/they/us/them" are powerful. We control.

Progressives are a cancer and need to be irradiated/eradicated. reply to: ras321

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

That's because your narrative is controlled.

Real liberals demand equal rights for all. Your constitution isn't perfect and that's why interpretations can be flawed. 2nd rate citizens come to mind. Actual equal rights and even representation will always have to be fought for. That fight certainly isn't exclusive to the US either. We fly the same colours.

But we do live in a world full of propaganda yet it's easy to cut through the bs. Equality is a state of mind and it isn't too hard to find out where another's head is at. I guess what I'm saying is build your own bridges with others and don't pay the toll.

We all want the same things. God or country doesn't afford us our rights. We do. That's the main reason the downtrodden often rise up and cause mayhem.

Btw what in your mind is the definition of American rights?

Not a fan of identity politics. The problem is the republicans are so narrow in their scope that the left is stuck with everyone else. Therefore they end up representing literally everyone who is not in favor of billionaires screwing us over. I agree that a lot of the problems have been cause by that certain group is to help those less fortunate with no need to use identity as a solution. a reply to: dug88

a reply to: 20Eyes1974

Wow! A little harsh there, don't you think?

Assuming this wasn't sarcasm, my response would be...No, there is a need for opposing ideas and viewpoints. When one side or the other is openly oppressed you just have an iron fisted dictatorship.

Oh, and be careful, else you might find yourself sounding like some of the liberals who say the exact same thing about the right...that extermination is the only way. What freedom is there in that?

Man, I'd devote some time to writing a book or something. You're certainly creative and it appears you've got some free time to think this stuff up.