by how people think. How I can look at the same thing they look at and come to a different conclusion. For example, I watch a TV program where the detective says “I don’t believe in coincidences.” At that point he enters into the domain of philosophy and statistics.
Some detectives say “I don’t believe in coincidence.” Making it singular.
Before I give my impression, I must confess, I don’t think your vote counts. In the State of Florida two counties had voting irregularities in the last presidential election. One county had 147% turn out and another had a 100% vote for one candidate. Shortly afterwards one of the independent news agencies reported a time delay as the votes collected from an ancillary vote collecting computer made its vote count to a national tabulation.
Too many coincidences. The election is rigged. Make no mistake.
UNLESS, you can make the population so dumb they will vote for the candidate that is chosen by the people in control.
I don’t know any of the candidates. Unfortunately, I only read what the media reports. The Huffington Post actually stated they were against a candidate and would do what they believed appropriate to prevent his furtherance. Following the scare headlines and the overt misinterpretation has been a study in poor writing skills (at least the New Yorker misinterprets with good writing)
I found something better than the news. I truly dislike having to read between articles of how the Kardashians and Jenners think. Who reads that tripe? Apparently they won’t need to have a voter scam this cycle.
Oh yeah, What is better than the news is, wait for it, I said wait — COINCIDENCES.
I read a piece showing all the suicides and premature accidental deaths surrounding the Clintons. Working for them is like an episode of HOUSE OF CARDS.
But here is my fascination. How can one not only defend but support all these coincidences?