The 2017 French Presidential Election – another fraud in the making? probably

21 Apr

2017 April 21st

Submitted as a comment at to the article “Champs-Elysees attack: Perfect timing, for some” at 15h50 (UTC-05:00) 2017 04 21

UPDATE: 20170425 17h10 (UTC-05:00) from:

“This petition has been created:

I’ve noticed several trends in the past 72 months (or so) of elections processes in G7 (plus ANZAC) nations.
1. Environmental factors, of course, as they are reported in the mainstream media, [apparently] result in candidates/parties/referendum polling outcomes to converge prior to the election timing.
2. Strange things happen during the actual voting process itself.
3. a candidate/party/referendum result is not as was (supposedly) expected by the experts, prior to voting

Now, in your article, the underlying direction is that these pre-election events have been manipulated to disfavour the ‘radical’ pro-more-equitable-living-standard candidate (for lack of a better word, this is the primary direction of the candidate, and a profession for common sense over traditional international affairs, where traditional international affairs is … a complete scam, like the EU and NATO direction towards a third world war!)

But the embedded assumption of a robust, rig-proof electoral process is in question, in my mind.

I feel like if they get it close enough, i.e. from a electorate perception management perspective, the highly-suspect polling process/reporting across this ‘western’ national subset, there are electoral process suasion mechanisms, getting better and better each running, to manipulate the electoral process to what ever the favoured candidate/party/referendum may be at the point in time.

I think we can assume that the ‘establishment’ (who/what ever they are), would prevent the pro-more-equitable-living-standard candidate from attaining power, as per your article.
I don’t think Fillon could win by fair electoral process, but he is at least in the top two preferred candidates for the ‘establishment’.
Assuming that they also consider Le Pen to be too ‘unpredictable’ to attain.

The best place to ‘get rid of’ Melenchon is in the first round, when there will be less clarity on the actual process, due to the larger number of variables and moving parts.

They (whomever they might be), would want it clear in the run-off; so, assuming (likely correctly) that Le Pen cannot win a run-off, except conceivably against Fillon, they might want her in the run-off, against Macron, the recent super-friend of the faltering middle-class republicans, so as to ‘fix-without-touching’ the run-off round.

Remember, these past contests have been more about keeping the candidate/party/referendum policy they don’t want out, more than putting in a particular candidate/party, as was the case in the US election, which was ultimately about keeping Bernie out, and had little ultimately to do with the choice between Trump and Clinton, for as hindsight is now showing us, mostly only branding differentiation, as opposed to actual policy differentiation.

1. expect a torrent of anti-Russian false-flag stories, like… supporting a border client regime in anti-LGBTQ… activities, and then link it back to Melenchon. There is probably one more they’ll let out of the bag before the election; since it is 15h00 (at UTC-05:00), it’ll have to happen pretty soon; Melenchon and Fillon to go in the first round.
2. with second round candidates Le Pen and Macron confirmed, we’d expect a switch in the mainstream media to anti-anti-immigrant material, i.e. [wordlessly assumed) Le Pen supporters bashing 30 year+ Arab immigrant women, who will have elaborate back-story development about how ‘françaises’ they were, and the wonderful things they’ve contributed to French society
3. but a good ‘terror’ incident never hurts an establishment candidate, for there is comfort in the known, and at a sub-conscious level, this may trump a longer-term visceral (potentially yet sub-conscious) yearning for change from the establishment; Macron may have differentiated himself enough (no doubt using the latest BI large data crunching statistical techniques)
4. Prediction: Macron in the run-off with a healthy margin over Le Pen, with the ongoing outrage over the gathering evidence supporting electoral fraud, in the primary, disfavoring Melenchon stiffled in the media, using the [likely unworded] ‘conspiracy theory’ dismissal technique
5. business as usual with NATO marching to war with Russia, with Macron’s reluctant admissions of ‘word order’ realities, forcing his hand….

I’m convinced there are clear trends in manipulating ‘democratic’ electoral processes, which are observable, but I’m still working on formalizing the emerging electoral process manipulation trends, at least for the prime techniques observable.
I might rant it out, incidentally, by blog at:

1. very, very robust, disciplined election scrutineering and reporting processes and execution; it will be tricky getting any meaningful information through the mainstream, so
2. ready alternative information distribution channels, and as close to instantaneous reporting by them
ultimately, however, lawyers will have to be involved, and immediately, to take actions to challenge the first round results
(as I write this analysis, having thought it through as I wrote, I am becoming more and more convinced of the prediction, but… it may be beatable! remember, this is France, and they can really get stuff stuck in their craugh, when they want to; I hope they’re still like that).
Due to the decrepit state of the judicial systems in the ‘first-world’ ‘western’ ‘democracies’, they move ridiculously slowly (the lawyer busy themselves with preparing large bills); so,
3. a ‘hurry-up’ legal election results disputation process needs to be prepared, and just the details finalized to launch, at multiple fronts and levels of government, as is viable under French election law.

I’m convinced the fix is in, but strangely optimistic that it could be beaten.

If you are in France, and want to take the battle to the offensive (there’s no other defense like it) ready:
1. disciplined process-driven scrutineering
2. non-traditional communications channels to broad electoral bases
3. ‘hurry-up’ legal election dispute processes, across multiple fronts and all available legal levels of challenge

4. watch and collect the data/evidence
5. communicate via established channels
6. cross the ‘t’s and dot the ‘i’s and launch legal challenges

Good luck.

France has lead the way before, (possibly due to an entrenched cultural obstinacy), it would be good to have a strike back now.

Showing it that it could be done might possibly co-ordinate the many submarines, stealthily lying in wait, across the deserts of the world.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: