Who is the candidate who will win?

For a very long time, the answer to this question has been debated on television debate programs. 

The candidate who will win! Who is the candidate of the opposition that will win? It is never finalized who will win. It cannot be decided for some reason. Everyone is curious, especially the government. Who, who, who, who is this candidate? And one of the conditions is that he/she WILL WIN!

Actually, I think this is a paradoxical situation. In a sense, you have to look into the future to know who will win. After all, if you say he will win, it means that the event will take place in the future!

As you know, time is an interesting concept. It flows, we can't stop it, it's not under our control.

I recently wrote an article on time, those who are curious can take a look from the link below.

https://strasam.org/ekonomi/mikroekonomi-ve-makroekonomi/bazi-seyler-zaman-ister-1268

According to Einstein, time can actually slow down, maybe even stop. But according to the formulas, you have to be light to see it stop. Now it seems that no one wants to know what it feels like, lest we become light for no reason. Some say being a light, may he rest in light. I say it sometimes too, though. That's what I mean when I say being light for no reason.

Einstein's theory has been proven by experiments, yes, even if it is at the level of micro-micro-seconds for now, it has been observed that time changes according to our speed.  

However, it is absolutely not possible to rewind time, scientists have not yet been able to find a formula for rewinding time, let alone a method to do so, nor have they been able to produce a conceptual theory. 

But there is a paradox, the grandfather paradox. Anyone who is curious can find and read it on the internet. It is also called the grandfather paradox.

The screenwriters of movies like Time Travel either imagined a time machine with lights spinning around it, or vehicles flying in the opposite direction of the earth's rotation (what's that got to do with it??), or they imagined a vehicle that makes some sounds without spending too much money, and when the doors of the vehicle are opened, they supposedly take the people inside to the date indicated by the time counter. 

In other words, the movie world is a world of imagination, and although we all enjoy watching it, it is ultimately a world of lies.

In the real world, there is a past part of time and a future part.  

There is also a part of time that we call "moment", and none of us know exactly what the duration of this "moment" is, or even what the unit of duration is. I mean, not seconds, not minutes, not any other unit. It is just a moment. Again, it is an infinitely short period of time. (I recently wrote an article on eternity, eternity is also an interesting concept) 

For some reason Planck could not calculate the shortest possible time for time. He calculated the shortest possible distance, he calculated the lowest possible energy level, but why doesn't he have a constant for time?

In the calculations, time is considered as a continuous structure, not in grains like matter, like energy, like light.

So we don't know the shortest possible duration for an "instant". But "moment" is also a very important concept, like a sharp knife, one side is the past and one side is the future. And the sharp side of the knife is the present moment!

The paradoxical part of the "candidate who will win", which I also describe as paradoxical, is related to this "moment" we are living in. Since we cannot go back and forth to the future at the moment, it is not possible to know who will win and who will not win when the day comes. 

What we can do is to look at the surveys conducted by polling firms on a certain segment of society. 

These polls already contain a certain error rate because they are conducted on a limited population. Moreover, as soon as the poll is conducted, the result of the poll is a matter of the past tense. In other words, the result means that this or that candidate "won" at the moment when only the pollster can see it, or that this or that candidate "won" for those who look at the poll result later. But we are predicting, based on the poll result, that this or that candidate might win in the future. 

So I call it a paradox because of the tone of certainty in the word "candidate who will win". However, there is no certainty about something that will happen in the future.

A bit burnt out, isn't it? 

Let's burn a little more, when we do the same survey again, the result will be different because the time segment we call "moment" has now moved forward in time. So the winning candidate of the new poll may or may not change.  Even if the candidate does not change, his/her rate may change depending on the circumstances. In other words, who wins and who loses will change from yesterday to today, at any moment. In other words, the results of the survey are only a prediction for the candidate who may win in the future, a prediction that is a bit by the book, even scientific, but in the end, it is only a prediction! There is no certainty. When you say that he will win, there is no more prediction in this discourse! It is a certainty that he will win. This is the paradox right here! 

Politically, maybe this discourse has a purpose, maybe someone is trying to send a message to someone, I don't know. But as I have been trying to explain since the beginning of this article, there is no such thing as a WINNING CANDIDATE! We cannot know today who will win.

Who knows what the conditions will be like on the next election day?

When that day comes, who will actually win?

One wonders, doesn't one?

Yes, there is an excitement in everyone that comes from curiosity. Fears and anxieties are also mixed into this excitement. Some are worried about what if the leader loses, and some are afraid of what if there is another defeat, what if we don't win this time. 

These uneasiness and fears are increasing day by day. Everyone is on edge. 

The situation is even more difficult for the opposition! Because on the one hand, even who will be a candidate in tomorrow's elections is still to be determined. 

Moreover, neither a proper program nor a joint statement addressing all the problems has been put forward. 

As time passes, the uneasiness is getting worse and worse. 

One feels like crying out, come on! Come to an agreement among yourselves, what are you not sharing? The country is going down the drain, don't you realize it? 

Everyone is impatient to tell us what you are going to do. We will open and read more, we will try to perceive, we will try to understand what you think. After we understand and comprehend what you think, maybe we will react by saying what are they saying? Maybe you will have to go back and correct the issues that society does not embrace.

Moreover, yours will only be promises, the government has already taken action and started to distribute them in abundance. You don't have that chance either. 

Your main voters are those who live mostly in the cities, who are blue-collar, who can more or less understand what they read and hear! That's why you have to come up with something honest. You can't just shake and paw what you do. If you do that, you will have a lot of headaches later.

There is no more time, there is very little time. The moment is constantly moving forward and the time that has passed is in the past, it is not possible to go back and correct the mistakes made. So you don't have the luxury of making mistakes!

The time left until election day is decreasing every second. I guess there is no point in panicking people. You never know how a panicked person will react. That's why we need to proceed with a planned program, tell us what you are going to do and how you are going to do it.

And I would also like you to give up this paradoxical definition. The candidate who will win! What a ridiculous statement.

No one knows who will win and who will lose tomorrow. 

At least change the rhetoric, say that in a reasonable period of time close to the election, the person who will be most favored by the society will be determined by conducting a few large-scale surveys.

Until then, at least announce the issues that you have agreed on one by one, saying that we are making our program among ourselves, we have reached an agreement on these issues, here you go, dear citizens, if you have anything to say on these issues, please give feedback.

I know that after every round table meeting a statement is issued, but nothing sticks in people's minds. 

Maybe you should explain it in more memorable ways. I don't know, maybe visually, maybe in short visual spots. Like public service announcements, in a way that everyone can understand. Let it run on the channels like an advertisement, let it be written in people's minds. 

In the meantime, be open and firm with the public, saying that we are continuing to agree on other common issues. So don't give the impression that you are at odds with each other. Stop sending messages to each other, especially through the press or social media! If you have a problem, talk openly amongst yourselves. Establish these channels of communication between you. Enough time has passed since that table was set.

In short, unite, it's time for unity, it's time for unity, like two hands holding each other tightly, hold each other tightly so that the society can see that a solid team is coming, that everything will finally be okay. You are the hope of the society, do not break the hopes.

Love and respect to everyone from Moscow.