Amici, a Chairde,
Can
the American political scene get any stranger? While of course many of
"usual suspects" of global punditry continue to excoriate Donald Trump
and those uncouth "deplorables" who elected him, still, its the
Democrats who have gone mad. Many articles are out there now
demonstrating how insane the Democrats have gone. "Insane" in the sense
of pushing crazed sexual confusion and dysphoria while concurrently
exalting infanticide, promoting a rabidly pro-Muslim position, and
to top it off: Socialism; that is, dumping all these full-force on an
American public that historically repudiates Socialism, finds the sexual
stuff utter madness, and is repulsed by Islam.
- This is quite amazing and indicative of the divide between American "elites", who often have a more "European"-based education, and the non-elites, who are more "American". While the American elites constantly compare themselves to the rest of the world – and most often, they do so from a sense of cultural inferiority and envy – "real" Americans (like "real" Germans and "real" Frenchmen, working class and middle class people slaving away at life) traditionally are not that interested in the rest of the world; we simply don't give a damn what European or Asian elites think of us. The idea that any part of the world is "culturally superior" is an absurdity to them. (That's as true to "average" Americans as it is to "average" Europeans.)
- This opens up another idea: Germans upper classes were, by and large, more or less, far "culturally superior" to the English throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, and into the 20th. Robert (von Ranke) Graves, the British author known mostly for "I, Claudius" today, if he's remembered at all, had written in 1929 a biography titled "Good-bye to All That" about his life, and I actually read part of it at one point. He grew up half in England and half in Germany (pre-WWI Germany) and it was clear the Germans were FAR more "culturally advanced" than the English, and Graves English school mates teased him mercilessly about it – for example, his taste in classical music. Yet ironically enough, it wasn't the English didn't sent six million Jews to the gas chambers, and they would never have thought of such a thing. Clearly, "cultural superiority" is not what it is cracked up to be.
Socialism
But
even though "average" Americans aren't interested in the world, even
still, a great many "American" Americans know Socialism is a fake thing,
a fig-leaf for grabbing power, a sort of pied piper leading the
ignorant to slavery: https://amgreatness.com/2019/03/17/socialists-dont-really-believe-in-socialism/
Yet
the Democrats embrace Socialism, openly. "Out and Proud," now, as it
were. They got Bill Clinton elected in 1992 because Ross Perot split the
Republican vote, and they got Obama elected in 2008 because, as Joe
Biden himself once said, Obama was a "clean" Black, but their Party has
no new ideas. Until this sudden turn toward the Far Left, the Dems were
talking like it was 1932 still. Then along came the Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez generation. As these began to get elected, things began to
change rapidly. From that moment on, commentators have been suggesting
that the Democratic Party leadership seems to be surrendering to their
radical "base". For example:
Excerpt:
The party’s
ostensible centrists are panicking, realizing that unless they can successfully
cast AOC et al. as outliers, the party faces an electoral bloodbath in 2020.
But there are few remaining Democratic centrists.
In
fact, of course, the Party bigwigs (all old, rich, and very white
people -- see below about the millionaires in New York City) fully
intend on pushing the radicals to the side and inserting in an
establishment presidential candidate when the time comes. For example: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/03/19/cnn-interviews-brad-parscale-then-accidentally-notes-the-dnc-2020-strategy/
Excerpt:
What Tapper
notes as the urgent data collection priority
of the DNC is specifically the reason why the club has enlisted
Beto to draw-in the community they need to harvest. The Democrats,
specifically young democrats, have no idea how the ‘club’ plans to use them.
It is
important to remember the DNC and RNC are private clubs. The club rules and
processes have have no direct connection to the administration of government.
The DNC and RNC are completely private organizations
with the ability to make their own rules, membership terms, conditions and
agendas. You’d be surprised how many people do not know that simple point.
Indeed. People are being played. It's an old, old game, but the gamesters are doddering idiots today. Trump outplayed – massively so – the "GOPe" (Republican Party elites) establishment, and ultimately the Democratic establishment. They really, really didn't like that. Hence the endless effort to get Trump thrown out.
However,
if this "bait and switch" is indeed the Democrat game, they'll be
damned by their "base" on the one hand, and on the other, Trump will eat
their establishment candidate alive, like he did GOPe scion Jeb! Bush and the rest of the "Club Men".
Otherwise,
to phrase it in a calm, historical-based understanding, one can say the
Democrats are trying to recreate the 1972 election for 2020. They went
too far Left in 1972 and it cost them. Nixon won big. So they took out Nixon.
They've
been desperately trying to take out Trump since 2016. But the more they
attack him the more his base solidifies -- because the more desperate
the Dems get, the more crazy they get, and we can all see what choice
they're giving us. This cartoon below is an instant classic.
This is found at http://allnewspipeline.com/Cortez_Officially_The_Face_Of_Ineptocrats.php,
which has the smarts to quote people who live in the U.S. now but who
grew up under Communist regimes, people like my wife. These sorts think
the U.S. has gone full bonkers. (My wife sure does.)
People who haven't "drunk the cool-aid" understand very well where this is heading, of course. For example, this Comment at: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/03/20/president-trump-notes-strange-candidate-platform-lower-voting-age-eliminate-electoral-college-increase-scotus-justices/#more-161448
trapper says:
In your wildest imaginings, think up the ideas that
could do the most damage to America. Then wait for them to be proposed by the
Democrats. Infanticide? Just wait for the maximum age proposal, because that is
what they are going for. Banning meat. Rationing food. Severe restrictions on
domestic travel. Mandatory gun turn-ins. Mandatory re-education. Total control
over every aspect of everyone’s lives. By those who know best. To save the
planet. Wait for it.
That's exactly where this is going. It comes down to a cadre of people who think they know how the rest of us should -- indeed, must -- live, and they're going to see we do as they command or else.
Weirdly,
this has happened before in the United States. In 1861,
Democrat-controlled satrapies in the American South voted to leave the
Union rather than accept the election of a Republican. And notice how,
after that upstart Republican had the effrontery to be re-elected, he
was assassinated. (I pray the Secret Service is guarding Trump very
closely!) Truly, the more things change, the more they stay the same.
That or else
today doesn't (yet) involve secession (or, thank God, assassination),
of course, but it does involve changing the Constitution to "stack" the
Supreme Court https://pjmedia.com/video/three-ways-2020-dems-want-to-remake-the-supreme-court/ and removing the Electoral College.
Importance of the Electoral College
The U.S. wouldn't exist today had it not been for the Electoral College. It would have broken up long ago.
The United States isn't a democracy – "democracy" is just mob rule and it's never
worked (or not outside of Switzerland). It has a history. A baleful
history. But the American educational system is a Leftist production
factory of homo ignorans maximands. This below is a great article on how the Electoral College works, and why: http://thefederalist.com/2016/09/16/the-electoral-college-still-makes-sense-because-were-not-a-democracy/
An excerpt (highlights/boldface mine):
The purpose of the Electoral College is to balance
voting power across states so no one region of the country can gain too much
control. If a president is elected by a simple majority of votes, a candidate
who is wildly popular in one region (e.g., Ted Cruz in Texas, Mitt Romney in
Utah) can ignore smaller regions and campaign only where large majorities are
possible. Or a candidate who kills in California and New York can write off
“flyover country” completely.
If,
however, the Electoral College elects a president, a candidate who is wildly
popular in one region must also prevail in a number of sub-elections to win.
The Electoral College ensures a better result for the country as a whole than
the democratic power play wherein 51 percent of us matter and 49 percent of us
don’t.
Think
of the Electoral College like the World Series. One person-one vote equates to
the World Series Champions being determined by total number of runs scored. If
the Dodgers win the first game 10-0, and the Yankees win the next four games
1-0, the Dodgers win the series. Even though the Yankees bested the Dodgers in
four games, it doesn’t matter because the Dodgers scored 10 runs to their 4.
One anomalous game decides the whole series. Without the Electoral College, a
few heavily populated states decide the whole election.
So,
the poor Electoral College sits condemned before its last meal because its
power is misunderstood. How ironic—and tragic if no stay-of-execution
arrives—that those who clamor for “one person-one vote” are seeking more power
at the expense of power they already have.
What about Hillary winning the popular vote by three million votes?
According
to Snopes (which may or may not be telling the truth, depending on
which way the pixie dust is blowing), it says of how many counties Trump
won vs Hillary: "Vote tallies by county differ
depending on the standards used, but an Associated Press tally of the
actual ratio pegged it at 2,626 to 487, not 3084 to 57" (Notice that "Vote tallies ... differ depending on the standards used...". I'm sure they do. /sarc)
But
the obvious point remains the same: a huge section of the country would
be discarded in dumping the Electoral College system for a popular
vote. Hillary Clinton had 3 million total more votes than Trump but
these came from the Democrat Party-controlled "asphalt plantation"
Hell-holes – which is, increasingly, what the entire state of California is. Check this article out: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/03/the_financial_collapse_of_the_democratic_mayors.html
These big cesspool metropolises that are totally controlled by Democrats are bankrupt. (California itself is in meltdown: https://amgreatness.com/2019/03/09/video-victor-davis-hanson-on-california-in-collapse/)
An excerpt from the American Thinker article (highlights and boldface mine):
Recently,
non-government organization Truth
in Accounting published a report
about the financial condition of the 75 largest cities of
America. As it turns out, 63 out of 75 cities in America were not
able to pay bills at the end of the fiscal year of 2017.
The final
result of this study was the calculation of the burden borne by taxpayers in
these American cities. The formula is simple: the financial balance
of the city (positive or negative) is divided by the number of
inhabitants. The result is a good assessment of how effectively the
city authorities work, depending on the positive or negative financial balance
of the city per capita.
First, it is easy to see that the
negative balance of cities at the bottom of a financial abyss exceeds the
positive balance of those cities at the top of financial well-being by an order
of magnitude. Secondly, the political preferences of the inhabitants
of these cities are quite unambiguous: they prefer almost exclusively
Democrats.
For example, in San Francisco
(California), the last Republican mayor was elected in 1964, in Honolulu
(Hawaii) in 1994, in Philadelphia (Pennsylvania) in 1954, and in Chicago
(Illinois) in 1931. In New York, America's city in the most dramatic
financial hole, the last real Republican mayor left the office in
2001. Republican Rudy Giuliani was replaced by pseudo-Republican
Michael Bloomberg, who eventually left the Republican Party. Since
2014, the mayor of New York has been the communist Bill de Blasio, who
methodically injects socialism into the city.
Ron again:
And just remember, friends, that New York boasts more millionaires than any other city in the world: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/18/new-york-city-has-more-millionaires-than-any-other-city-in-the-world.html
These
are the places that voted for Hillary. They're the places driving the
young generation of Socialists taking over the Democratic Party. They
disaster twilight zones, bankrupt, failing, miserable. And their elites do not care. https://amgreatness.com/2019/03/18/the-elite-pulls-up-the-ladders-behind-them/
And the "young Turk" Socialists would turn the whole country into Chicago or Detroit. Or in a word, Venezuela.
And
also, we see in California that "vote harvesting" is an outrageous
fraud. Even a conservative estimate (by the cautious Tom Fitton, of
Judicial Watch) has 900,000 non-citizens voting in the 2018 election. If
2020 turns out to be an electoral jungle "red in tooth and claw" you
can expect a full-blown Revolution. There won't be any choice except to
"Cry havoc! And let slip the dogs of war". Elections simply must be
"purer than Caesar's wife" or ballots will be replaced by bullets.
And
Trump is going to win in 2020 because, simply put, he puts "America
First" and "rank and file" Americans like that. So, he'll win, unless
they take him out by voter fraud or literally take him out. I fervently hope his Secret Service protection is first-rate.
An Préachán
PS Oh, and this:
No comments:
Post a Comment