A chief aim of the Constitution as drafted by the Constitutional Convention was to create a government with enough power to act on a national level, but without so much power that fundamental rights would be at risk. It is quite obvious that limit has been overstepped, and electing Hillary would essentially re-create the same greedy, selfish, tyrannical government that the King of England and Parliament had back in the 18th century. Then she could begin dismantling the Constitution piece by piece.
I hope the FBI does their job, and that the DOJ does theirs. I hope that the evidence that was purposely deleted from the private email server makes its way to the American people, and that the establishment and its corrupt politics are eliminated. I still have hope that all is not lost in our federal government, but I have no confidence.
AR15.com News
August 15, 2016
[As gun owners I think the best that we can hope for from the November election is that Hillary is soundly defeated and the next president nominates judges who respect our rights. Hillary is extremely unlikely to be indicted let alone spend time in jail.
Discussing this with Sean Flynn a couple weeks ago he told me that he was of the opinion Hillary could be elected even if she was in jail and that only if her health problems manifested in her death before the election would we be able to avoid another Clinton presidency. I told him I thought her supporters would be willing to elect her corpse. He agreed I was probably correct. However there are much more successful political prognosticators than either Sean or I who claim the election is already over in a landslide for Trump.
The bigger issue of the Federal government exercising far more power than it was given by the constitution and infringing upon rights at such a broad scale it’s difficult to fathom appears to be beyond our reach through mere elections. I’m of the opinion our “best” hope for that is through the economic collapse of our federal government. It appears the collapse is inevitable but I see no clear path to something better arising from the ashes.—Joe]
Those who need to know already know what the following means. If it’s not crystal clear to you then don’t worry about it. It’s not for you.
3lFXBqoBxjkW+AostSLl0qgrsTBeG33EvJ3gCUb3BjwzBnaNgLMB/uZZxksVf6Gn4Mg1A5dn
JYOn8y21SdTyueDyP9Cmm+QnZ84ggIZuvHHwK65qGdrR2q8fm75qhgCDYfWIjsDsYHx5IkS
1YALQe7+qv071buUyieYSg4NYJwD6Yh2RDFUNbxVCYXrNLf8kHBzEaFBzkTEfmb/um17rVP
8y4jqVR6wqVc5jriKxKn5TZHIq9DoQ1eeRh9U0EMfHDClwDCGdJkRzn1XNcH5XYMkPN1XR0
9SElArPJ/OICOei6ebgRZODPIi+36it30LqiOTsc+kUk++J4tS/8IGjrvnVqvp65pRw30kx
8vRA4ZU=
Trump may well have more votes cast for him, but Hillary will win the election, because she will have more votes counted for her.
Remember the Democrat motto: The election isn’t over until the Democrat has more votes.
“However there are much more successful political prognosticators than either Sean or I who claim the election is already over in a landslide for Trump.”
I agree, for two reasons.
Trump fills stadiums. Clinton can’t fill a hotel meeting room. This has been the case since the campaign began over a year ago, and it’s been the case across the whole country. Indeed, at one Clinton campaign rally during the primaries, only ONE person showed up.
The polls show the two candidates as approximately equal, but the poll sampling does not take into account the lopsided ratio the candidates’ support shows. There is NO way for them to credibly sample this, so they don’t. So, if the polls show them equal by the usual sampling methods, then skewing those samples by taking into account how many people show up at rally after rally to support the candidates, and the enthusiasm by which they do so, shows it’s gonna be a Trump landslide. The pollsters are gonna be speechless after it’s over.
The reason for this lopsided support ratio is the combination of two things: 1) Trump is NOT an establishment politician and is campaigning in opposition to establishment politics, thus he has the support of a HUGE swath of the people who want to throw the bums out; and, 2) Clinton IS an establishment politician, with a 25 year track record of lies, graft, corruption, and incompetence, such that she has no credibility; indeed, if she were President, there isn’t a diplomat or head of state anywhere who would believe anything she says.
Given those two things, consider a simple question: Is there ANYTHING we could learn about Clinton between now and the election that would cause people in large numbers to think, “Well, okay then. We were wrong about her. I’ll ignore all that stuff and vote for her.” No. If there was such a thing, she’d have trotted it out long ago.
Her cause is hopeless. A huge number of people all across the country WANT what Trump represents. We’ve survived Obama, and we’ll survive Trump. It’s gonna be a Trump landslide.
I think the biggest issue with the polling currently is they’re overestimating the D side of the likely voters. A big part of most of the likely voter models is your prior voting history. How many people came out for Barack in 08 and 12 who are gonna sit home this year? Probably a lot I’d expect….
“Probably a lot …”
Ya THINK?
Let’s consider the voting so far.
On the Republican side:
Trump began running for President last year. He has been loudly opposed by the Republican party leadership, the news media, and the social media. He does not solicit big-dollar donors, indeed he financed his primary campaign out of his own pocket. Overall, he has spent very little on this campaign.
Trump received more votes in the Republican primaries than any Republican candidate has ever received, despite running against 16 opponents. Bottom line: He won handily, and with a huge amount of support from real people.
On the Dimocrat side:
Clinton has been running for President for 16 years, ever since she moved out of the White House. She has the support of the Dimocrat Party leadership, the news media, the social media, and lots of big-dollar donors. Indeed, there is news today that Amazon is actively censoring the comments posted about her book, which were highly negative before the censoring began.
There were over seven million fewer votes cast in the Dimocrat primaries than were cast in 2008. Clinton received roughly 1.3 million fewer votes in the primaries than she received in 2008. That’s awful, especially considering that she lost in 2008. Further, she very nearly lost to an aging socialist whacko, and it’s likely she won ONLY because of the “super delegates” which the party leadership instituted to enable them to override the popular vote. Bottom line: She won a rigged election, and likely only because it was rigged in her favor.
Summary:
This ought to give you some indication of how skewed the poll samples are. Trump’s support is from real people, who are extremely enthusiastic about voting for him, despite all the opposition. Clinton’s support is from the party, the news media, the social media, and the Republican party noisemakers who oppose Trump, but the people don’t appear to be enthusiastic at all about voting for her. Thus, we should expect a huge turnout for Trump and a small turnout for Clinton. The pollsters have no way to estimate the sampling that would reflect this, and I don’t think they would publish such a poll even if they could.
A postscript:
NBC conducted an opinion poll from August 8 to August 14, in which it sampled 15,179 registered voters. ELEVEN PERCENT of them rated Clinton as “honest and trustworthy”. In contrast, fourteen percent of the people believe in Bigfoot. She’s broken, and she isn’t fixable.
There is no clear path from a collapse of the Feds to anything better. When the Bastille was taken, there was one prisoner in it. The Terror after the French Revolution was worse than anything any of the Louis’s ever did. The blood literally ran in the gutter. The Russian Revolution was orders of magnitude bloodier and more violent than anything the Czar did. Compared to the Gulags, the banishment to Siberia was no punishment at all. Entire work camps in the Kolyma region died of starvation and cold, only to have another crew swept off the streets and installed. Mao and his murderous thugs murdered more people than any Chinese Emperor.
I share your belief that what cannot go on won’t go on and a collapse is near, but I think that with people used to the current system, any disruption will only reinforce the idea that they are entitled to a free lunch and someone else is keeping them from eating it, so either the country will fracture into warring states, or a “man on the horse” will emerge as the national leader and take action against whatever group is chosen as the scapegoat, Jews, Christians, , Right-Wingers, White people, Rich people, Bankers, Kulaks. . .
It wouldn’t have to be an economic collapse. It could well be a political collapse without the economic collapse. Look at the way we don’t pass real budgets any more. If states decide to start actually enforcing nullification laws, it could amount to a political collapse–and IMHO, that would be better than what we have now.
Matthew Bracken has posited a fairly plausible collapse scenario that requires not much more than the sudden failure of the “food stamp” system.
The problem is the Fed.gov is standing on our shoulders, we’ll drown long before they get their shorts wet, unless we throw them off. The danger is that the Constitution is so maligned and hated that we’re more likely to end up like the other revolutions than our own.
Lincoln killed the constitution. The rule of law is dead. The guy needs to grow up.
sir:
i like this blog. i like you, and lyle, and others who post here. the gobbledygook at the bottom of the page makes no damned sense to me, and i am not gonna waste my time figuring it out.
i short, i do not fucking care for, “… if it’s not crystal clear to you, then don’t worry about it .” i find that aggravating, patronizing and condescending as hell, and extremely irritating.
for those of us to whom it is not crystal clear, explain it. thank you in advance.
john jay
1971 whitman college, b.a.
1977 u or oregon school of law, juris doctorate
It is an encrypted message. You are not one of the people who has a key. This is a means of sending messages to one or more people without anyone who might be listening knowing who the message(s) are for. Except, now, everyone knows you are not one of the people it was intended for.
Or this is a case of both of you engaging in psyops. 🙂
That being said, john jay, the point of having an encrypted message (or what appears to be an encrypted message) at the end of each and every post is that if you only encrypt what has to be secret, then a nefarious individual (we’ll call her Eve) only has to focus on breaking those messages – and just about any message can be broken with enough time. However, if every communication is encrypted, from “The balloon is up” to “Here’s my grandmother’s macadamia nut cookie recipe,” then Eve has to try to break all of them to find the important ones, which is a lot harder task. Ideally, everything that Joe posts should be in code – but then how would anyone read it? He could send out the decoder rings to those who ask – but how to insure that Eve doesn’t pretend to be Edward to get a copy? (This is one of the classic conundrums – the tighter you restrict information, the more likely it is that your opponents won’t get it, but the more likely that someone who does need to know it won’t find out. It’s a tight balancing act.) Having a plaintext/crypto mix is a decent compromise, I think.
As for the messages being annoying, I somewhat agree. I think it would be better for Joe to post a modified picture/bar code/visual with every post instead of a code block, as this will be far less obvious to a casual observer and will still accomplish the necessary goal, at a slight cost to user friendliness. I also think a short line saying “And here’s today’s Have Fun with the NSA code block!” would be more polite to us fellow travelers.
Disclaimer: My experience with crypto is what I picked up reading Cryptonomicon as a kid and read about on Wikipedia. Do not mistake me for Bruce Schneier.
The collapse won’t happen during my lifetime, I hope. We have an unsustainable system over the long run. I worked for GM (a subsidiary) and you could see it coming. They were a “healthcare company that built cars” due to their large retired workforce with lifetime health benefits. I see the US government as being the same way. We have more entitlements than we can pay for. The tipping point is somewhere in the distant future, but it seems impossible to stop it. I am not sure what the average person can do about it, but I figure it can’t hurt to have a little bit of a survivalist mentality.