June 30, 2016
Fraud comes easy when you are a Clinton or the DNC wing of Clinton Inc. During the primaries a lot of funny (aka likely illegal) stuff went on during the primaries that swung voters magically away from Bernie Sanders and/or towards Hillary Clinton.
Man sites have reported on it but Heavy describes it in a nutshell, interestingly, and not truly surprisingly, the subterfuge is all on the Democratic side:
Huge voter registration problems are plaguing states with closed primaries, leading to allegations of election fraud around the country. People who said they were previously registered Democrat or Republican suddenly found their registrations inactive or their party affiliations dropped, and now they can’t vote in their primary. These problems were a big issue in Arizona, and now they’re being seen in New York, California, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and more.Many people are concerned election fraud is happening, but others think it could be widespread clerical errors. Either way, the problem is affecting people’s ability to vote. Is your voter registration affected, too?
Don't expect these sort of hijinx to disappear in the general election. If Trump is within whistling distance of Clinton in the polls, the dirty tricks will be in full effect. If he's actually leading, watch for dead voters, illegal immigrant voters, phantom voters and any other sort of phony voter the DNC can muster to bury Hillary's rival using as many fictional people as necessary.
Addendum: Let's not forget hacking voting machines as a Clintonista option. There's a good article about it here.
Addendum: Let's not forget hacking voting machines as a Clintonista option. There's a good article about it here.
Via The Daily Beast, more Hillary Clinton subterfuge. Back in April, and likely still continuing, they're paying people to correct comments of Facebook and Reddit.
Citing “lessons learned from online engagement with ‘Bernie Bros,’” a pro-Hillary Clinton Super PAC is pledging to spend $1 million to “push back against” users on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit and Instagram...The PAC was created in May of last year when it was spun off from the American Bridge SuperPAC, which is run by longtime Hillary and Bill Clinton supporter David Brock. Brock also founded the left-wing media watchdog website Media Matters for America....Due to FEC loopholes, the Sunlight Foundation’s Libby Watson found this year that Correct the Record can openly coordinate with Clinton’s campaign, despite rules that typically disallow political campaigns from working directly with PACs.“SuperPACs aren’t supposed to coordinate with candidates. The whole reasoning behind (Supreme Court decision) Citizens United rests on (PACs) being independent, but Correct the Record claims it can coordinate,” Watson told The Daily Beast. “It’s not totally clear what their reasoning is, but it seems to be that material posted on the Internet for free—like, blogs—doesn’t count as an ‘independent expenditure.”
Okay, so they're possibly playing within the rules to the letter of the law (though clearly not the spirit) and nothing will be done to stop this during this election cycle. The point though is that ethics is playiong no part in this campaign for Hillary Clinton and as a voter that should be a chilling concern for you.
Collusion on an epic scale.
Via Inquisitr, what the latest hack of Democratic National Committee's email server reveals about Hillary Clinton and her enablers is just as abhorrent as you'd expect. It's practically Nixonian in nature if this were Watergate, Hillary would already be on her way to jail.
A new hacker who identifies himself as Guccifer 2.0 has revealed confidential documents that point to collusion efforts between Hillary Clinton, the DNC, and the mainstream media. The documents the hacker released contain more than just the multi-pronged approach to derailing Donald Trump. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has already acknowledged that a hacker accessed its servers.MSNBC has released a story about the hack, but as noted above, it only pertains to information about Donald Trump. The media outlet made only a passing reference to the other documents Guccifer 2.0 released, claiming “much of the information was already available publicly.”...So, what exactly do the documents released thus far reveal? At the very least, they reveal a coordinated effort between the DNC, Hillary Clinton, and the mainstream media to make play up Clinton’s positive’s while downplaying her negatives. It also reveals that the DNC has fed the mainstream media information and questions about Republican candidates that news anchors and reporters should ask during interviews.In a document dated May 26, 2015 — a little over a month after Clinton announced her candidacy for the Democratic nomination — the DNC issued a document specifically aimed at discrediting GOP candidates by working hand-in-hand with the mainstream media.
Expect a massive level of avoidance of this in the coming months by all the perpetrators involved. But this issue needs to have a 1000 Megawatt light shine on it, because it's indicative of everything that's wrong with insider politics that is choking the democracy out of America.
June 29, 2016
Via The Rebel, a discussion on BREXIT below spurred some thoughts for me, which follow.
Take the opinions out of the equation, there are some parallels that do indeed apply to the United States. BREXIT does have some implications for the U.S. elections in November, and for Trump in particular, the vote was like a rebuke of the elite, and a rebuke of unfettered globalism. It's more like the equivalent of a vote to leave NAFTA and that plays into Trump's message.
Another concern that comes up as part of a broader question that I have. Why is it socialists are pushing so hard for globalization? Why are labor union leaders pushing for trans-nationalism in opposition to the interests of their members whose interests are mostly about secure, good-paying jobs? Why did the Labor party in the U.K. push so hard to remain in the E.U.? This is bizarro world stuff.
June 28, 2016
The Benghazi reports are out. The Democrats' report mentions Trump over a dozen times - clearly it was a planned political report. The Republican report points out that help didn't arrive because American forces could not have reached there in time.
You know what everyone seems to be overlooking? Everyone is overlooking what could have made it there in time. A phone call from the president of the United States to Libyan officials demanding that they mobilize and protect foreign nationals or face consequences from America.
Why didn't that ever happen? Oh wait, this bunch of collective intelligentsia either didn't think of it or else couldn't back up the threat with enough credibility to make it happen. Or perhaps they all simply reacted like a deer in the headlights. Either way, there was no one in that room ready to make a 3 a.m. call.
June 27, 2016
Via RCP, this tasty morsel today:
Although the delegates Hillary Clinton earned in primaries and caucuses, coupled with superdelegate endorsements, put her over the top for the Democratic nomination mathematically, the YouGov survey (and other polls) show that she has made little headway in converting the last big chunk of Sanders loyalists to her cause. In fact, the reconnect poll shows that since February the number of Sanders voters willing to support her in the general election has actually dropped slightly, from 68 percent to 66 percent.
Make of it what you will - either she has room for growth within her Democratic base, or she can't make the sale to what should be a locked up portion of her constituency.
June 26, 2016
Donald Trump was not my first choice for Republican nominee for president. He's loud, obnoxious, un-practiced and quite frankly unseemly. He's still a better choice than Hillary Clinton and #NeverHillary is reason enough to vote for him. So too are his suggested Supreme Court nominees.
That said, I can't help but feel that Trump's play on immigration and trade deal populism is indicative of two things:
(1) Trump quite possibly has a keen awareness of what the electoral issues will be (or are) this cycle.
(2) Trump possibly views the Republican electorate as a bunch of bumpkins, rubes and Neanderthals with archaic views of the world that he can subsume in order to get himself elected.
It's not a flattering view. And there's a downside to it: should Trump win, the Washington elite and media intelligentsia will savage conservative voters as knuckle-dragging mouth-breathers with the IQ of a wet stick. True, they already do that, but they'll double down on the attacks. Trump's path to victory plays right into their hand should he win.
But it will be worth it to derail a Hillary Clinton presidency. Let me be clear, it's not because she's a woman. It's because she's a closet progressive, she's an inveterate liar, she's a self-obsessed, she's money hungry and puts personal interest in wealth and power ahead of national interest. Hillary Clinton would be at best marginally better than Obama and at worst, even worse than that very low bar.
Hank Paulson, A Bush insider has endorsed Hillary Clinton. No really. If ever there were a wedge for Democratic voters blind support of Hillary Clinton, a Bush team endorsement, or a Bush endorsement, would be it. Remember, the second Bush was Hitler according to those on the left. A flood of Bush team support for Hillary Clinton might be enough to push Sanders supporters into the Trump camp.
It's a weird circumstance. But it is a dramatic opportunity for Trump, and for the GOP. Think about it - if there's no difference between Bush and Clinton, why vote Clinton if you are fed up with a status quo that's leaving the middle class behind? And if Bushites are supporting Hillary, is there really any real difference between the two?
And the wave of anti-establishmentarianism isn't just evident in the U.K. BREXIT vote. Iceland just elected a novice outsider too. It's hitting closer and closer to home.
June 25, 2016
Another geography lesson today, it's the theme for Saturday Learning Series this year (for economics, history, science and other topics covered in the Saturday Learning Series, search the topic on this blog).
June 24, 2016
With waves of unfettered immigration, lost economic sovereignty a divorce from the EU was inevitable. I'm surprised frankly that the vote was as close as it was. It's led to a volatile market reaction, bad news, but it should have been predictable.
In terms of the U.S., the populist nature of the vote portends well for Donald Trump''s candidacy. Yes there's an ocean in between the U.K. and the U.S., but the common thread is the understanding that the status quo is not working for most people. Hillary Clinton represents a corrupt status quo, Donald Trump represents a bull in a China shop style of change. The BREXIT vote tells you where a lot of people's heads are at on that choice.
June 23, 2016
June 21, 2016
Back in early May I wrote about future de-urbanization and I asked what you thought about it. Someone else has been thinking about it, and here's their thoughts - good news for the GOP. I don't agree with everything in this article, but this much I can agree with:
...This is told as a fantastic story of human empowerment and social transformation, which it is. More and more of us are escaping the tyranny of location; thanks to the telecom revolution we can work where we want and when we want.The rise of telecommuting will lead to better, richer lives. Families will be stronger. The environment will benefit from less commuting. All good.But it also represents the death of the political philosophy and economic system that the Times is otherwise prepared to defend to the last: the blue social model. If this revolution continues—and it will—fewer and fewer people will be stuck in big, high tax, over-regulated cities. While some will still choose to live there, many, especially those raising children, will not.In the long run, people who live and work the way that the subject of the Times article does will simply not support the cumbersome procedures and institutions of the bureaucratic state as we know it.
Rural = conservative, at least generally. One of the very ideals that modern liberalism shoots for - local, local, local - will eventually be its undoing.
June 18, 2016
June 17, 2016
June 16, 2016
There has been a lot of complaining about the Hillary Clinton primary victory in California from the progressive left. They may have a point.
Then again they may not. This could just be a poorly designed and executed primary system. But, who cares. In the spirit of Rush Limbaugh's 2008 Operation Chaos where he tried to derail Hillary Clinton, to ultimately a bad end result unfortunately, let's spread the existing meme of the question of whether election fraud pushed Hillary Clinton across the finish line in California.
June 15, 2016
Twitter removed conservative gay opinion leader and critical thinker extraordinaire Milo Yiannopoulus today and after banning him for some apparently anti-Muslim tweets, reinstated him thanks to Drudge.
Twitter is a mess:
Milo Yiannopoulos has hit out at Twitter after they suspended his account earlier today, accusing the social networking service of being “Sharia-compliant” and in financial freefall.In a press conference at Ground Zero Orlando, delivering a truncated speech following Sunday’s mass shooting — one he was supposed to give on Muslims and gays at the University of Central Florida (UCF), which was canceled by campus police — Yiannopoulos said Muslim campaigners were responsible for him briefly thrown off Twitter this morning.Milo told a lively crowd that influential news aggregation site The Drudge Report linking to Heat Street’s article on him directly resulted in him being re-instated on Twitter. He said: “My Twitter account was suspended as a result of a campaign by Muslim tweeters. It has been re-instated because the Drudge Report put my picture on the front page with a gigantic headline- thank you Matt Drudge- saying ‘Twitter tells Milo to go to hell!’“It was Muslims who told me to go to hell and I’m glad to see that Twitter very quickly panicked and backtracked and reinstated my Twitter account today. If it goes down again, who knows?,” he said.
Twitter has turned to the dark side of censorship of conservative ideas recently at the same time they've descended into fiscal duress. Free speech clearly takes a back seat. The good news is they seem to listen to whomever complains the loudest. Good to know for conservatives.
June 14, 2016
I'll start by saying that I believe the shooting at the gay nightclub in Orlando was a horrific and terrible act of terror, regardless of the motivation behind it. My heart goes out to families and friends who have lost loved ones in the senseless tragedy. It's terrible, sicken and truly sad whenever something like this happens.
Here are a couple of other thoughts on the situation. Regardless of what I believe about differing lifestyles and morality, it is not my place to impose my beliefs on others, just as I would expect no one do the same to me. While I might as a Christian want to warn others about promiscuity etc. (and no, I'm not explicitly equating homosexuality with promiscuity) if I do so and they choose to ignore my advice or opinion, so be it. That is their prerogative. Similarly, anyone who believes that they have a right or a mandate to impose a death sentence on those who do not conform to their views (or perhaps impose Sharia law, or laws requiring churches to marry people whom they morally feel compelled not to do), is simply put, wrong. They are wrong on every level. Murder is morally reprehensible.
A civilized society does require laws, but it requires the minimal amount possible in order to provide as much individual liberty as is feasible. That is the society we have opted for in Western civilization. The degree to which governments adhere to that varies and can be quite telling. A civilized society does not require vigilante Wild West style justice.
And on another note, some good is being ignored in this situation, probably because of who is behind it:
Chick Fil A has made national news for it’s owners’ stance on gay marriage. Anytime they do something even remotely non-PC, their supposed slip up goes viral. Hash tags pop up all over the place.So why is that what they have done in the wake of the Orlando nightclub shooting hasn’t received a single mention on the mainstream new outlets?It’s probably because people like New York City Mayor, Bill DeBlasio might have to eat crow instead of chicken. DeBlasio has said that Chick Fil A spreads a message of hate.Not so yesterday. In a shocking move, the Orlando location at University and Rouse Road fired up its grills on Sunday. The chain is notorious for not being open, ever, on the first day of the week. Employees cooked up hundreds of their famous chicken sandwiches. They brewed dozens of gallons of sweet tea.Chick-fil-A-logo-vecThen, instead of making a single dime, they crated the product of their labor to the One Blood donation center. The food and drinks were handed out, free of charge, to all the people who had lined up to donate blood.
A wonderful example of hating the sin and not the sinner, quite unlike the approach taken by the shooter in this case. And dare I say it, Chick-fil-A has chosen the Christian thing to do here.
June 12, 2016
"Dr. Brad Stone, professor of Philosophy and the chair of the Department of African American Studies at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles joins Jesse Lee Peterson to discuss race relations, Black Lives Matter, "White Privilege," religion, and why some of his peers support illegal immigration. Dr. Stone was rated one of America's 300 Best Professors by the Princeton Review."
This is the third late night video of a Thursday Hillary Bash on a not Thursday. The other two from this late night (Sunday morning) can be found here and here.
This one from the Amazing Atheist is NSFW due to the tremendous amount of swearing. But he calls out the idiots reacting to Hillary's "clinching" the Democratic nomination for president.
June 11, 2016
June 10, 2016
June 9, 2016
According to the Wall Street Journal, Hillary Clinton's unsecured email under criminal investigation did involve national security:
The vaguely worded messages didn’t mention the “CIA,” “drones” or details about the militant targets, officials said.The still-secret emails are a key part of the FBI investigation that has long dogged Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, these officials said.They were written within the often-narrow time frame in which State Department officials had to decide whether or not to object to drone strikes before the CIA pulled the trigger, the officials said.Law-enforcement and intelligence officials said State Department deliberations about the covert CIA drone program should have been conducted over a more secure government computer system designed to handle classified information.
I can already see Hillary's defense: (1) this is nothing new (2) I already admitted I did not take the best course of action (3) while wrong, this is small potatoes and no real damage was done and (4) "vast right wing conspiracy". And she will be holding that line, even if she's being hauled away in handcuffs.
On the same day that Obama endorses Hillary Clinton for president (no real surprise), the FBI confirms that it is conducting a criminal investigation of her. Obama has become the status quo. Endorsing Hillary is more of the same status quo. And the status quo is apparently criminal. This at a time that people are fed up with the status quo.
Is it any wonder Trump is surging even while he's crude, abrasive and often is a hard listen? Even Latinos are not so radically opposed to him.
It's seeming more and more like Trump is going to win and the reason is clear: people are willing to put aside their distaste for him because the country is in dire straits. Clinton is more of the same failed approach and Trump is promising to fix things. Clinton fundamentally believes things are on track. Maybe for her and her million dollar speeches they are, but voters don't see it that way.
Voters see trouble. they feel it personally in millions of cases. Bernie Sanders gets that and is the socialist man in the right place at the right time. The GOP, for all their supposed understanding that the country is sick, did not field a candidate capable of embracing the unrest and unease - except for Trump. Those voters have no place to go in a head-to-head Hillary-Trump match except for Trump.
Trump could win a lot more electoral votes than the 270 necessary to win. Unless..
There's a third party spoiler (think Johnson or Romney) or maybe if Hillary in a transparent bid to get his supporters on board selects Sanders as her running mate. Either or both of those scenarios could derail Trump. Trump could derail Trump, but evidence so far suggests he won't. Then again, he's trying to attract more moderate supporters and a new tone might help there. I doubt it. His track record of bombast has generated his success, so he's not likely to change. And indeed softening his image might look like capitulation to the status quo. That likely will hurt as much as it will help.
Trump is likely to continue and will attract incrementally smaller increases in support. But barring the impact of either scenario mentioned above, it's likely to prove enough for him to win. So all things being equal, assuming he does, let's hope he can actually deliver on some of the important things he's promised that will help make America great again.
June 8, 2016
In 2008 you implored John McCain to take the fight to Obama. He did not. In 2012 you held your nose and voted for Mitt Romney despite the fact that his debating style was Marquess of Queensberry Rules when he was in a street fight with a political adversary and never even realized it.
What we wanted was someone with the teeth to take the fight to Democrats. We wanted someone with the intellectual prowess of William F. Buckley and the oratory skill and charisma of Ronald Reagan.
We didn't get all of that. We got a fighter though. Donald Trump certainly has teeth and it has been lacking in the Republican nominees since Ronald Reagan - both Bush presidents possessed neither rapier wit nor the seeming urge to fight. Bob Dole?
So ask yourself, even if Trump is not the ideal candidate for you, is he a fighter? Will he take the fight to Hillary? And will he be better than Hillary?
The title of the Politico article says it all, "Can Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama save the establishment?"
Hillary Clinton stepped into the 2016 presidential race hoping voters would effortlessly pass the torch from President Barack Obama to her, yet found herself surrounded by a raging anti-establishment inferno. “Burn it down” was the unofficial slogan of the Republican primary. And Bernie Sanders gave her a run for her money by metaphorically lighting all her Wall Street speaking fee money on fire.Today, as she is unofficially crowned the “presumptive nominee,” Clinton has officially done what Jeb Bush, John Kasich, Marco Rubio and Lindsey Graham could not: survive the populist wave while being perceived as an insider. Now, as Donald Trump tries to assemble a potent pitchfork brigade to seize Washington, the establishment’s lonely eyes are turning to Hillary Clinton....she and Obama have begun crafting arguments more associated with establishment politics than populism.Make no mistake: this is nothing less than a political high-wire act being attempted by a meticulous but not always agile candidate. Many Sanders voters say they don’t trust her when she claims to be a “progressive,” and any new rightward lean will only confirm their suspicions.
And there's what's wrong - the establishment is not worth saving because the establishment has twisted itself into a self-serving mass of bloat and avarice. The establishment are not benign overlords looking to do the best for the most as they claim. They seek power for the sake of power and the hell with everyone else. All that they offer is the pretense of concern.
Trump blows that apart as does Sanders, whereas Clinton is the embodiment of the self-serving establishment seeking the status quo. Even asking the question, shows what side you are on. I was never impressed with Politico, this only reinforces the reason why.
June 7, 2016
Add in the Superdelegate party insiders who pre-backed Hillary Clinton, and regardless of whether Bernie Sanders sweeps the vote in California and other states today, Clinton has "won" the "Democratic" party nomination for president;
SAN FRANCISCO — Unbridled fury about the media and the Democratic establishment rippled through a crowd of Bernie Sanders supporters here Monday after reports that Hillary Clinton had clinched the Democratic presidential nomination...Turning toward the Democratic superdelegates who do not formally vote until the convention, Sanders said they should look hard at polling data and argued that he is best positioned to take on Trump in the fall campaign.
Bernie Sanders will continue on, in the hope only rto drag the party further left. I would have laughed at the conundrum for the party as Hillary would need to keep moving left and moving out of contention versus Trump (or any Republican nominee who might have won for that matter), but now I'm actually concerned. Because as Hillary tacks leftward, even after clinching the nomination the thought of her winning is that much scarier. So I'm currently a bit perplexed. There should be some clarity once we reach the Democratic and Republican conventions. At least I hope that will be the case.
June 4, 2016
June 3, 2016
It's been a while since my last Dictator Watch. Why bring it back now? Because it still matters and it points out something a lot of Americans and Canadians do not seem to understand: Socialism DOES NOT WORK. Attention Bernie Sanders supporters - watch this video, the latest example of socialism failing yet AGAIN. Flama, a Venezuelan breaks it down on the broke down nation.
WARNING: Language - she's clearly not happy.
June 2, 2016
Private email server issues are really more of an accountability issue. Good on MSNBC for finally discussing this in a non-defensive way. Hillary Clinton's base is going to slowly dissolve away to only extremely low information voters.
June 1, 2016
Expect more of this. North Korean crackpot leader Kim Jung Un has endorsed Donald Trump, and it makes perfect sense:
A column carried on Tuesday by DPRK Today, one of the reclusive and dynastic state's mouthpieces, described Trump as a "wise politician" and the right choice for U.S. voters in the Nov. 8 U.S. presidential election.It described his most likely Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, as "thick-headed Hillary" over her proposal to apply the Iran model of wide sanctions to resolve the nuclear weapons issue on the Korean peninsula.Trump instead has told Reuters he was prepared to talk to North Korean leader Kim Jong Un to try to stop Pyongyang's nuclear program, and that China should also help solve the problem.
Why does it make perfect sense? There's two schools of thought on that (1) Trump has indicated he's hands off on involvement with other countries. (2) Trump is going to be tough on Mexico, and they are not a titular enemy like the DPRK. Kim Jung Un probably realizes that he has the reputation in America of a crazy person. And he may regard Trump as crazy and he might even be fearful of a Trump presidency. By endorsing Trump he could be using reverse psychology, trying to convince Americans that him being behind Trump means Americans should avoid voting for Trump at all costs.
The former possibility while true, is more about supporting allies financially than backing down from existential threats. Perhaps Kim Jung Un is misreading the Trump doctrine before it even gets its legs. The latter possibility seems more plausible to me, but in either case, the endorsement makes sense.