Trump does not display the attitude of a man who intends to lose. Biden does not display the behavior of someone who can win. The equation to predicting a Trump victory is elementary: one candidate works for what will happen after the victory he takes as already guaranteed; the other works to attain that victory. Victory goes to the one who works for it.
For some reason, the need to work for victory sails past the thinking of too many people, not the least of which include members of the media.
Not only are election news articles conclusive when reporting events—in a sweeping trend yet unseen in the West—, now they use the same terms. Republican senators and representatives are reported as making a “last-ditch” effort (hyphenated across news platforms). This leads Pacific Daily Times to develop the “morning news memo” (MNM) theorem—that reporters, anchors, newswriters, and other such wordsmiths across the news industry receive some kind of [actual or theoretical] memorandum in the morning on which identical words to copy so that their content is less original from one news outlet to another. This may not actually happen, but the theorem merely states that news content can be better understood as if it happens. Accordingly, the PDT MNM theorem suggests that the MNM word for the day was “last-ditch”, (hyphenated).
Senators and representatives, headed by posy leader apparent Ted Cruz, propose an “Electoral Commission” to investigate the legality of all electoral votes in an emergency 10-day review. That would return results by January 16, which could then allow the electoral college to be certified before the January 18 deadline. If House Democrats and the Senate agreed, Biden could win. But, Democrats don’t want such a win, suggesting that they fear the results if an “Electoral Commission” were created as a “last-ditch” (hyphenated).
Without said commission, the posy will dispute the electoral college as not “regularly given” or not “lawfully certified”. Having neglected the need to gain the confidence of his own election, and with a clear and likely path to victory for Trump, it seems as if this entire election dispute was doctored from the get go. Biden may have already found himself in a ditch—the “last-ditch” (hyphenated).
Trump signed the $600 stimulus bill, but with a “rescission” order. In other words, he is forcing Congress to discuss and deliberate on spending certain items or else the bill won’t become law for another 45 days.
Trump’s method is ingenious, though many worms in Washington wrongly project their own motives of immaturity or ego. After all the squawk Trump gave about $2,000 checks, the people expect more money and Congress has an easy way to give more money. Either way, many Democratic voters will thank Trump. If the bill is not revised to give Americans more money, Congress will become very unpopular. Violence only increases; consider Nashville. At a time when Congress may need to choose the president due to a failed electoral college, Congress needs popularity anywhere it can get it.
Yes, Congress may indeed end up choosing the president. Senators and representatives from any of 18 likely states could easily dispute the electoral college. Then the Senate, led by the man running for Vice President, would oversee the discussion. If discussion delays, the electoral college fails and is no longer relevant. Senators and state delegates in the House, both dominant Republicans, would then have to choose Trump and Pence to avoid political suicide. With Trump having played his recent popularity game over the economic stimulus, things seem to trend in that direction.
Thanks to Trump, Congress has the power to increase spending and choose Trump as the next president, and Congress has such a mandate from the people. But, historically, consider the factor of surprise. History is always full of surprises and unexpected victories. By the expectations of conventional wisdom, which usually leads people to be surprised by reality, Biden’s victory seems too non-surprising not to not happen.
Trump has a realistic path to the presidency. Rules for the electoral college allow for discussion and dispute which could delay finalization of the vote past January 18. If Congress has not approved the electoral college vote by then, the electoral college fails and the election defaults to Congress. Then, the Senate chooses the vice president and the House chooses the president by state delegates—of which there are more Republican. At that point, it would be political suicide for even Romney to vote against Trump. All that has to happen is delay in the Senate—something the Senate is very good at when it wants to be. With 18 states having filed a suit with the Supreme Court, such a delay is quite likely.
Far more interesting are the public narratives. All mainstream news, including Fox News, continue to push finality—the idea that the election is over and decided, when it is in fact in dispute and when it has not yet been finalized. The Trump team responds by pushing evidence—strangely changed rules, flagrantly broken rules, and endless testimonies. As a result, Biden voters are being conditioned to believe the election is over while Trump voters are being conditioned to believe it should not be over. The only assurance is limbo.
If Trump wins, the Democratic base is preconditioned for nation-wide meltdown while the Republican base is preconditioned for the in-your-face exhilaration worthy of a Rocky movie ending. That leads to the greatest danger: an overly-trusted Republican Party. That was Trump’s danger from the onset.
The suspicious part is how well the Democrats in Washington played along to make it all possible. Sooner or later, people will figure it out. Some are already starting to.
And so, the crud hits the fan. Elections only work with a consensus of trust. A distrusted election result can’t work; the masses won’t allow it, even if the inaugural ceremonies continue. Neither Trump nor Biden can persist as president past January except in name only. This is how nations split every few centuries. We live to see historic times.
Eighteen states, including Texas, sued the four swing states for illegally changing election rules mid season. If we count the undisputed votes and Republican legislatures of those four states which heard the evidence, that would be twenty-two states for Trump. Twenty-two Democratic states filed to object. If results favor Republicans, the nation is split right down the middle. Each side is convinced it is in the right—Democrats because they saw it on the news—Republicans because they saw it at government hearings which were specifically not on the news. That’s all the reason either side has ever needed to believe anything they believe.
Neither side even tried to persuade the other in a way that could be heard. The news-Democrat side simply asserted a result, marginalizing questions as “atypical”, ignoring the fact that eighteen states can’t be atypical by definition and cannot become atypical by mere assertion. Conservatives and Republican voters argued “evidence” and “rules” after sewing distrust of rules through a century of refusing justice to Democratic voter needs.
Neither side was ever going to concede. The Supreme Court stayed out of it, arguing “lack of standing”. Democratic-run states answered with blanket denial one would expect from China—and it seemed to work on the Supreme Court, though it never works when China does it. With the Senate sending a blistering 83 votes against Trump’s veto promise on a military bill, Republican voters feel betrayed. Surely, the gun-owning Republicans are mulling over multiple militarized responses. Democrats would riot before conceding. If Trump ever does concede, it would indicate he has plans to eventually win by means more formidable than a militarized option. Concession from either side would be fake, indicating hidden danger to come.
Those eighteen states may boycott the electoral college, denying the two-thirds quorum; if they don’t then their lawsuit was only for show. If the Electoral College names Biden, he can rightly be called the “President-Elect” for the first time, even if in question. And, if he gets that title while in question, America will see Conservative rage—and Liberal riots in response—like never before. Liberals aren’t fond of following rules when they lose because the rules are unfair against them all too often. Lawless Liberals are somewhat common; lawless Conservatives are a bigger league altogether. God forbid that Liberals break enough rules to convince Conservatives to stop following their own rules. That is a wrath none could prepare for. There is no peaceful resolution, but at least Americans all agree on the depth of our long-neglected problems.
Elections are not decided by news desks. They are decided by the electoral college, which meets in mid December. Electors sent there are chosen by the State based on election results certified by each State. If an election is in doubt, the decision goes to State legislatures, pursuant to the Electoral Count Act (1887) and a Supreme Court interpretation from Bush v Gore (2000).
Judges don’t decide whether election results are certifiable; State legislatures do. The burden is not on the Trump campaign to prove vote fraud to judges. The burden is on the polling stations to prove there was no fraud to State legislatures.
Right now, five key states are in severe doubt concerning polling credibility: Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia. Republicans control the legislatures of all five. And, Trump just backed McDaniel to continue as RNC chair. Perhaps she will have some sway over those Republican legislatures.
Republicans don’t have an option. Gross suspicions of election cheating have caused the Republican base to turn away from Fox News to Newsmax. News networks wouldn’t call Georgia or North Carolina, even though it looked long past the time it seemed reasonable. To Republicans, this is a conspiracy to institute nation-wide political machines, which they can’t accept. In their minds, if they let Democrats steal this election, there will be no more fair elections, and the only way to escape would be an armed revolution. There is no scenario in which the Republican base allows Trump to lose. If Trump gave in, they would turn against him also.
Democratic voters aren’t about to tuck tail and turn. Emboldened by a news industry, that insists on its own ability to declare an election outcome, the DNC base only builds for greater disappointment. They don’t have the power to decide disputed elections, but they think they do. They haven’t already won, but they think they have. Note cautiously, the media does not hope to sway the election outcome, but to sway a revolt for when Trump inevitably wins—a revolt from, of all people, the gun haters.
In order for Trump to lose, he would have to bow out, then Republican voters would take up arms and the RNC, seen as an obstruction, would be dissolved by its base. When he does win, Democrats voters will riot. In either scenario, we are looking at martial law in the coming weeks and months.
But, the question remains: Why was there such gross election ambiguity specifically in states with Republican-controlled legislatures? It’s almost as if the entire election controversy were staged. But, the reason remains yet to be seen, unless the answer is: China.
Socialists worldwide claimed Trump would be bad for America and predicted his loss in the election; Russia probably would think the same and try to help him. If Russia aimed to help Trump, that would be yet one more mistake on behalf of the global club of socialists—both official and unofficial. There is no news here, though many report it as such.
The faithless elector movement has already found it’s scrutiny, already fulfilling Symphony’s prediction from just last week. Their point man is reported as a would-be fraud. And, the dwindling movement itself does not include most of the people who voted against Trump. These are only the few who don’t know how to accept loss.
The anti-Trump alarmism has an interesting history since his announcement to run. Trump makes public comments that reflect a private self-talk of “no excuse, no whining, and know which battles you’ll lose”; his opponents lost, don’t seem to know it, make progressively-more dramatic excuses of how it’s “someone else’s fault” (this time the Russians), and won’t stop whining. They seem to follow the Kübler-Ross five-stages of grief. This current suspicion of the Russians has a few contradictions…
In the “election hack” narrative, no one claims that votes were directly altered. Though, precincts in Wisconsin had more Republican votes than registered voters and Democratic precincts in Detroit had something similar. Both parties can thank Hillary for exposing those precincts in her generous reverence for honesty—but, we don’t hear much thanks.
The purported “bias” in the leaked-hacked info. implies that an unbiased leak would have been preferable. And, it ignores the reversed bias from the American media, not to mention its failure to recognize the use of “fear marketing” from the Trump opposition.
Moreover, the clearer influence of Russian propaganda has always been in sectors of education, where the Constitution is attacked, turning points in American history are left out, and Communism is touted as an ideal theory. Those who opposed Trump seem to agree with one or more of those talking points, but only seem concerned as if Russia wanted to pick and choose candidates rather than sowing doubt of the entire process itself; and they certainly show no concern for the Russian influence in their own ideology. The Russian-conspiracy theorists should suspect themselves most of all—and they will, sooner or later.
Hillary’s involvement in a bid to recount the election results will lead to her indictment. Before, her indictment was in question. Perhaps Trump would be “magnanimous” and not persecute his political opponent. That would make sense since political retribution is a can of worms that few want to open—except perhaps Hillary. Then again, no one is sure what she wants from this post-concession recount.
Chris Wallace proved his dated journalism nose once again; he asked the wrong candidate about accepting election results. He really expected the tables to be reversed. He questioned Trump based on his speculation of the vote rather than on the character of the candidates.
Of course Hillary would contest the results after she conceded to them. From her retributive, venomous, retaliatory mode of operation—even with every indication of magnanimity from Trump—she thought surely she would be indicted because that’s what she would do. While some speculate that Hillary hopes to sow doubt about Trump’s legitimacy and stir chaos in the nation, she’s just a wolf trapped in a corner who doesn’t seem to know that she is driving nails into her own political coffin.
Michigan and Wisconsin both could see intervention from their own legislatures and State Supreme Courts. The States could determine that the request for a recount came too late to be completed before the electoral college meets. The US Supreme Court would be divided and bounce decisions back to the States. Other speculations include Congress choosing the President and Vice President, but it is doubtful to even get that far. The States are about to display their power. America’s adversaries will quietly watch and that will make them respect America more than anything we will read in the headlines over the next eight years.
Fidel Castro died at 90 years old. He even said goodbye at the most recent Communist Party Congress. Cubans celebrated in the streets of Miami while Black Lives Matter mourned.
The hashtag #Calexit would be #Texit if the election had gone the other way. California and Texas already did secede once. Of course Washington would do something to stop it, we wouldn’t be dealing with Obama anymore. Secession is now on the table for real, thank you Californians. It’s only a matter of time. These are bad days for globalism.
Reince Priebus and Stephen Bannon will be great in the White House. Trump is the man who led and starred one of NBC’s most profitable shows, The Apprentice. He knows who to hire. This man, accused of being a woman-hating, homophobic racist has already hired KellyAnne Connway, Peter Thiel, and Dr. Ben Carson. The Anti-Trumpist retort is that they are examples of Trump operating in “rare form”.
Are the protesters in as much danger of Trump as they protest to being? Will Trump retaliate against NBC and other venomous enemies with an onslaught of IRS audits and the like? Historically, no because Trump is not a Democrat.
“Experts” in other countries, disparaged Democrat voters, members from the four corners of Congress, and media talking heads from the four corners of the moon—even Fox News Sunday and debate host extraordinaire Christopher Wallace—did not predict the 2016 US election outcome; Pacific Daily Times Editor in Chief and writer-narrator of this editorial, Jesse Steele, did in early February. The most widely-known prediction of Trump’s victory before Jesse Steele’s was from Richard Nixon’s wife, though Mrs. Nixon didn’t make a map.
A few polls got it right. Khali at Trafalgar polling found a way to get the truth from “shy” Trumpist Conservatives who think they can’t tell the truth to pollsters: “Who is your neighbor voting for?” It’s interesting how we tend to think that our neighbors think how we think.
In their ever-shifting opinions and speculations about Trump, so-called “experts” of 20/20 hindsight who park their pedestals among aftermath should cite their more accurate election maps published before February. As usual, if you read it here, you read it here first, at Pacific Daily Times.
The divide in America is between the archetypal city mice and country mice. The country mice need land to make things in factories and grow food on farms; the city mice manage the market’s business on less and more costly land, all the while consuming the fat of the land they rarely visit. Like a saddle and a horse, a saddle helps, but bareback is an option while a saddle ridden on the fence goes nowhere.
The two are naturally polarized and out of touch with each other; they have formed political right and left extremes. The country mice want production and renaissance while the city mice want fashion and manners. Being a “moderate” in the city-country conflict surmounts to mixing coffee with orange juice at breakfast—both are great, but they need different cups.
As for the controversy of the electoral college, it resurfaces in every presidential election as if it has just surfaced for the first time: It’s a newbie voter’s topic. The basic purpose is, in the event of a very close margin of city mice v country mice, the country mice will win because the country can’t function without the rural backbone. This is why a State gets just two extra votes just for being a State, and all that comes with it. This is why Alaska contributed 3 Republican votes, not just 1, and Hawaii and New Hampshire contributed each 4 Democrat votes, not just 2. That said, there have been no certified reports on how much of Clinton’s 260k vote lead came from illegal voting. We do know that Democrats openly object to measures that prevent illegal voting while moderate Republicans claim to oppose illegal voting, with little or no action to back up that claim. The policies, both actual and claimed, of both Democrats and Republicans brought the vote to what it was.
Pro-Lifers should be glad abortion will likely end. That was the biggest and most lasting direct result of this election, which many people have not realized, yet if ever. Perhaps Religious Right Conservative Christian Anti-Trumpist lamenters could learn a thing or two about gratitude from Liberal Democratic Anti-Trumpist protesters. Trump has managed to inspire shared hashtags for these Conservatives and Liberals. They might actually talk to each other now. That could be a longer-lasting, less direct result of this election. The way has been paved for The People’s Party.
The massive protests against Trump are the result of the country’s public education policies since the 1990’s. Students are given a trophy for showing up and recognition of winners and losers in sports is outright persecuted. Nannying and sissifying young people left the generation of first-time voters ill-prepared to deal with loss. While neither Conservative nor Liberal youth have had much experience training them to deal with the emotions of “losing” something, Conservative parents were more likely to prepare them at home for the things that school neglected. If nothing else, Conservative first-time voters had their first eight years of voting to learn to deal with loss; the Democrats did not.
There would have been protests of some kind either way. These protests are more of a “nasty” nature, involving destruction of private property with little legislative result. Had the election gone the other way, riots would have been replaced with larger, more peaceful, and yet more effective protests. Secession petitions would have been legitimate enough to provoke Congress, involve the Supreme Court, and surely military action, citing Clinton corruption and excess executive orders that Trump promised to undo. This election was somewhat of a “deal”: Get back inside the Constitutional boundaries or rip it up; the electors chose to get back inside the lines, for now. California and Texas will secede eventually, but that will require the “don’t get mad, get busy” action of sobriety and will happen only after elections and wars yet to come.
Contrary to some opinions floating around the “media-osphere”, there actually is a Constitutional basis for secession, though not stated directly. The Federal government is obligated to repel invasion, according to original Article IV. If the US is ever invaded, State secession will be as Constitutional as it is inevitable. The topic California brought up implies a warning to US enemies: Invading the United States at home would not be an act of war against one country, but against fifty. While secession is coming, let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves. The president elect still has not taken office, the electoral college has not voted, and the results of many States have not yet been certified by their election authorities. While some things are foreseeable from the vantage point of history, history informs foresight while the two remain separate.
The earthquakes had the final and poetic word after “US election week”: Both sides of the Pacific were shocked and shaken, and, more poetically, the shock in Christchurch started a tsunami.
