And So It Begins

Like many others, I’m still in a quandary after the election. While the media gushed over how Kamala Harris is a great candidate, her history said the opposite. The election confirmed what most already knew: she was awful.  

Of the seven battleground states, six also had high-profile senate races. Democrats won five out of the six, even though Trump swept those states. This outcome shows people were willing to split their ticket to vote for a Senate Democrat. Maybe some didn’t vote for Harris or Trump. It shows it wasn’t Democrats per se that people didn’t like; it was Kamala Harris. The question remains: why trade the declining Biden for the dead weight of the vice president?

It may surprise some, but Trump plans to fulfill his campaign promises. All the people he has appointed are loyal to him and his agenda. This realization inspires fear and joy, depending on where you stand on the issues. I’m experiencing one and the other.

Continue reading

And So It Ends

I hope to live long enough to read the definitive book explaining how the powers in the Democratic Party brilliantly executed their plan to win the 2024 presidential election up to the end game. Faced with an administration with failing policies led by an increasingly physically failing President, the plan was to secure the weakest opponent. Once accomplished, replace Biden with a bright new face unattached to the administration to carry them to victory. A complaint media would partner in the endeavor.

The planners secured the Republican nomination for the weakest possible opponent, Donald Trump. They focused media attention on Trump by hitting the former president with several novel indictments. It is suitable to punish even political opponents if they break laws; we punish other citizens.

However, most of the cases were questionable rather than airtight. Republicans reacted as intended, with anger and sympathy for their former president. The planners also tried to keep him off the ballot in several places. The obvious unconstitutionality further enraged many in the G.O.P. All the focus on Trump’s court cases sucked all the air out of his primary opponents. Only Nikki Haley lasted through Super Tuesday.

Continue reading

It Gets Worse

It’s hard to believe, but both presidential campaigns keep getting worse. Have we learned anything? As I’ve pointed out in my series, “The Long Journey to More,” settled societies were run by the ruling elites for their benefit, while the masses were left to subsistence. Kings and emperors picked winners and losers. It was better to align with the ruling powers than rock the boat with innovation.

From the Pharaohs in ancient Egypt to Louis the Fourteenth in France, rulers dictated who got what. However, the fifteenth century ushered in changes undermining elite arbitrary authority, resulting in markets, not masters dictating actions. More people participated in making, trading, and benefitting from new goods used in innovative ways. A new system replaced the old great for the few but bare sustenance for most with “More” for those allowed to partake.

Moral philosophers began to take notice. The author of “The Theory of Moral Sentiments” proposed that markets, rather than potentates, making decisions on prices and what to produce and sell would bring widespread benefits. The “invisible Hand” of markets was the moral way to “The Wealth of Nations.” At the time, no one thought of this Scotsman as an “economist” because, in retrospect, he was the father of this “science.” He and his contemporaries thought of Adam Smith only as a philosopher.

Continue reading

 The Mouse Doesn’t Like You

Two takeaways from the debate: Trump is still Trump, and we have irrefutable confirmation the bulk media has crossed over to the dark side. Somewhere along the line, it became part of MAGA dogma that Trump is a great debater. The facts never supported this contention. He lost debates with Hillary Clinton in 2016 and failed to win against Joe Biden in 2020. Trump scored a solid victory in a presidential debate only against a feeble Biden in the recent one. You must return to the Republican primary debates in his first run, where Trump appeared to dominate. However, then he could belittle his opponents on a very crowded stage.

Trump, unprepared and drawn into rehashing his 2020 loss, failed to effectively present his case in a debate ripe with opportunities. On the other hand, Kamala Harris delivered many carefully vague, rehearsed answers, mainly unrelated to the questions asked. Her first question was, “Are you better today than four years ago?”‘ It was left unanswered in favor of a planned opening statement, setting the tone for the night’s rest. The ABC moderators’ failure to follow up and press her for an answer was consistent throughout the debate.

In judging the debate, it’s helpful to note what issues Americans care about most:

Before the event, Trump said Disney’s ABC was biased against him, so why agree to a debate where it might be three against one? Possibly, CNN’s recent Biden-Trump debate gave him a false hope of even-handedness. but that time, Biden’s removal was the target.,not him. It might’ve been hubris; maybe he didn’t comprehend how far Disney would go to ensure a Harris victory. Even though we’ve seen moderator bias in Presidential debates before, such as Candy Crowley erroneously intervening to back Barrack Obama over Benghazi Terrorism, severely damaging Mitt Romney when he was about to win his second straight debate.

Continue reading

Orange Hair Rides To His Little Bighorn

Just like General George Armstrong Custer, known as Yellow Hair to the Cheyenne, led his 7th Calvary to defeat, the Republican’s orange-haired leader ignores all the signs he needs to change his plan. The rash, self-promoting Custer refused to believe his Crow Indian scouts when they told him he was riding into a trap. The overconfident General even divided his forces. The outcome was one of the worst defeats in U.S. military history.

Since April of last year, I’ve been sounding the alarm about a carefully laid election trap for the GOP. The Democrats, through lawfare, managed to secure Trump’s nomination. The weak cases against him garnered sympathy for him and diverted attention from the more viable younger contenders. Lawfare was the Democrats’ tool to handpick their weakest opponent, Trump. Their goal was never to halt him, but quite the opposite.

Now that they secured the feeblest Republican ticket most Democrats could beat, dumping their losers in favor of younger winners is happening. Even with the near miss on Trump’s life holding back calls for Joe to go for a couple of days, the last two weeks have gone as I forecast. The Biden-Harris ticket is now history. As soon as the Republican V.P. nominee was announced, it was just a matter of days.

Somewhere, the trap planners were cheering when Trump selected J.D. Vance. With only a few percentage points apart, the one who can add even a little to the total will win.

Continue reading