Archive for January, 2024

Trump Haters Are Wasting My Cycles

Saturday, January 13th, 2024

So Chris Christie is out. I’m amazed he lasted this long. He never had anything to sell, not one single thing, besides “I hate Trump.” And as a champion of that particular movement, he is also just the latest piece of evidence that they’re like mosquitos — annoying, quite memorable, in-your-face at the worst time, ruining things that ought to be better than they are, but when measured, perhaps not as numerous as they appear to be.

Just like Congresswoman Cheney, he made it a point to keep his Trump-complaints non-specific, up in the higher altitudes of “wink wink nudge nudge, we all know why we hate him.” Even though we don’t. Details were avoided, for sake of the constant-complainer’s political longevity. And just like with Cheney, over the longer term of time, or even over the not-so-long term of time, this didn’t work. But defeat doesn’t mean disappearance. And I see both Christie and Cheney are keeping it up, like the cartoon coyote who hasn’t yet realized he’s walked beyond the brink and so doesn’t quite yet start falling. Selling more of what didn’t work. “Trump has to go away. I’m not saying why. I know you know I know you know.”

Alright, we’re left with no reason to take this seriously whatsoever. But let’s do it anyway: When we achieve this dream of soundly and finally ejecting Trump so he can never hold any office of trust or honor ever again, that leaves us with…whom? Is Trump so far below the median that, with him gone, our prospects with the remaining immediately brighten? Say it. Form the words. While Kamala is speaking. I really want to know if that’s the position. How incoming-information-averse these haters really are.

No more lying about anything? Tell me that while Joe Biden is telling his tall tale about being a truck driver, or being at Ground Zero the day after 9/11…yet again.

Trump never told me if I like my doctor, I can keep my doctor. There’s a lie that did some real damage, and upon the millions.

All this colluding to get rid of Trump. I thought that was one of the reasons for getting rid of him, the colluding. Nobody colludes, and in secret, quite as exuberantly or energetically as a Trump hater. Collude, collude, collude. So much collusion.

I could ask you directly what your problem really is with him. But I’ve done that already. I just get back this laundry list. It’s not a straight answer, because spewing it, ratcheting down the list from the top item to the bottom one, is part of the mission. It’s not answering my question.

With Trump gone, we’re not exactly left with the cream of the crop. Any reasonable discussion must start there, and all parties must concede this fundamental truth before an earnest exchange of ideas can continue. So, what’s the real beef?

I suppose we’ll never know.

There may be an earnest feeling of discomfort over our recent transition. Back when JFK ran for President and then won, I can see we entered a phase where hopeful and promising presidential candidates ceased to be knowing father-figures, and started to become ideal sons-in-law. The kind of handsome, bright-eyed and well-mannered knight in shining armor a girl would be pleased to bring home to meet Mom and Dad. It was an early expression of female empowerment: We can’t have a woman President yet, but the girls have veto power, because of the males in the running don’t positively impress the wives mothers sisters and daughters, they might as well quit. Our public schoolteachers brainwashed us into thinking that was a good thing. Isn’t it wonderful? Lascivious and ditzy females can alter the course of history without so much as a shred of male cooperation. And look how splendid those male candidates look, with their poofy hair and puffy neckties! Right or wrong, this became the status quo. It’s been the chiseled-in-stone and yet unwritten rule for sixty years now.

Even if you like Trump, he’s not part of this. A girl or woman dating him wouldn’t want take him home to meet the parents. You wouldn’t want to raise your son into this “Didn’t start it, but I’m gonna finish it” attitude, at least, not going around displaying it so brazenly. Running around, all day every day, calling his opponents losers and suckers. As a role model for young people, he’s not ideal, and he is the icon of our transition away from “What a nice young man” presidential candidates.

In that sense, some of the resentment against him may be sincere.

And, magnified by this gossip about how he’s told thousands and thousands of lies. (No, he actually hasn’t.)

They’re wasting my cycles. I have to keep revisiting this question, because they continue to have an effect on things, albeit not nearly as much of an effect as they’d like to have. But they are not, as the young people say, “a thing.” They don’t merit the attention. Every single test they encounter, upon their actual numbers — they fail. Resoundingly, and consistently. They themselves don’t seem to know what drives them. They are eager to impress other Trump haters. And that seems to be most of the source of inertia, maybe all of it.

Absent a straight answer, I have to conclude the real problem is: Too much law and order. People would be going to jail, who belong there, and we don’t want justice there — for whatever reason. They’re our friends, it’s too scary to us to admit the crooks are in charge, etc.

Someone needs to clue the Trump haters in, that it looks like that. It doesn’t look like anything else. They’re certainly not maintaining any sort of minimal standard, of character, honesty, etc. Certainly not that. Their surface appearance is not what they think it is.

And that’s a big part of why they keep losing politically. You can’t win, politically, without maintaining better control over your own appearance on the stage, than what they have. They’re preening to themselves, and themselves only, and they don’t seem to understand what a tiny crowd that is. He’s got enemies just like any candidate has enemies. A few of them are within his own party — and that, too, is true of most other candidates. The evidence says he doesn’t have more of these detractors than most. They’re just pushy and loud. Requesting the attention they’re getting, soliciting it, demanding it, receiving it. Month by month and year after year. But not earning it, in their numbers, or in the thoughtfulness of their never-ending campaign. Not worthy of it.

I’m Going Into 2024, Thinking 2020 Was Rigged

Monday, January 1st, 2024

In 2012, the incumbent President Barack Obama received 65,915,795 votes and His challenger, Mitt Romney, received 60,933,504. That’s a total of 126,849,299.

Four years later, 62,984,828 people voted for Donald Trump, and 65,853,514 voted for Hillary Clinton, which adds up to 128,838,342.

So among just these four candidates, in four years, there was an increase of 1,989,043 votes.

Suppose the increase was the same between 2016 and 2020. That would mean there were 130,827,385 votes legitimately cast between Trump and Biden, right? We can probably believe the 74,223,975 going to Donald Trump were legitimate, because there certainly wasn’t anybody behind the scenes putting thumbs on the scales for his sake. So that would mean Biden legitimately received 56,603,410 votes, which would be less than his “official” take of 81,283,501 by a difference of 24,680,091.

Why should we doubt these twenty-four million?

Three words: Vote by mail. We have a national tragedy of loudmouth people running around talking about how the 2020 election was the most honest in American history, and they have no idea what sort of loopy statistics they’re trying to sell. They have no idea how much the electorate swelled, if you’re buying into the idea that each of Biden’s 81 million votes came from a unique and authorized voter and was entirely legitimate. They don’t know what they’re saying.

The electoral base leaped from 128 million to 155 million? When in the previous four years it swelled modestly from 126 million to 128 million?

The swelling between 2016 and 2020, exceeded the natural swelling between 2012 and 2016…by 1,240 percent?


If you radically change the methods, which we did…China Virus, remember…and then you get radically changed results. Your default premise should be the results had something to do with the methods.

There’s only one way that can happen.

Fraud. Just admit it. Like in all other pursuits where there’s an information asset that has to be safeguarded against bad actors, the threat actors advance their technology and techniques, and the good guys do likewise. You hope the good guys are out in front. But there’s really no reason to assume it.

Especially not here. You’re just hearing from all over the place that you shouldn’t think such things. That’s because you’re hearing from people who liked the official result.