Featured Post

The Democrats Resurrect Stalin and Beria

Sitting in my hotel room in Manhattan while the Diplowife and the Diplodaughter spend what's left in my bank account, I was reading a gr...

Monday, November 28, 2016

Tough Times to be a Progressive

Progs are having a hard time with their narrative.

Events, i.e., facts, conspire against them.

Let's start our happy trip with November 8, although we really should start with Brexit (and here), but let me keep it close to home, for now.

Trump won the election for President, "fair-and-square," as once was said in this country. He followed the rules of the game, and won. He has 306 electoral votes; well over the required 270. For those progs and other low-info whiners crying about the popular vote, let me make a couple of points. In our country, the country established way, way back in something called the 18th century by really, really smart and brave Brits, we have a unique system of electing our presidents--and it works.

Our presidential election system has, in effect, 51 elections--46 states, four Commonwealths, and one District of Columbia. Each one of those "little" elections has electors assigned to it equal to the number of representatives it has in both houses of Congress; each state (in general) grants it electors to the winning candidate within its boundaries. Since we currently have 538 members in that Congress, a winning candidate needs 270 electoral votes to win. The idea of the now much-maligned electoral college is to serve as part of the intricate system of checks-and-balances that this band of really, really smart Brits instituted to avoid tyrannies by either a minority OR by a majority. Everybody gets a voice, regardless of whether they are big or little. Dear progs, please look at the UN that you love so much: every country there gets the same vote regardless of size: Luxembourg gets the same vote as China. Should we change that?

The gross popular vote is irrelevant. Back on October 28, 2014, I wrote a piece about how the Democrats would try to skew the popular vote. All that came to pass, and in spades. We had a President, no less, calling for undocumented people to vote and assuring them that there would be no legal consequences; Hillary's campaign, of course, included "outreach" to the "undocumented" and even hired "dreamers" for that outreach: All part of an effort, as I wrote, to make citizenship meaningless. I noted that we would see demands for citizenship as,
a smokescreen for electoral fraud. Citizenship is under assault from another direction, as well. Voting I.D. Yes, that is the main weapon being used and the one which reveals what is really going on. Our Attorney General Eric "Fast and Furious" Holder tells us that his agency will be very vigilant re attempts by states to use voter identification requirements to "suppress" turn-out. The DOJ has been filing lawsuits against states with voter I.D. requirements (here and here, for example.) The justification? The progs conjure up an imaginary poor rural black too stupid, too poor, and living in such a remote place that he or she just cannot afford or otherwise get valid state identification. Nonsense. Many states offer free identification cards, and, more important, poor, middle class, and rich black people have valid identification documents for driving, buying property, getting bank loans, voting, etc., just like everybody else. Progs have a Hollywood version of race in America which they sell to the willing media, and seek to turn into public policy.
Easily some three to four million illegal and legal aliens voted with an additional 2-4 million dead and multiple voters. Those votes went to . . . surprise ... the Democrats. I love how they are now criticizing Trump for saying this "without' evidence.  For years, the progs have conducted a successful campaign to destroy the evidence, and now they point to the lack of it. Nice try. No cigar.

Despite all that, the progs still lost. So now we see calls for a recount by "third party" Castro-admirer Jill Stein but only in states critical for Trump's victory. She has mysteriously raised millions of dollars for this effort, and has, it seems, roped in Hillary into backing it--assuming Hillary wasn't behind it with her friend Soros from the start. All part of the effort to delegitimize Trump as much as possible before inauguration. It will fail. The progressive narrative will take another hit.

Speaking of hits, the death of Fidel has shattered yet another icon in the prog pantheon. They can heap all the words of praise they want on the old tyrannical monster, but the fact remains that Cuba is infinitely less free, less prosperous, less happy, and less habitable than it was on January 1, 1959. Once the wealthiest country in Latin America, Castro's Cuba is now among the most irrelevant, poorest and most miserable in the region--although Fidel and family managed to squirrel away hundreds of millions of dollars and properties for themselves. Not long from now even the dodgy statistics produced about Cuba's miraculous literacy rates and its stunningly low infant mortality rates will be shown for the lies they are. I remember when the same stuff was said about Romania. Facts will not support the prog narrative.

As I wrote this, news reports of a "mass" shooting on an Ohio university campus had been coming in. The progs, including the execrable Tim Kaine, came out with their tweets and press releases blaming Ohio's "lax" gun laws for this "shooting." Lots of tweets implying white male, Trump supporting racists as the shooter(s). OOOPS! The only gun involved, it turns out, was in the hands of a good guy, a campus cop, who shot the thug dead with three well-placed rounds. The thug used a car and a machete to hurt several people (exact number is changing).

Oh yes, just by the way, the thug turned out to be a recently arrived and "vetted" Muslim Somali refugee . . . now we will see the search for a "motive" and demands for solidarity with the oppressed and fearful Somali community. Let's help the cops and guess what the motive might be . . .

Tough days to be a prog . . . love it.

19 comments:

  1. One's heart bleeds for them.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hellary won the popular vote by say two million votes but she won California by 3.5 million votes. This means that she lost the popular vote in the rest of the country (not counting illegals). Perhaps we should appoint her president of California?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That would so serve them right.

      Delete
    2. They have Brown. They couldn't do much worse.

      Delete
  3. Progressives...that is really an odd term for them. The term could be "repetitives" because they only repeat throughout history. Same m/o, same promises, same outcomes, same excuses.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'Progressives' is quite an apt term, since these people believe in the Marxist axiom that the inevitable end point of all societies is Communism, and that Capitalism will be replaced by Socialism which will be replaced by Communism, forever. Progressive is a way of telling you that they plan to destroy our current capitalist system and then socialism will magically rise out of its ashes, instead of a repressive dictatorship (or a Clinton Dynasty). The two main problems is that the long march to Communism is not inevitable, and secondly the only way to maintain Communism once introduced is to maintain a Fascist police state - and even then this eventually fails.

      Karl Marx was quite peeved that the industrial revolution seemed to stall the supposed inevitable uprising of the proletariat by raising the living standards of everyone, and giving them a stake in the capitalist society. However, this did not deter the communists who even today believe in this inevitable progression; hence the name 'Progressives'.

      Delete
  4. Instead of your "Luxembourg gets the same vote as China" example, you should use one that the lefties will grasp emotionally. You should use "Cuba gets the same vote as the United States."

    ReplyDelete
  5. Speaking of Jill Steins recount...Pennsy came out today and mentioned the deadline to file recounts was 21 November...a week ago. Not sure what game the Lib/Progs were trying to setup, but they may have just encountered an epic fail.

    ReplyDelete
  6. To her credit..our female Chief of Police..did not come out and say..we see no evidence of it being related to terrorism..she said...it probably was!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dunno. America is still in hock up to the eyeballs to the heirs of Mao Zedong.

    ReplyDelete
  8. O Schadenfreude, o Schadenfreude
    How delicious you taste!
    You're sweet not only in the election time,
    No, also for the next four years watching the tears.
    O Schadenfreude, o Schadenfreude
    How delicious you taste!

    ReplyDelete
  9. A question regarding your comment "Easily some three to four million illegal and legal aliens voted with an additional 2-4 million dead and multiple voters. Those votes went to . . . surprise ... the Democrats." What's your source(s) for this? I haven't been following events closely the last week, and I cannot find anything on my normal sites.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are lots of studies on this. You can start here: http://dailycaller.com/2014/10/24/study-non-citizens-are-voting-and-could-decide-the-election/

      Delete
    2. Here too: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/11/28/illegal-voters-true-the-vote-supports-trumps-claim/. True The Vote was attacked without "reason" by the Obama Administration as per Congressional hearings, so they must have credibility.

      Delete
  10. So we will have, maybe, a 3 state recount of votes, not an investigation of illegal voting. Yes, we need one as well as voter ID in all states as in Canada and Mexico, comparison of voters/registrations to deaths and those motor voters registrations of illegals compared to the registration/voter rolls.
    The SCOTUS approved the Indiana voter ID law as constitutional so all states should pattern a law under their's. Also there should be a way to compare registrations from state to state and precincts with-in states. In MD in 2012 the Democratic candidate for 1st District representative was arrested for voting in two different states only because someone in the Democratic party reported her. The poster lady for the Democrats, when going to the SCOTUS to fight voter ID, was found to have voted in two states. Just comparing the Florida voter rolls to that of NY & NJ would catch, IMO, many illegal voters.
    So if there is any potential problem, as it seems with the state controlled voting system, just from these examples, why not implement a few verification methodologies.

    ReplyDelete
  11. http://janderresearch.blogspot.in

    Pennsylvania attorney explains why Stein can't get a recount there (deadline was in Nov). All she can do is contest the election, which goes before a judge and requires voters with proof of irregularities.

    And WI has refused to hand count the ballots for her. But this will put money in the coffers for her to make another run somewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Ms Stein would seem to have destroyed her reputation. The Clintons pollute everything they touch.

    ReplyDelete
  13. A few weeks ago my dishwasher broke. The repairman required a photo ID to accept my payment.
    I sure hope none of these disenfranchised poor people need their dishwasher fixed because out here in the real world you need a photo ID.

    ReplyDelete