Subscribe to the IHARE Blog

Democrats Win Gold Medal for Skating on Thin Ice

Parental Love in Trumpican America (Getty Images)

The Democratic Party has won the gold medal for skating on thin ice. This coveted medal is awarded to the political party that best jeopardizes its political opportunity through risky and dangerous actions. A review of recent elections and gauging the present temperature for future elections shows that the Democratic Party right now is nowhere near where it expected to be.

BACKGROUND

For what seems like decades now, the Politically Corrected People (PCPs) have been touting the coming demographic deluge. This change in the composition of the American people would overwhelm the existing voting patterns. It would create a large Democratic voting bloc for perpetuity. The Democrats would own the Presidency and the Congress. The language and laws of the PCPs would dominate the land.

The PCPs ignored that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. In practice what this meant was that the PCPs totally terrorized the weeny party of stupid. Republicans became the party of people scared for themselves, their family, their communities, and the country they patriotically claim they love. LBJ is remembered among other things for having lost the Confederacy to the Republicans in the 1960s with his civil rights legislation. Similarly the PCPs will be remembered among other things for having lost the northern white ethnics without college to the Republicans.

The Republican Party itself is not the party the PCPs confronted when they first launched their campaign to remake America according to their values. In 2008, Sarah Palin as the Vice-Presidential candidate represented the transition in process to the new party. The 2016 election sealed the deal. In American political history, the Access Hollywood tape will mark the official death of the Republican Party and the birth of the Trumpican Party. The battle lines for America’s Third Civil War had been drawn.

Now it is only a question of which side will win. Will victory be Taliban-style where one side controls the entire country and the losers pay the price? Will victory be Israeli-style where one side dominates but the other side retains some modicum of control in designated areas? Or will the victory be like the longtime-proposed but never realized Two-State vision where each side independently governs its own half? At this point in time, there is no way to know for sure what will happen. I reiterate my long-standing contention the 250th anniversary of the birth of the United States may not be for the country as we know it today.

2016 ELECTION

The 2016 presidential election was the first time when the PCPs made a difference. In that election the famous Democratic Blue Wall cracked. The Democrats lost in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. That was not supposed to happen.

For Democrats, it was easy to find scapegoats. Putin had interfered. The Democratic candidate was fundamentally flawed though well-qualified and the winner of the popular vote. The traditional Democratic voters who abandoned ship just as Confederates started to do post-LBJ were racist. No need to worry, the expected demographic deluge would sweep the Democrats to victory in the elections to come without them. Cooler heads recognized the impact the PCPs were having on the Democratic vote. Still overall, the Democrats saw the election as the last gasp of a fading former majority who soon would be confined the dustbin of political history. After all, in the era of Baby Boomer presidencies, the Republican Party only won the popular vote once in 2004. Sooner rather the later, the Republican ability to draw an inside straight in the Electoral College would cease and the demographic deluge would prevail.

2018 ELECTION

The mid-term election favored the out-of-power party. Democrats did well in the 2018 elections. The PCP impact seemed muted. Democrats focused on moderate candidates often with military or intelligence service background. They won in districts they had not won before or had not won recently. The trend seemed to be going their way. Democrats had great expectations for the 2020 elections not just for the presidency but in the House and the Senate.

Meanwhile the PCPs had mutated into a more virulent strain. A new word had entered the American political vocabulary – Woke. This strain of PCP has proved extraordinarily effective in alienating white people and, even worse for Democrats, other people as well. The Democrats had counted on the demographic deluge sweeping them to power. However, the taken-for-granted unity of all the new immigrants to the United States and all the colors of people included in the mushrooming of Woke acronyms can no longer be taken for granted.

The first crack in the Woke unity occurred with The New York Times 1619 Project. For the Woke, the casting of July 4, 1776, as a day of infamy and not celebration which should be replaced by 1619 was a dream come true. Perhaps the reaction was not quite as stark as I am depicting it here, but the groundwork had been laid. The problem was that many of the people in the demographic deluge actually were proud to be Americans, wanted to live the American Dream, and could not have cared less about 1619 which often was meaningless to them. If the weeny party of stupid ever caught on to these developments, the Democrats would be in big trouble. Meantime, it was becoming the Diversity Party of “all race, all the time,” and “you are your hyphen.”

2020 ELECTION

With the 2020 election, all did not work out as the Democrats had hoped for. Yes, Democrats won back Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Yes, they won Arizona and Georgia. Joe Biden not only won the popular vote, he won the Electoral College vote and by the same “landslide” as in 2016. Actually, he did even better since he did not lose any defector votes when the Electors voted.

However, elsewhere the Democrats did not fare as well. Particularly in the House. Where the Democrats expected to increase the margin, instead they barely held on. Democrats did regain the Senate. But it was real touch-and-go with some nail-biting squeakers weeks after Election Day that pushed them to a tie.

So where was the demographic deluge? We are now entering the decade which Democrats expected to own. Perhaps the Census results will force a shift that even gerrymandering cannot overcome. In the meantime, they are fighting for their lives even excluding the voter suppression and rigged counting that will transfer the attempted steal of the election by the incumbent loser in 2020 into a guaranteed victory in battleground states in 2024.

What happened?

“Defund the police.”

If there had been no coronavirus, the odds are that Donald Trump would have been re-elected. How is that possible?

Even with the coronavirus, if he had worn a mask, faked compassion, and followed Fauci instead of attacking him, the odds are he would have been re-elected. How is that possible?

Joe Biden is the only Democrat who could have defeated him in 2020. How is that possible?

Joe Biden probably is the only Democrat who could defeat him in 2024. How is that possible?

Meanwhile the Woke continue unabated in their quest to alienate white voters and elect Donald Trump. With 1619, critical race theory, systematic white racism, and white privilege, the Woke have perfected the ability to maximize the people who will turn away from the Democratic Party. Veteran Democratic operatives have caught on to the damage the Woke are doing to the Democratic brand, but they are powerless to stop it. Foxhub will make sure that the Woke and not Joe Biden is the face of the Democratic Party and in the culture wars that is a powerful weapon.

LOOKING AHEAD

The demographic deluge may take some odd twists. At some point even Trumpicans may realize that Hispanic white are white and that the term non-Hispanic white is a con to limit the number of white people in America. If the same standards were applied to non-German white, non-Celtic white, non-Latin white, and non-Slavic white, then the number of white people in the United States would be very few indeed. If that is what the Democrats are counting on, they are skating on thin ice.

The bipartisan infrastructure bill may be the last of its kind. The Republicans who have posed as TRINOs (Trumpicans in name only) are retiring. The Trumpicans who enter Congress do not know how to legislate or care to. They are performers who count their victories in Foxhub appearances and not legislation passed. They are not even interested in bringing home the bacon and do not know how the sausage is made.

Joe Biden is governing and running on obsolete models. “It’s the economy stupid” is dead. In the culture wars, bipartisan legislation is meaningless. Did anyone seriously think that masks would be weaponized when the coronavirus hoax first occurred? Did anyone seriously think that the vaccine would be weaponized and people would demand the right to die? (They are lucky the coronavirus is not small pox or the bubonic plaque.) Did anyone seriously think that masks would be weaponized again and even more virulently after the vaccine was distributed?

Even death cannot change the minds of Trumpicans, not even the death of their children. This reaction shows that “It’s the culture wars, stupid” trumps all other considerations. If the Woke define the Democratic Party, then the Party is in deep trouble even if the demographic deluge does occur.

The Texas Secession: Legally Dividing America

Why he fights so hard

This report on America’s ongoing Third Civil War is being conducted through The Atlantic time capsule issue from December 2019 entitled: “How to Stop a Civil War.” The initial blog covered Editor Jeffrey Goldberg’s explanation for the issue and David Frum’s Dispatch from the electoral front-lines as he saw it back in 2019. The world has changed a lot since then.

Moving though the magazine, the next article is “The Secessionist” by Graeme Wood. It was based on interviews with Daniel Miller, the leader of the Texas Nationalist Movement. He wanted to divorce Texas from the Union once and for all. Now here we are a year later and the called for secession has moved from a magazine article to a national event. The change now has been the extension for the call for a single state to a broader secession involving all the states that had joined in the unsuccessful coup to steal the 2020 presidential election.

In The Atlantic article, Wood cites a claim of membership of 300,000 for the Texas Nationalist Movement. That seems like a significant number. The goal was for there to be a referendum in Texas on secession. Miller called the movement “Texit” based on the action in Britain. Left unmentioned were two related possibilities:

1. a referendum by the other 49 states on whether they (we) want to kick Texas out of the country regardless of how Texas voted.
2. dividing the state into the portions that wanted out from the portions that wanted in somewhat as Virginia had divided at the onset of the Second Civil War into West Virginia and Virginia.

If option #2 is taken, then even if portions of Texas vote to secede, the pro-American citizens can remain part of the country. That way, there could two Texases: one an independent country and one a state in the United States. There was no indication what Miller thought about these options.

Miller proposed a new country which would be the tenth largest economy in the world. He favored a cordial uncoupling with a largely undefended border with the United States (no mention of a wall with Mexico). He expected that the border between the United States and Texas would be like that between the United States and Canada. The key would be the independence of Texas where it would now be in charge of its own political decisions. And it would accept the consequences of those decisions as well.

Miller claims the right of self-determination. It is a right the United States supposedly supports in locations throughout the world. Now it is time to do so at home. He feels that if Americans see that the second largest state in the country declares that it was participating in the union under protest that the request could not be ignored. Apparently he is anticipating if not a 100% Texan support for secession at least a landslide. There is no indication in the article in what if any is his cutoff point for secession. As noted above, what if self-determination for a significant number of people means they want to remain American. Miller did not address this issue in the article although it is possible he has elsewhere.

As mentioned, this article was last December. What has happened this December? First the Texas Attorney General led the unsuccessful coup attempt to overturn the presidential election of 2020. This action does not comport with Miller’s expression of seceding because he does not want Texas to be governed by others. Now the Texas Attorney General was seeking to tell four other states what to do. How would Miller like it if other states petitioned the Supreme Court for Texas and other states to end voter suppression, end gerrymandering, and end the one drop-off location per county for early voters as a violation of the civil rights of Texans? I suspect Miller would not like such interference in Texas affairs even as his state sought unsuccessfully to interfere in the voting of other states.

Following the decision of the Supreme Court, the Texas GOP acted

Austin, TX, Release: December 11, 2020. For Immediate Release

Below is Chairman Allen West’s statement regarding the decision by the Supreme Court to dismiss Texas’ constitutionally legitimate and critical lawsuit.

“The Supreme Court, in tossing the Texas lawsuit that was joined by seventeen states and 106 US congressman, has decreed that a state can take unconstitutional actions and violate its own election law. Resulting in damaging effects on other states that abide by the law, while the guilty state suffers no consequences. This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable. This decision will have far-reaching ramifications for the future of our constitutional republic. Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution.”

The Texas GOP will always stand for the Constitution and for the rule of law even while others don’t.

This is not the place to attempt to unravel the workings of the mind of Allen West or the place he is trying to carve out for himself in Texas politics. So far I am not aware of Miller or any Texas officials jumping on the Texas secession bandwagon either alone or with the other “law-abiding states.”

Still there are consequences to voicing out loud thoughts you never should have had in the first place. For example, Rush Limbaugh said the “US is ‘trending towards secession’ and there can’t be ‘peaceful coexistence’ between conservatives and liberals. It can’t go on this way. There cannot be a peaceful coexistence of two completely different theories of life.” Immediately afterwards he was forced to backtrack his comments. Limbaugh pretended he was echoing other people’s opinions rather than advocating for secession himself. It is quite possible he was a victim of his own rash impulsiveness. He just blurted out what felt good without thinking of the consequences just like the impulsive President.

While what Miller advocates is not significant, when the GOP Chair of a major state voices secession talk, it is more serious. Don’t be surprised to quietly see him disappear after the New Year.

The Supreme Court has punctured the hot-air balloons of the hothead traitors. The backlash has already started. The Orlando Sentinel has apologized for endorsing one of the Trump Traitors in the recent election:

We had no idea, had no way of knowing at the time that Walz was not committed to democracy… During our endorsement interview with the incumbent congressman, we didn’t think to ask, “Would you support an effort to throw out the votes of tens of millions of Americans in four states in order to overturn a presidential election and hand it to the person who lost…Our bad.

The paper vowed to ask such questions in the future.

Rep. Paul Mitchell, Michigan, has left the Republican Party. He was retiring so it doesn’t amount to much.

Smartmatic, the voting technology company that has been attacked by the various Trump networks has struck back. It “demands a full and complete retraction of all false and defamatory statements and reports published by Fox News. This retraction must be done with the same intensity and level of coverage that you used to defame the company in the first place.” Obviously that is not going to happen. Smartmatic is reserving its legal right to pursue possible defamation claims against Fox News, One America News, and Newsmax. There is a financial price to pay for simply making things up unless you are the President of the United States. How many pardons will have to be issued to protect his networks?

Now suppose in 2022, you are the daughter of the Sore Loser and you are asked in your Senate race: “Do you think Joe Biden got away with a rigged election in 2020?” How will you answer that? “What did you do to stop the attempted coup?” How will you answer?

The shell-shocked Trump Traitors who are in silence now will not be able to remain in silence forever. They can expect their efforts to overturn the election will be part of the attack on them in the 2022 elections. Representative Adam Kinzinger who did not participate in the attempted coup, instead tweeted:

[T]he Supreme Court is not part of the deep state… Complaining and bellyaching is not a manly trait, it’s actually sad. Real men accept a loss with grace.

Our immature-child President is not a real man and cannot accept a loss with grace. Instead America’s biggest baby has put all his children who want to be Senators and/or President on the spot. He has put Mike “sold his soul” Pence, Mike “sold his soul second Trump term” Pompeo, Nikki “sold her soul” Haley, and Ted “sold his soul” Cruz on the spot as well. What will they say about their failure to resist the attempted coup in 2020 or even to abet it? What will they say about their willingness to accept the vote in 2024?

The irony of the secession talk of like-minded states is that the Sore Loser would be perfectly willing to accept the United States dividing into two if he could be President for life in one half and there was no extradition to the other half.

When Did You First Know Individual #1 Would Reject the 2020 Results If He Lost?

Will Robert Mueller Be Our John HancocK? (Image via Everett Historical / Shutterstock)

Eight months ago on September 7, 2018, I posted:

Suppose the very stable genius is wrong about the red wave. Suppose the Democrats win control of the House. Suppose the Democrats act on that basis and investigate all the items on the Republican hit list of potential problems where they are at risk. Will the President honor the election results? If a blue wave puts Democrats in charge will the President of the United States honor the results or will he demand a full investigation into the rigged results?

Suppose the very stable genius is wrong about 2020 (assuming he is still in office and chooses to run again)? Will the President honor the election results? Will the President leave the White House voluntarily? Will he demand a full investigation into the rigged results? Will he remain in the White House until the investigation by his Attorney General (not a stupid Southerner) is completed?

The big change since that prediction has been the replacement of the Attorney General with His Roy Cohn (HRC). With HRC in position, the chances of an aggressive assault on the rule of law increased substantially (Rule of Law: George Washington, Nimrod, and Today).

Then on March 17, 2019, I posted the following after the testimony of Michael Cohen (with a change to “Individual #1):

INDIVIDUAL #1 WON’T LEAVE THE WHITE HOUSE VOLUNTARILY

Back on September 7, 2018, I wrote [see above]

Those of you who read this blog, may I have thought I was off my rocker. I am pleased to note that five months later the Fixer, who well knows the personality of Individual #1 and what he is capable of, raised the exact same concerns in his Congressional testimony. There was not the chance to resolve this issue in the 2018 elections since the Democratic tidal wave was so huge. Even for someone living in an alternate reality there are limits as to how many Congressional districts can be contested. The situation is quite different at the presidential level.

Suppose in 2020, the Democratic candidate wins by the same small margin as the 306 electoral vote landslide in 2016? How many states would need to be contested to switch the national results? At this point it is impossible to know. Indeed we may never know if the margin is comparable to the Congressional vote in 2018. An almost 9% spread is difficult to finesse to an Electoral College victory.

There may be a preview of the 2020 crisis with his tax returns. Individual #1 will not voluntarily release his tax returns. It does not matter how the Democrats submit their requisition, he will not honor it. If his court rules in his favor, then the issue ends there. If the Supreme Court also has a traitor and the ruling is against Individual #1 he will not honor it. Instead he will claim Executive Privilege and that the Court has no authority over him. What will the Supreme Court do then? Or to update Andrew Jackson: “John Roberts has made his decision; now let him enforce it.”

Now we have the May 4, 2019, interview of Nancy Pelosi with the New York Times. It’s déjà vue September 7, 2018, all over again.

Let’s begin with the Congressional election. Pelosi’s concerns mirror what I had written.

Few people outside Ms. Pelosi’s inner circle were aware of how worried she was that Mr. Trump would try to stop the opposition party from taking control of the House unless the Democrats’ victory was emphatic enough to be indisputable.

It is mind-boggling that everyone in the Democratic Party and all their talking-head spokespeople could not figure this out for themselves. This failure to recognize what should have been taken for granted exposes that the Democrats still did not understand their adversary.

“If we win by four seats, by a thousand votes each, he’s not going to respect the election. He would poison the public mind. He would challenge each of the races; he would say you can’t seat those people.”

Exactly. If you do not understand this then you do not understand Individual #1. This realization should have been a no-brainer.

The same issues apply to the 2020 elections.

In recent weeks, Ms. Pelosi has told associates that she does not automatically trust the president to respect the results of any election short of an overwhelming defeat.

She said the victory in 2020 needed to be by a margin so “big” that it cannot reasonably be challenged.

“We have to inoculate against that, we have to be prepared for that,” as she discussed her concern that Mr. Trump would not give up power voluntarily if he lost re-election by a slim margin.

As it turns out, even with the 9% spread in the 2018 Congressional elections, the margin is quite thin. If those Congressional votes had been presidential votes then the Electoral College results would have been 329-206. Those numbers are deceiving. While Democrats won the House vote in Florida, they lost the state votes for Governor and Senator. That shift leaves an electoral vote even less than the landslide vote in 2016. It is reasonable then to anticipate the possibility of legal challenges in Florida, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan and any other states the Democrats manage to flip including those with Republican governors in control.

Pelosi may only be thinking of the legal challenge. With HRC going full-speed to deny the validity of any such election results, we should recognize that the danger is far more than legal. Certainly HRC will drag out the challenges well beyond what happened in 2000. We can see now in Venezuela what can happen when there are two claimants to the presidency. In Venezuela, the military stands with the loser who rigged the game against democracy. In America, the military should not be expected to act on American soil against Americans. That still leaves open who will physically remove him from the White House, take back the nuclear codes, and prevent him from doing something really dangerous during the interim.

I also wrote on March 17,

Will Individual #1 unleash his muscle in his militias, military, police, and Second Amendment people to protect him from the greatest threat to the United States ever?

How long would it take the Supreme Court to adjudicate all the legal claims filed?

If his Supreme Court betrayed him, would Individual #1 honor its ruling?

Who would actually extract Individual # from the White House?

At that time, I thought his income taxes would be the moment of truth. In anticipation of the refusal to turn them over, I expected the legal battle to reveal whether or not the rule of law prevailed in the nation’s capital or not. Now it seems we may have a quicker example. Will Individual #1 order HRC to refuse to let Mueller testify? We may know the answer fairly soon. If Mueller is ordered not to testify what will he do? We may know that answer fairly soon as well. If Mueller disobeys a direct order from HRC will there be additional civil disobedience?

So exactly how will America celebrate the 250th anniversary of the American Revolution? What will the legacy of our birth be in the present? Who will favor the Patriots? Who will favor the Loyalists? After all, there were mighty fine people on both sides. Will We the People have the experience of directly participating in the revolt against King George III by having one of our own starting May 15 with Robert Mueller in the role of John Hancock? What will happen in 2020? Who knows for sure? But as Pelosi said we have to be prepared.