View Poll Results: Who wins?

Voters
13. You may not vote on this poll
  • The god emperor Donald Trump

    8 61.54%
  • Sleepy Joe Biden

    3 23.08%
  • There won't be an election...

    2 15.38%
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: 2020 POTUS Election: Trump v Biden

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Winterland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Last Online
    13 Hours Ago @ 04:44 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    German; Scot-Irish; Scandinavian
    Country
    Prussia Prussia
    Location
    Coastal region
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Free Lance
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    170
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    177
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    113
    Thanked in
    82 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jagdmesser View Post
    Democrats will vigorously enforce the Fair Housing Act and the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act and hold lenders accountable for discriminatory practices. We will use the federal government to enforce settlements against discriminatory lenders, and require communities to proactively review housing patterns and remedy local policies that have a discriminatory effect.
    We have seen these policies under Bush administration and the first housing bubble. It has been predicted for many years that the elite will displace the white suburbs with minorities as upper class desire to reclaim certain cities for work proximity and older aesthetic homes. We lost many historic neighborhoods to poor Blacks and Hispanics as crime increased. Some of our suburban areas have also suffered from economic slumps and lost jobs so that the federal governments hand out vouchers to fill in the lagging real estate markets. The government also contracts to build low-income projects, which collapse our schools within five years. Interesting enough, I see many of the burbs going Asian, low to high income.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Loyalist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Last Online
    1 Day Ago @ 01:36 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Canadian
    Ancestry
    British Isles
    Subrace
    Keltic-Nordid/Atlantid
    Country
    Dominion of Canada Dominion of Canada
    Gender
    Age
    30
    Family
    In a steady relationship
    Politics
    Traditionalist
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    1,168
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    33
    Thanked in
    24 Posts
    I don't think Trump's re-election is a forgone conclusion. Far from it, in fact. Like last time, he has the entire media apparatus (Fox News notwithstanding) mobilized against him, as well as the minority grievance lobby, but also organized labour (ironically) - which is going to create headaches in those manufacturing-wasteland swing states that propelled him in 2016. Plus, it has to be said, his record is mixed. He talked a big game, but has, in practice, tried to be too conciliatory. Only recently does it seem like he has woken up to the fact that everything from the centre leftwards hates him, is still apoplectic that he won, and will do anything to remove him, no matter what he does in office.

    Given that the Democrats have now been full-on hijacked by Marxists and are running on what is probably the most progressive and destructive platform ever seen in the west - kowtowing to BLM types, etc. - this is doubtless the most important election the US has ever faced. If Trump loses, America is finished, figuratively and otherwise. That the Democratic nominee is transparently senile and literally can't string together a coherent sentence or thought, yet is competitive, adds to the overall absurdity. Although, that does seem to be part of the plan - Biden will be a figurehead for a backroom cabal of the hard-left that will really be calling the shots.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Loyalist For This Useful Post:


  4. #23

    Trump overturning Obama’s plan to compel suburbs to build low-income housing is not racist. It’s sensible





    The president has been called a “segregationist” for repealing an order forcing suburbs to build “affordable housing” or lose funding. But it’s got nothing to do with race – 35% of those living in the ‘burbs are non-white already.




    President Donald Trump this week repealed an Obama era executive order called the AFFH (Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing). It was gutted quickly after Trump took office, but Trump finally repealed it completely on the 29th of July. The original act was blatant social engineering, which would have forced suburban towns to build high-density housing in the middle of low-density areas.



    To no one’s surprise, the political left has already tried to brand this as racist. Connecticut Democratic Senator Chris Murphy outright called President Trump “a segregationist.” Kevin Liptak and Gregory Wallace at CNN stated that Trump was trying to “stoke racial divisions with the administrative rule change. This of course ignores the fact that non-white populations in suburbs have been rising since the 1990s, and is now up to 35% of the total, according to the left-leaning
    Brookings Institute.



    But hey, why let facts get in the way of a good narrative? The fact that the suburban population reflects the overall diversity of the country means absolutely nothing to the political left. Any time you oppose the idea of social engineering like the AFFH, you are a racist. Granted, as I’ve seen in my own life, you’re branded a racist for challenging any narrative.




    There are two realities at work here. The first is that the original executive order was a disastrous idea even in concept. Low density areas would have to scrap zoning laws, build bigger water and sewer lines, expand social services, add mass transit, and so forth. This would increase taxes, making life for those who don’t want to live in a giant city too much like… living in a giant city. It defeats the purpose of a low-density area! It makes about as much sense as a vegan restaurant introducing steak to the menu.



    The second is how much it ignores reality. As I mentioned earlier, more and more people who are non-white are fleeing to the suburbs. The appeal of those areas and that type of life isn’t something that has anything to do with skin color. It has everything to do with quality of life. As someone who lived in the suburbs of Chicago in the 1990s, I know it’s never been a ‘whites only’ type of life. Ever. If there was even a shred of discrimination in those neighborhoods, the federal government would snap down on it before you could blink.



    Segregation is not something that exists in the United States. We threw it out with Jim Crow. People are fleeing to the suburbs, and want the suburbs to remain the suburbs, because it’s calm and peaceful. It doesn’t have the trappings of a big city life. There’s less crime. There’s less noise. None of these things have anything to do with skin color. The white picket fence and two-story house lifestyle is something that all Americans find appealing, because it’s something we all dream of. But this just shows how much the media is out of touch with America.



    If you want to live in the suburbs and don’t want it to be the city, I suppose you’re not black, according to CNN and the Democratic Party. How classy of them.





    Facts are that the rich aren't affected by Obama's laws. Only the middle class. They are forcing the ghetto into the suburbs.



    Oh, didn't Obama buy a house on Martha's Vineyard? And one in a spacious neighborhood in D.C.? Yep, I guess just because I was born a white Caucasian, I'm automatically a racist.





    R T: Trump overturning Obama’s plan to compel suburbs to build low-income housing is not racist. It’s sensible 31 VII 2020.



  5. #24

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to jagdmesser For This Useful Post:


  7. #25
    Senior Member Verđandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 12th, 2018 @ 02:42 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    Luxembourg Luxembourg
    Location
    Asgĺrd
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Family
    Two sisters
    Occupation
    Wyrd-weaver
    Posts
    1,856
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    314
    Thanked in
    201 Posts

    Trump Should Wargame Secession, Too



    Earlier this month, the New York Times revealed that top-level Democrats have been wargaming possible outcomes of the November 2020 election and are considering secession if things don’t go their way. This should come as a surprise to no one. Since the epoch-changing George Floyd riots — which began in May and are still ongoing — America has endured its greatest, most destructive, and most painful social hemorrhaging since the Civil War. That a second civil war might very well be on the horizon — given all the uncertainties surrounding the upcoming election, COVID-19, and racial unrest — wargaming such an eventuality not only makes sense, it’s downright prudent.

    Much has been written about the Floyd riots and their entirely fraudulent origins. As we all know, the far-Left has manufactured unrest through generous donations to terrorist organizations such as Antifa and Black Lives Matter, and also through its methodical destruction of not just our cities, but of the social trust and civic competence that goes into maintaining them. They are blaming police, but point to chimeras such as “systemic racism” and “white supremacy” as the real villains in their cartoonishly Manichean and black supremacist worldview. That these riots have in fact caused crime to spike in many cities, resulting in even greater numbers of blacks being killed (the very people whose lives are supposed to matter), makes no difference to the Left. They do this because they can — because they hate whites, they hate nationalism, they hate traditionalism, and because they hate everyone in power who isn’t them.

    The focal point of the Left’s hatred is, of course, President Trump. Regardless of what Trump has accomplished as Commander in Chief, they see him as the representative of white collective interests, and therefore someone who must be destroyed. And they are not entirely wrong. No president since Ronald Reagan (or maybe even Dwight Eisenhower) has been as implicitly aligned with white racial interests as Donald Trump. That he appeared virtually out of nowhere in the second decade of the twenty-first century to roll back leftward gains and to remind whites that they do indeed have collective interests after all. . . well, that was just too much for many on the Left to bear.

    That Trump is at best a tolerable champion of white America (and, at worst, no better than any other cuckservative, back-stabbing Republican) makes no difference to the Left as well. Their anti-white racism is so complete they have no interest in such picayune distinctions. In fact, they are so consumed by hatred that their leadership in the Democrat Party is not even trying to hide the fact that it wishes to dissolve the Union if it cannot stop Donald Trump:

    But conveniently, a group of former top government officials called the Transition Integrity Project actually gamed four possible scenarios, including one that doesn’t look that different from 2016: a big popular win for Mr. Biden, and a narrow electoral defeat, presumably reached after weeks of counting the votes in Pennsylvania. For their war game, they cast John Podesta, who was Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, in the role of Mr. Biden. They expected him, when the votes came in, to concede, just as Mrs. Clinton had.

    But Mr. Podesta, playing Mr. Biden, shocked the organizers by saying he felt his party wouldn’t let him concede. Alleging voter suppression, he persuaded the governors of Wisconsin and Michigan to send pro-Biden electors to the Electoral College.


    In that scenario, California, Oregon, and Washington then threatened to secede from the United States if Mr. Trump took office as planned. The House named Mr. Biden president; the Senate and White House stuck with Mr. Trump. At that point in the scenario, the nation stopped looking to the media for cues, and waited to see what the military would do.

    When one-half of a nation’s major political parties is seriously considering secession prior to a presidential election, you know that that nation’s future is in doubt. To assume that the American political system, which was designed when whites held a demographic supermajority, will survive the next few elections as non-whites take up an ever-increasing share of the population is simply naďve. Something’s gotta give, and by November 2020 there is a slim yet not-nothing chance that the Democratic Party — the representative of non-white collective interests — will be willing to give it.

    Faced with such an adversary, Trump and his people should wargame what would happen if the Democrats do resort to extralegal means to get what they want post-election. In the case of Trump winning unambiguously with the divide between him and Joe Biden being too great to be fudged, we can assume that any Left-wing secession efforts would be half-hearted and easily crushed (and therefore likely not attempted). This will be good for the Right and good for America, but it won’t save America. This will only give American whites more time to prepare for that fateful day when America finally does break apart roughly along racial lines.

    Likewise, there would be no Left-wing secession if Joe Biden wins unambiguously. In this case, the Left would get what it wants, which is to assume absolute power, take pitiless revenge against the Right, and pull the anti-white day of reckoning as close to the present as possible. Since such a scenario does not involve Left-wing secession, wargaming it falls beyond the scope of this essay. The topic of Right-wing secession, on the other hand, will be dealt with in part two of this series.

    The likeliest scenario involving Left-wing secession would be the one described above: Trump wins a squeaker via the electoral college but loses the popular vote. Biden (on the advice of his hard-Left handlers) refuses to concede and pulls enough strings to get the House to declare for the Dems. Meanwhile, the Senate and Executive Branch plop for Trump. This would truly be a “house divided,” and the Left would ascribe to itself the political capital to call for exit of the Left Coast. In this circumstance, History would be opening up a gateway for decisive action that could potentially change everything forever. Anyone with enough vision, money, manpower, and chutzpah could march through it and into the history books. An extreme example would be an Army general putting down riots in several cities and then crowning himself emperor ŕ la Napoleon. What could anyone do to stop him?

    Absent such a third-party intrusion or any eventuality involving foreign invasion or nuclear weapons (which would be much trickier to predict at this point), Trump’s wargame must entail the Left Coast declaring itself its own nation rather than submitting to another four years of low unemployment, favorable trade deals, and media-trolling under Trump. Now, my first instinct would be to say, “let them go.” Good riddance to bad garbage, and all that. From a Right-wing perspective, what downside could there possibly be to losing twenty-to-thirty million Leftists, Democrats, and liberals, a sizeable portion of whom would be non-white? Greg Johnson wrote an excellent analysis of this phenomenon — known as Calexit — after Trump’s victory in 2016. “In short, after Calexit, there would be fewer but better Americans,” he wrote.

    From a white nationalist perspective, this is as true now as ever. But from the perspective of Donald Trump, who will have to deal with how the country has changed since 2016, simply letting the Left Coast go would not be as simple as it would seem. Without California, Washington, and Oregon, being a Leftist of any stripe in America would cease to have a point. The electoral loss of those three states alone would shift the rest of the country so far to the Right to make it completely intolerable for most left-of-center people. If we lose the Left Coast, any wargame scenario should include the likely possibility of East Coast blue states cashing in their chips as well. This would include large portions of the mid-Atlantic states and New England. And what about blue cities in otherwise red states, such as Chicago and Houston? What about states in the former Confederacy that are over a quarter black, such as Alabama, South Carolina, Georgia, and Mississippi? What about border states in the Southwest that are almost as Mexican as they are white? A hung election could trigger massive unrest in those places which could dwarf the Floyd riots.

    If the Democrats are wargaming secession, Trump would be remiss not to count on Antifa and BLM doing so as well. At this point, we must assume that these terrorist organizations already have plans in place to demolish bridges, dams, and infrastructure in red states in order to disorganize, demoralize, and hobble the Right once hostilities begin. This is their kind of warfare, and if they can shut off the lights in Topeka, Kansas the day before a city-wide, anti-white pogrom, so much the better for them. Essentially, we would have to assume that the far Left will stop at nothing to gain control of this country.

    How is a president going to handle all of this? By letting the Left Coast go, Trump would be ensuring the death of the country he had sworn to serve. This would be entering uncharted territory with unfathomable chaos and complications ahead. Who knows how that would turn out? On the other hand, not letting the Left Coast go would require unleashing the military upon domestic enemies. This tactic may very well lead to civil war, depending upon the fitness and loyalty of the US military and the strength and will of the insurgents.

    Best case scenario, Trump crushes them with reasonable casualties. The insurgency, like the Civil War, has a beginning and end, after which we have a formal surrender and a return to the status quo, such as it is. Furthermore, a well-armed and motivated red state populace organizes enough to resist whatever attacks the insurgents plan for them.

    Worst case scenario, the US military struggles with a well-funded and ruthless insurgency that spreads havoc and terror in dozens of locations. The military, the national guard, and the police suffer from poor leadership and lack of cohesion thanks to decades of affirmative action and are hamstrung by their own politically correct rules and regs. Defeat after defeat eventually increases sympathy for the insurgents until a critical mass of the US fighting forces actually switches sides. After all, everyone loves a winner. And if backing the faster horse would mean a quicker resolution to the hostilities, then so be it. Then secession would no longer be on the table. Control of Washington, DC would be. By taking the insurgency on directly, Trump would be, in effect, risking everything.

    Bill Clinton never had to contemplate anything as bloodcurdling when launching hellfire in Waco, Texas. Only President Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis may have carried a greater burden. But Kennedy’s situation was nothing like Trump’s wargame, and so little can be learned from it as a precedent. To find a precedent, one would have to go back to Abraham Lincoln himself.

    I’m sure that if Trump ever wargames Left-wing secession, he’ll employ top experts with a better handle on the specifics than I have. They will likely have a more accurate understanding of the enemy’s strength as well as the military’s. Such planning, if done competently, would be worth infinitely more than my armchair spit-balling. However, the best chance of solving a problem requires a complete understanding of that problem before any attempts are made to solve it. Trump’s experts could wargame with the best possible data twelve hours a day from now until the election, but if they don’t truly understand the problem then it’s possible they’ll find themselves going into hiding the day that Lenin’s successor sets foot in the White House.

    And what exactly is the problem? Due to America’s increasing racial diversity, the tribalist nature of human beings, and the reality of racial differences, America is becoming ungovernable. And no amount of MAGA hat, civic-nationalist rah-rah is going to change that. This is an irreversible process. To try to stop it militarily would be pure folly. Better to climb aboard that crazy train and steer it away from the cliff than attempt to stop it in its tracks.

    When wargaming this problem, a proper understanding points to one solution with an excellent chance of averting catastrophe. (Sadly, this is the one Trump will least likely consider, but I will present it anyway.) Trump, upon a close victory in November, should anticipate Left-wing secession and then. . . get this. . . sweeten the deal. California, Washington, and Oregon want to secede? Great. But why don’t we also let New York south and east of Albany go as well? And most of New England. And Philadelphia, New Jersey, DC, and Northern Virginia, too. They could all be part of one country if they want, separated by thousands of miles, sort of like Pakistan and Bangladesh once upon a time. In any case, Trump’s people should know ahead of time what territory a post-America America can cede to the enemy and what territory it can’t, and then bargain accordingly. By dictating the terms of the split, Trump will be avoiding much of the chaos and complications mentioned above.

    Do the blacks want reparations? Trump should be prepared to give them exactly that in return for a black homeland in Georgia and South Carolina, to which all red-state blacks must go. Win-win for them, right? And in the Southwest, I’m sure it wouldn’t take much to initiate Reconquista in parts of New Mexico and Arizona which effectively belong to the Mexicans anyway.

    In return, Trump should make a few non-negotiable demands such as an even partition of the military and the debt as well as a reasonable timeframe in which to allow a peaceful transfer of populations. He should also demand that legacy, red-state America (which he would presumably lead for a time) return to its pre-1965 demographics. He should enshrine that sentiment in law and in his country’s new constitution. He should also make it abundantly clear that if these demands are not met and the Left still wishes to secede, he will bomb blue city after blue city until they realize the wisdom of doing business with Donald Trump.

    It will be a difficult offer to refuse, and a clever trick to boot since it will enable Donald Trump to wargame without a war.

    Counter Currents

  8. #26
    Senior Member Verđandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 12th, 2018 @ 02:42 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    Luxembourg Luxembourg
    Location
    Asgĺrd
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Family
    Two sisters
    Occupation
    Wyrd-weaver
    Posts
    1,856
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    314
    Thanked in
    201 Posts

    Newlywed’s Car Vandalized After Groomsman Jokingly Paints ‘Trump 2020’ on Window

    Quote Originally Posted by Verđandi
    And yet the wife is saying sorry to the vandals ...


    SALT LAKE CITY (KUTV) — A day after one of the best nights of their lives, newlywed couple Brayden and Macy Beardall woke up to find a swastika scratched into the side of their car in Salt Lake City, Utah.

    The couple was married on Saturday in Sandy, and as per tradition, their vehicle was decorated with balloons, marker paint and other wedding gag decorations. One of the groomsmen wrote "Trump 2020" on the driver's side window as a joke, Macy Beardall explained.

    The couple woke up on Sunday morning to see their car scratched up, mostly under where "Trump 2020" was written. Besides the swastika, things were scratched on the car including "I am a racist" and "Blue Lives Splatter."



    The couple lives near the University of Utah. The bride was the first to see the vandalism:

    Besides the initial shock and sadness, Macy Beardall said she is mad. She described herself as an ally and an advocate to the Black Lives Matters and human trafficking movements.

    "I have done so much education and educating on this. They could have wiped it off or left a note educating me. I try to learn and know that not everyone’s experience is the same. I know the fact that I even own a Jeep is a privilege, but it’s still not OK."

    Besides the vandalism, the couple described their wedding to be "super awesome, super happy."

    Macy Beardall has had the vehicle for two years. She said she is filing an auto insurance claim to cover the damages. Additionally, she said she will reach out to the apartment complex's management team to see if they will cover the damages "because they have zero surveillance cameras, which is ridiculous because it's Salt Lake City."



    When asked if she has any advice to other brides or people doing harmless pranks, the bride said:

    "To future brides: When people are decorating your car, stick to the penises because it’ll get you a lot further than Trump 2020."

    Source: WJLA

  9. #27
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Elizabeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    European American
    Ancestry
    United Kingdom, Czechoslovakia, Netherlands, Germany, France
    mtDNA
    H1c12
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Florida Florida
    Gender
    Age
    50
    Zodiac Sign
    Aries
    Politics
    Pro-Trump, Nationalist
    Religion
    Folkish Heathen
    Posts
    1,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    916
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,011
    Thanked in
    493 Posts
    Sleepy Joe Biden has picked Kamala Harris for his VP.


    (warning: video has bad language)

  10. #28

    Are we about to see a Colour Revolution in the United States?



    Are we about to see a Colour Revolution in the United States?




    The familiar tropes are out in force, Trump may not weather this storm.


    It started with peaceful protests. It always does. Oppressed, poor or otherwise desperate people take to the streets because they don’t know what else to do. Because their neighbours are doing it. Because the world is unfair to so many people. Because attention should be paid.


    The reasons don’t matter. The peacefulness does.


    Nobody who is marching for justice and change really wants to burn down a bakery or steal some trainers from a Nike store. But then it starts happening. Windows are broken. Bricks are thrown. Civilians are sprayed with mace. Bystanders are caught up in the throng. People get hurt. It doesn’t need to happen, but it does.


    Sometimes police panic in the face of intimidating crowds. Sometimes protesters let their anger boil over. A small minority of people just enjoy violence and chaos. Others stand to benefit from it, they stoke conflict and spread blame. Then the molotov cocktails are flying and the snipers are shooting people on both sides. There’s blood in the streets and barricades are going up and the whole thing has its own momentum.


    And, through all this, the media is churning out the noise. Partisan and dehumanising. “criminals” on one side “Fascists” on the other. Both sides are called thugs. Fox News and CNN tell the same stories with reversed points of view, slashing society down the centre.


    And the chaos builds. The President has to do something, so he calls in the army. Now the press are calling him a fascist and a dictator. They say he’s violated his office and he has to resign or be removed or be arrested.


    I’m not talking about the United States. I’m talking about Ukraine in 2014. Or Egypt and Syria in 2011. Or Libya in 2010. Or Bolivia just last winter. Or Venezuela every year for decades.


    If the events currently unfolding in cities across the United States were happening in any other country in the world, a lot of us would already have said that the US Deep State was behind it. All the hallmarks are there. The constructed narratives. The handy props: The agents provocateur. The hysterical media. The stench of agenda.


    Consider, for a moment, that what is happening in Minneapolis and New York and Los Angeles has been happening in Paris and a host of other French cities for nearly two years. The Guardian never called Macron a fascist. CNN never had a live stream about that. Compare the coverage of the Gilets Jaunes to Black Lives Matter, and then to the Maidan protests. The rubber bullets and tear gas are the same. The headlines are not.


    CNN has one host calling Trump a
    “thug” who’s “hiding in his bunker”, and another saying “Trump declared war on Americans”.


    Robert Reich, writing in the Guardian, says:

    [Trump] is no longer president. The sooner we stop treating him as if he were, the better.


    The Washington Post has an op-ed headlined:

    Trump must be removed. So must his congressional enablers.


    Slate magazine:

    Remove Trump Now



    The corporations are all on board. Every one of them releasing statements of solidarity and heartfelt Instagram posts and sending money to all the right places. Nike had their famous ad. Because the same companies paying slave-wages to 10-year-old Indonesian kids in vast sweatshops just hate racism and inequality, honest.


    We’ve seen this before, haven’t we? Doesn’t this look like a play for an exchange of power? A colour revolution in the offing?


    I suppose we should ask “why now?” Trump is up for re-election in just five months after all. Biden doesn’t really stand a chance, but they could have him suffer “ill health” and pull out, replace him with a Harris or a Warren or Michelle Obama. Hell, they could just rig it. They’ve done it before.


    But then maybe it’s not about Trump per se, maybe it’s about the process of elections and the office of President in general. Maybe it’s about getting martial law in place well before the Covid19 backlash kicks in. Maybe there’s something else coming down the pipe that will make it clearer.


    Supposing the plan is to get rid of Trump, what happens next? Well, maybe one of a few things.


    Firstly, it’s possible it all just dies down. But if 2020 has taught us anything it’s that the Deep State doesn’t fold a bad hand, they just up the ante and hope to bluff it out.


    Second, there’s the possibility Trump introduces full-on martial law and becomes a quasi-dictator. While I’m sure he has no moral compunctions about that, it’s hard to see he would have the (vital) support of the Pentagon and the intelligence agencies in that endeavour. They’ve shown their colours throughout the last four years. However useful Trump has been, he is not an insider and he is entirely disposable.


    Third, and final, Trump goes. Whether there’s an impeachment or a trial or an early election or a civil war…I don’t know. But it’s hard to see Trump weathering this storm.


    If I had to guess, I’d say the protests and pressures mount until Trump does something stupid. If he makes any Yanukovych-style attempts at appeasement (he probably won’t), they will be ignored or minimised or the goalposts will be moved (we already saw that, when the arrest of Derek Chauvin went almost totally unnoticed).


    If soldiers fire on civilians – whether Trump orders it or not, or whether mercenaries frame the army (like in Ukraine) – that will be it. The military will resign en masse, turn on Trump and he will be ousted. From there could emerge an appointed “temporary” President, a middle-of-the-road type with support from both parties, whose job is to “unify the country” and “heal the divides”. The emergence of a totally unelected President will, of course, be called something like “a triumph of the democratic spirit” in The Guardian.


    The riots will be blamed for a constructed “second wave” of Covid19. Just in time for one of the new POTUS’ first announcements to be that “America will start taking Covid19 seriously”. Stronger lockdown rules, mandatory track-and-trace…the full Monty. This will naturally earn him/her good-boy points all across the mainstream media, with the (totally accidental) bonus that anyone who dares protest the coup will be breaking the law, being selfish and risking lives (and probably a racist).


    This is all just my supposition. I could be wrong, I hope I’m wrong. But I can see it heading in that direction. And the idea should worry everyone. Not out of any latent concern for Donald Trump, obviously. Just for the stability of the world. Coups or impeachments or other non-democratic power-changes are not good. They don’t end well. They don’t end well for the leaders being removed, who almost universally end up exiled or hanged or poisoned or shot. Sometimes worse.


    More importantly, they don’t end well for the ordinary people, who always suffer when the Deep State turns society on its head. And, in this instance, it may not end well for the world, which suddenly has a nuclear-armed superpower in a severe state of flux to worry about.


    We should all be concerned.


    There’s an old joke:

    Q: Why has there never been a military coup in the United States?
    A: Because there’s no American Embassy there.
    It looks like maybe that no longer applies.



    Are we about to see a Colour Revolution in the United States?

    12 VIII 2020.



Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •