Restoring Integrity to America’s Elections

At least three or four US presidents owe their election to fraud.

Restoring Integrity to America’s Elections

By: George Noga – January 24, 2021

America experienced back-to-back election debacles in 2016 and 2020. In 2016 it was failure to accept the results due to alleged foreign interference. In 2020 it was fraudulent voting. Recounts accomplish little if they merely recount votes including illegal ones. Voter fraud has a lengthy provenance in the USA and there have been at least three presidents elected fraudulently – four, if you include Rutherford Hayes.

Benjamin Harrison defeated Grover Cleveland in 1888 due to fraud in Harrison’s home state of Indiana. Following a massive pubic outcry, Indiana’s election laws were reformed and in 1892 Cleveland won by carrying Indiana. LBJ won his 1948 senate seat by 87 votes – the final 200 of which were all for Johnson, in the same ink, same handwriting and in alphabetic order; otherwise, LBJ would not have been president. Finally, the 1960 election was stolen for JFK due to rampant fraud in Illinois.

Stealing elections is as American as apple pie. In my high school, the administration changed the results of student elections if they didn’t like the outcome, even for homecoming queen. In college, student government vote fraud was rampant. In my fraternity, the election for sweetheart was rigged so the fraternity president’s girl friend won – even though she was disliked. My psychiatrist friends tell me 90% of their patients’ problems revolve around money, sex and/or power. Politics involves all three of these (in spades), so cheating in elections should be no shock to anyone.

During colonial times, people voted aloud to have their votes recorded. In the early days of the republic, there were no secret ballots and vote buying was commonplace. After secret ballots were introduced in the 1880s, voting declined by about 20% due to the absence of vote buying. By 1892, 38 states had adopted secret ballots.

If Americans no longer trust elections, we are no better than banana republics. Polls show large swaths of Americans believe there was rampant fraud in the 2020 election. If this continues, it will lead to violence and anarchy. If cheating is rewarded, it will increase. Unless we restore integrity to our elections, we will reap the whirlwind. The following reforms must be instituted to restore credibility to our elections.

  1. The entire process must be 100% transparent including to poll watchers.

  2. There must be an audit trail that matches every ballot to an eligible voter.
  3. Absentee ballots must be requested individually by registered voters.
  4. Voter rolls must be purged often of deaths, non-deliverable addresses, etc.
  5. Everyone must have government issued photo ID to vote – no exceptions.
  6. All votes must be received no later than when the polls close.
  7. Ban mail-in voting, the greatest source of potential cheating.
  8. Early in-person voting allowed no more than 7 days before an election.
  9. No vote harvesting – only one vote (or family) at a time to be turned in.
  10. Make it a felony to violate these laws and vigorously prosecute offenders.

A huge majority of Republicans, a majority of independents and a significant cohort of Democrats believe there was widespread fraud in 2020. It doesn’t matter whether they are right – the fact they credibly believe it is a serous problem. We must not only end voter fraud, we must prevent even the appearance of, or the potential for, fraud.

Without integrity and transparency, our elections will become like those of Russia, Venezuela or Belarus. Today, it is the Democrats who believe they win from failing to reign in fraud. But if our elections are to be decided opaquely with no ironclad curbs on cheating, it will become a race to the bottom and there will be no winners.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Incredibly, MLLG has come to possess a document from the year 2121 containing the

definitive history of climate change written 100 years from now. Our next post presents

that history and you will know the outcome of mankind’s struggle with climate change.

More Liberty Less Government – mllg@cfl.rr.com – www.mllg.us

President Biden or President Trump . . . Whoever Wins Should Not Really Matter

Who is President of the United States should have little effect on our lives.

President Biden or President Trump . . .

Whoever Wins Should Not Really Matter

By: George Noga – September 20, 2020

For America’s first 200 years, whoever was elected president was largely irrelevant because he had little power over our lives or that of our neighbors. This is as our founders intended. The Constitution grants government only a few limited and enumerated powers and contains many checks and balances against the concentration and abuse of power. Government’s purpose was to protect our liberty. Who was on the school board, mayor or governor mattered much more than who was president.

Until a few decades ago government stayed mostly inside its constitutional box; whoever held office made little difference in our lives. Presidents exercised limited power and vetoed unconstitutional laws. Congress did not cede power to armies of unelected bureaucrats and the judiciary was largely apolitical. States jealously guarded their rights as part of a federalist republic. The media held government accountable. Ordinary citizens wielded power to convene grand juries and to nullify unpopular laws. Finally, Americans regarded liberty as a priceless jewel and voted accordingly.

How did we get from a Constitution of limited government to one that dictates which rest room we use and how much water is in our toilets? How did we get to a president who declares he will stop the rise of oceans? How did we get to a congress that passes unread 2,000 page laws in the dead of night? How did we get to a hyper-political judiciary that conjures new rights from thin air? How did we get to millions of bureaucrats and 200,000 pages of regulations? How did we get to neutered states, a statist media and a populace that meekly accepts all these horrors?

The answers are both sad and predictable. Per Jefferson, “It is the natural order of things for government to gain and liberty to yield”. Capitalism has made Americans so rich we forgot the source of our liberty and prosperity and it has sown the seeds of its own destruction. Per Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, Americans have transcended basic needs and achieved material prosperity. This allows people the security to indulge in risk-free political witchcraft. Any society with psychologists for its pets is one that has badly lost its perspective. Like Esau, we sold our birthright for a bowl of stew.

Unfortunately, who we elect president in November will profoundly affect our lives. Presidents have transmogrified into kings, wielding enormous unchecked power unthinkable for the first 200 years of our republic. Americans once saved most of their passion for religion; now politics has largely supplanted religion. We view elections as contests between good and evil rather than as ones of policy. Everything in our lives has become politicized, including science, religion, news and education. We have come to regard those with whom we disagree as not merely wrong, but as devils.

American democracy is caught in a hyper-partisan death spiral. Winning at all costs threatens our constitutional foundation and the rule of law. The quest for immediate electoral victory is coming at the cost of long-term stability, such as by eliminating the filibuster, which has stood as a bulwark for moderation for nearly 200 years. The dehumanization of our political adversaries sanctions increasingly extreme behavior.

Our liberty is a priceless jewel of eternal and inestimable value. However, its setting has become badly tarnished. We must dedicate ourselves to restoring its original luster and grandeur to that worthy of the gem of incalculable value it holds. If we succeed, one day in the future who becomes president will again have little effect on our lives.


Next on September 27th, I reveal my decision about buying firearms.
More Liberty Less Government – mllg@cfl.rr.com – www.mllg.us

Fallacy of One Person – One Vote

“The right to vote is a consequence, not a cause, of a free social system. Its value depends
on strictly delimiting the voters’ power; unlimited majority rule is tyranny.” (Ayn Rand) 
Fallacy of One Person – One Vote

By: George Noga – March 1, 2020

        Our February 2, 2020 post about the Electoral College generated one of the highest open rates on record and left readers asking for more. We are happy to oblige. This post further probes: (1) the wisdom of the Electoral College; (2) problems innate in popular vote elections; (3) perceived inequalities in our federalist system; and (4) inherent problems of a one person, one vote system. Visit our website: www.mllg.us to read our 2/2/20 post in case you missed it the first time.

         Progressives consternate about what they view as egregious inequalities in the US federalist electoral system – particularly in the Senate and the Electoral College. They are particularly fond of pointing out that California (population 40 million) and Wyoming (580,000 people) each have 2 senators. They call this undemocratic. They are ignorant that under the Constitution senators represent states, not people.

         We need to go back to first principles. What is the purpose of government? Is it to actualize the will of the majority at any and every moment? If instant actualization is what you want, a popular vote system will deliver it – as in the French Revolution. Or instead, is the measure of good government whether it is effective at creating long-term justice, freedom, security and stability – like in the US for the past 233 years?

       Of 195 countries in the world today, only a few, mostly in Central and South America, use popular vote; how has that worked out? Canada’s Senate has members, appointed by the Governor General, who represent regions and are not based on population. In Switzerland each canton, regardless of size, has two members. The Senate in Australia has 12 members for each state – independent of population. Most nations use a variant of the parliamentary system, wherein majorities are rare.

          Majorities usually tyrannize minorities. Consider Switzerland’s solution. In a one person, one vote system, Italian or French-speaking Catholics feared tyranny by German-speaking Protestants and vice versa. To allay such concerns, the Swiss adopted a double majority system in which important matters require a majority of the popular vote and also a majority vote in a majority of cantons. The Swiss system has endured for 729 years and counting. Note: When rural Swiss go to vote today, they carry rifles and swords as symbols of how their freedom was attained and preserved.

        Consider Iraq with its Shia, Sunni, and Kurd factions or Afghanistan with its many feuding tribes. Particularly relevant is the former Yugoslavia; when the Serb majority demanded one person, one vote the country disintegrated into chaos resulting in genocide and the deaths of 140,000 people. How did that work out?

       When drafting the Constitution, America’s founders considered the history of majority tyranny and, on multiple occasions, rejected a popular vote. The states had stark differences. Slave states and free states were in conflict. Small states were concerned about domination by large states. Agricultural states were at odds with industrial states. Inland states worried about maritime states. Pietists in New England, Catholics in Maryland and Lutherans in Pennsylvania worried about each other.

       Those demanding a national popular vote and restructure of the Senate believe things are different today. Although differences between states may have moderated since our founding, many significant chasms remain. More to the point, human nature has not changed since 1787 and tyranny of the majority remains of great concern. A present-day poster child for this is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Imagine what horrors would be loosed on America if she and her squad ever acquired unchecked power.

       The Constitution of the United States of America has served us well for 233 years, including the Electoral College and the makeup of the Senate. Those advocating for fundamental change are ignorant both of history and of human nature.


Next on March 8th, we blog about UBI – Universal Basic Income.  
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

MLLG Analysis of the 2020 Election

We dissect the tectonic forces (and one mega wild card) that will determine the election.

MLLG Analysis of the 2020 Election
By: George Noga - February 9, 2020

           This is our first 2020 election report; political analysis is a popular feature with readers because we have been been incredibly prescient and perspicuous in the past including Trump’s surprise 2016 victory. New readers should go to www.mllg.us to see my bio and political bona fides. This post addresses the tectonic forces that will determine the winner – beginning with those favoring Trump.

African-American Vote: I was among the very first to discern the shift in black voting patterns; read my blogs of  2/12/17 and 6/2/19. This mega wild card has the potential to radically transform this election and, with it, American politics. Polls have Trump’s approval rating among blacks in the mid-thirty percent range; this is astounding.

In 2016 Trump got 8% of the black vote; if he increases this to just 12% it makes it hard for Dems to win certain key states; 16% makes victory all but certain while 20% or more is a landslide. In addition to winning a higher share of the black vote, Trump benefits if, as in 2016, many blacks don’t vote. Moreover, the blexit movement (black exodus from Democratic Party) also includes Latinos and other minorities. MLLG fearlessly forecasts Trump will substantially increase his share of the black vote!

UK/Other Elections: An immutable principle is that real people voting in real elections count more than polls and pundits – even in elections held in other countries. Recent elections in Germany, France, Canada and Australia all have resulted in defeats for liberals. Bill Clinton, a savvy politician, foresaw Hillary’s loss after the original 2016 Brexit vote. The December UK election casts a large shadow, as parallels between the UK Labour Party and the US Democratic Party are incandescently apparent.

The revolt of the working class that rocked the UK affects us. If disaffected Americans in the Rust Belt turn out in force, Trump wins. People everywhere have similar desires. Voters in northern England are no different than voters in Michigan,  Pennsylvania and Wisconsin; they want economic security but also crave cultural security. Democrats in the US could end up losing a culture war they didn’t know they were fighting.

The Economy: Economics trumps all else. Every econometric model shows Trump winning handily given a strong economy. Voters always reward a politician who makes them better off. The economy in 2020 is as good as it gets and the bonanza is broadly shared, Democrat protestations notwithstanding. Even if the economy weakens, it will remain strong enough in November to provide Trump a powerful tailwind.

Incumbency: In the past 127 years, only two elected presidents lost head-to-head elections. Americans always vote for the fool they know over the devil they don’t.

Other Forces Favoring Trump:  We are at peace, at least relatively. In 2016 Trump was outspent over two to one; this time he is flush with cash. His rallies routinely draw tens of thousands of enthusiastic supporters, crowds Dems can only dream about. Every independent legal betting site has Trump a heavy favorite. His opposition appears weak, woke, discombobulated and out of touch with working Americans.

 

Forces Favoring the Democrats

Suburban Women: This cohort deserted Trump en mass in the 2018 midterm election. If they do so again in 2020, this will provide a huge boost for the Democrats.

Trump Personna: Many voters have developed an aversion to Trump’s personal style including his tweets, braggadocio and insensitivity. It is an open question as to the extent this personal animus will prevail over the positive forces noted supra.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

         The forces favoring Trump clearly overwhelm those favoring the Democrats, but eight months is many eternities in politics and anything can (and will) happen between now and November. The tectonic forces identified herein are not ephemeral or transitory. Nonetheless, it is wise to bear in mind that Carter led Reagan well into October and that Dukakis once led Bush by nearly 20 points. We will continue our inimitable analysis of the 2020 election as the year progresses. Stay tuned.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
On February 16th, we dissect the proposed wealth and other new taxes.
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

There is No Such Thing as the Popular Vote

The United States is not a democracy and there is no such thing as the popular vote.

There is No Such Thing as the Popular Vote
By: George Noga – February 2, 2020

 

The Electoral College (“EC”) gets no respect! Hillary’s 2016 loss whipped progressives into a frenzy, prompting much talk about abolishing the EC; there also has been action. A leftist, Soros-funded organization, National Popular Vote (“NPV”), aims to overthrow the EC. Thus far 16 (blue) states with 195 electoral votes have passed legislation to cast their votes for whoever wins the national popular vote. The NPV compact takes effect if and when states with 270 electoral votes ratify the pact.

       It is past due for MLLG to provide a full-throated defense of the EC. Following are compelling reasons why the Electoral College is preferable to a popular vote.

The United States of America is Not a Democracy

       The US is a constitutional republic; the word democracy is nowhere to be found (not even once) in either the Declaration or the Constitution. The EC is consistent with, and a popular vote is inconsistent with, a republican form of government. A national popular vote would destroy the carefully crafted constitutional architecture which is based on federalism, separation of powers and checks and balances. A direct popular vote would sever the election of the president from the rest of the constitutional forms and would create a myriad of new troubles including tyranny of the majority.

There is No Such Thing as a National Popular Vote

      There are many things crucial to winning a presidential election: fund-raising, advertising, grass-roots organization and personal campaign appearances. Republican candidates would not waste precious and limited resources on New York or California. No democratic candidate would squander such resources on Texas or Wyoming.  Moreover, if you were a democrat voter in Utah or a republican voter in Illinois, just how motivated would you be to vote, knowing your vote for president is meaningless?

       The simple truth is that there never has been and there is not now a true popular vote in America. There is only a meaningless total of votes cast within the electoral college system. No one knows who would have won a popular vote since none existed. Therefore Hillary did not win the popular vote and, as shown infra, could have lost.

Hillary Probably Loses a True Popular Vote Election

       Since 1824, when popular votes first were recorded, 19 presidents, or 40% out of the 48 elections since then, failed to receive over 50% of the vote. In a true popular vote election there would be a runoff if no candidate received 50%. In 2016 Hillary got 65,853,516 votes to Trump’s 62,984,825. In a runoff Hillary probably gets Jill Stein’s 1,457,216 Green Party votes and Trump gets Gary Johnson’s 4,489,221 Libertarian Party votes. Trump then wins with 67,474,046 votes to Hillary’s 67,310,732.

      Not only would Hillary likely have lost the 2016 popular vote election, Bill also would have lost in 1992. Bill got 44,909,806 votes, Bush 39,104,550 and Perot 19,743,821. If Bush picks up 65% of the Perot vote, he wins and Bill loses and most observers believed Bush would have gotten a strong majority of the Perot vote.

Other Nations Don’t Conduct Popular Vote Elections

       Few countries use popular vote; most advanced democracies use indirect systems. In the recent Canadian election, Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party won with 33.0% of the vote to the Conservative Party’s 34.4%. Parliamentary systems, ubiquitous throughout Europe, routinely elect minority leaders. In virtually no democratic system is the popular vote decisive. The measure of our system is how effective it is at bringing about just, free and stable government. A popular vote, like in the French Revolution, does a good job of actualizing the will of the people. How did that work out?

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

        Our Constitution is the best and most enduring document ever created to define the relationship of man to the state. The Electoral College contains fraud within small jurisdictions, reduces federal power over elections and fosters the building of broad coalitions while discouraging regionalism. It has served us well for over 232 years. It is a foundational safeguard against the tyranny of the majority. We need to preserve it and importantly, we must help our fellow Americans understand why it is worth keeping and not to be discarded whenever there is a tough electoral loss.


Next on February 9th, we shine our light on the 2020 presidential election.
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

Enduring Principles of American Politics

The first and foremost principle is that America is a center-right country. 
Enduring Principles of American Politics
By: George Noga – May 26, 2019

           Judging by our feedback, readers can’t seem to get enough of our non-partisan political analysis. Many readers have requested a posting that contains a complete listing of MLLG’s principles of American politics. This post fulfills that request.

 

          Presidential elections are influenced by, inter alia, parties, candidates, events, issues, ads and debates. Based on American political history and tradition, MLLG has identified eight enduring principles that exert an outsized effect in determining who wins; such principles usually transcend parties, candidates, issues and events. These principles provide you a strong foundation to better understand the 2020 election.

1. America is a center-right country. Forget this principle and you get a Goldwater or McGovern-like outcome. This remains true in 2020; all the prattle about democratic socialism is limited to about 20% of the population. The only center-left candidates elected in the past 75 years were Carter and Clinton, southern state governors, and Obama, who ran as a centrist, was a rare political talent and faced insipid competition.

2. Economics trumps all else. Clinton’s mantra “It’s the economy, stupid.” was exactly on target. If the economy in 2020 remains robust, it creates a powerful tailwind for the incumbent. Every econometric model shows Trump winning handily if the economy remains strong. Voters always reward a politician who makes them better off.

3. There are no permanent majorities. Issues, positions, alliances and demographics continually shift and minority parties skillfully adapt. Movements of all types get subsumed into larger groups. This principle is not relevant to the 2020 election.

4. Money is important but not dispositive. Clinton spent $1.2 billion to Trump’s $600 million in 2016 and still lost. Any serious candidate will get the necessary funding. Spending money has diminishing returns and, at some point, negative returns – a case in point being Huffington’s 1994 CA senate race. Money will not be a factor in 2020.

5. Incumbency is powerful. In the past 126 years, only 2 elected presidents lost head-to-head elections. Americans always vote for the fool they know over the devil they don’t. This principle, ceteris paribus, confers great advantage to Trump in 2020.

6. The longer a party is in power, the more likely it is to lose. With only the exceptions of FDR and the post Civil War era, we must go back 225 years to see any party in power for more than 12 consecutive years. This is not a factor for 2020.

7. Define yourself before your opponent does; as a corollary, define your opponent before he does. It is essential to define who you are with the electorate; failure to do so lets your opponent define you. Like a good joke, defining yourself and your opponent must contain some truth to be effective. Trump is a master of this principle and he employed it to great effect in the 2016 primaries and general election.

8. Polls and approval ratings have limited value. The value of polls lies in identifying issues and sentiment more than who is ahead or behind. Polls today are notoriously inaccurate and undercount Trump support by 3-5 points; no major poll predicted a Trump victory in 2016. Don’t get too worked up over early polls, or any polls for that matter. Remember that many Americans don’t seriously focus on elections until after Labor Day and often don’t decide until weeks, or even days, before an election. Carter led Reagan well into October, yet Reagan ended up winning 44 states.

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

       As you watch the 2020 election drama unfold, there is one wild card with the potential to utterly disrupt politics as usual. I am referring to the “blexit” movement, i.e. the black exit from the Democratic Party. MLLG was among the very first to identify this trend in our February 12, 2017 post (see it on our website: www.mllg.us). Next week’s post is devoted 100% to blexit. This is a post you won’t want to miss!


Blexit – the black exodus from the Democratic Party – is next up on June 2nd.
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

Trump or Cotton versus  **Wild Card** in 2020

Trump is the presumptive Republican nominee, but if he falters it will be Tom Cotton. The Democrats have socialists, geriatrics, failed politicians and an intriguing wild card.

Trump or Cotton versus

**Wild Card** in 2020
By: George Noga – September 24, 2017
       Election cycles have become perpetual with one bleeding seamlessly into the next. The GOP is easy to handicap; if the economy is chugging along and if he doesn’t shoot himself in the foot (or even higher) Trump will be the 2020 nominee. If not, it will be Senator Tom Cotton (AR), Harvard Law and a decorated (Bronze Star) officer with two combat tours. He is articulate, a great debater and he unifies all elements of the GOP. Cotton is off and running judging by the time he is spending in Iowa.
       The Democrats’ situation is dismal; they must choose among socialists, geriatrics, and failed politicians; but they do have one wild card. The sclerotic retreads are Bernie Sanders (age 78 in 2020), Hillary Clinton (72) and Joe Biden (78). The failed politicos include Andrew Cuomo and Cory Booker, while the socialists are Pocahontas a/k/a Elizabeth Warren and Sanders. All are seriously considering running in 2020.
        The Democrat candidates fall into two camps. The socialist camp, consisting of Sanders and Pocahontas, at least has a coherent ideology advocating free stuff, single payer healthcare, class warfare and well, socialism. The Dems have moved so far to the left that a socialist could get the nomination. However, in that event they surely would lose in November as only a tiny portion of Americans support socialism.
        The other camp, containing the remaining candidates, has no discernible ideology; it targets a ragtag collection of interest and identity groups: unions, blacks, women, millennials, LGBTQ+, environmentalists and latinos. However, Democrat support is declining among rustbelt unionists and has maxed out in the other groups. Moreover, there are serious fissures and conflicts within this unstable coalition.
        Democrats lack a coherent, credible, unifying, positive message. They still haven’t come to grips with why they lost in 2016. They prefer symbolic to substantive issues. They obsess about transgender restrooms and confederate statues but have no plan for health care, taxation or education. They are all about obstructionism, negativity, name calling, symbolism, interest groups and identity politics. They are clueless about how to deal with existential threats such as North Korea, Russia, Iran and ISIS.
     The face of today’s Democratic Party is foul-mouthed politicians, screeching obscene rioting students, abortion-on-demand snowflakes, environmental protesters who leave behind toxic sludge, obstructionists and protesters against almost anything, Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter, bullying professors and clueless movie stars threatening to blow up the White House and assassinate Trump. They have lost over 1,000 elected offices and failed dismally after decades of governing blue states and cities. They have turned once prosperous cities and states into bankrupt hellholes.
        Democrat prospects for 2020 are grim. Barring a severe economic downturn, none of the above candidates stands a chance against Trump or Cotton. Every so often a captivating candidate (Obama) comes along, the Republicans self destruct or the electorate tires after several terms of one party rule. None of that will happen in 2020.
       The Democrats have one possible wild card candidate who conceivably could win and he has shown some interest in running. That person is  – – – drumroll please – – – Jamie Dimon! Remember, you read that scoop first here on the MLLG blog.

Our series “Red October” observing the 100th anniversary of communism is next.

Election Analysis and Afterthoughts

Hillary had a world class marketing team trying to sell box wine to oenophiles, more baggage than a carousel at LAX, a paranoid streak rivaling Nixon and a limitless sense of entitlement.
Election Analysis and Afterthoughts
By: George Noga – January 15, 2017
     We got it right all year! My January 17th post cited 3 principles: (1) no permanent majorities; (2) the longer a party is in power, the more likely it is to lose; and (3) economics trumps all else. I also cited 3 keys: (1) polling is dead; (2) Obamacare is wildly unpopular; and (3) demographics, i.e. for Republicans to make gains among Hispanics, Asians, women and millennials would be easier than for Democrats to make gains among whites. All 6 of these principles and keys proved to be correct.
 
     My September 20th special posting began “I don’t purport to know who will win the election, but I know how it will be decided. . . . It will be decided by les deplorables, good-hearted, hard-working Americans branded as racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic and Islamophobic and revulsed by the latte-left’s perversion of America and outraged about being lied to.” Those words proved to be prophetic.
 
     Our final preelecton post on November 6th stated the race was tightening and Trump would win if all or most of the following happened: (1) polling was flawed; (2) there were late shifts in voter sentiment; (3) Obamacare repudiation was robust; (4) government failure drove voters as in the Brexit vote; and (5) blacks and millennials stayed home while evangelicals turned out in force. BINGO! All five happened. 
 
     Clinton and the Democrats lost because a good, decent and just society is based on a voluntary social and economic compact between citizens and government. That compact was violated, desecrated and trampled upon by Obama, Clinton and liberal elites who would be our masters. Voters demanded change from failed hyper-progressive social and economic policies. It had nothing to do with Comey or Putin; it had everything to do with deeply flawed governance and candidates.

Post-Election Reflections

  •     Hillary outspent Trump 2 to 1 and had a better organization but, in the final analysis, the best sales and marketing are limited by the product being sold. As one pundit nailed it, they had world class marketers trying to sell box wine to oenophiles.
  •     After every defeat, Democrats delude themselves into believing that their problem lay in not getting their message out. Their problem was that they did get their message across and it was soundly rejected by the voters. They never learn.
  •     Liberals exposed their churlish souls after the election: rioting, contesting the results, tampering with the electoral college and planning to disrupt the inauguration.
  •    Voters repudiated Obama’s policies and his method of governance, although he remains personally popular. Both Hillary and Obama immeasurably aided Trump.
  •     Demonization of opponents is dead. The Democrats won in 2012 by turning a good and decent man (Romney) into an unrecognizable monster. It did not work against Trump even though he was a target rich candidate. It may never work again.
  •     Democrats obsess with branding their opponents as racists. That abomination also may never work again. Disagreement about immigration is not racism. Over 200 counties that voted for Obama in 2012 changed to Trump; were they all racists? 
  •     Steve Bannon as a Trump advisor outraged liberals who were a-okay with Al Sharpton advising Obama. Bannon has degrees from Georgetown and Harvard, served 7 years as a navy officer and had successful stints at Goldman Sachs and Breitbart News. Sharpton attended Brooklyn College for two years before dropping out, never served in the military, owes $4.5 million in unpaid taxes and is known mainly for his role in the sordid Tawana Brawley affair that a jury ruled was a giant hoax.
 
    The fierce, frothing-at-the-mouth animus and virulence liberals are showing for Trump is not out of concern for America or because progressives are afraid he will fail. Au contraire; it is entirely because they are  terror-stricken that he will succeed!

 Coming January 20th – an Inauguration Day retrospective of the Obama presidency

Plague or Pestilence?

Here are some final thoughts about the 2016 election and a far, far too early look at 2020.
Plague or Pestilence?
By: George Noga – November 6, 2016
      I have been a keen observer of US presidential elections beginning 56 years ago in 1960. This election is different than anything I have seen before; only 1968 comes remotely close. By any conventional method or measure, Clinton wins; nevertheless, there is a path still open for Trump if all the factors noted below break just right.
 –

     ##  The polls are wrong. For technical reasons (absence of landlines, etc.) polling is much less accurate than in past elections. Polling was notoriously wrong in many primaries, in the Brexit vote and most recently in the Colombian FARC treaty vote. Many people, especially Trump voters, do not divulge their true feelings to pollsters.

     ##  The massive global failure of government drives voters to make a change. Government is failing in the US, Europe, Japan, the Middle East and elsewhere. Change is in the air worldwide and the USA is not immune from this dynamic which was clearly manifest in the Brexit vote and in other recent European elections.

     ##  Voter turnout could produce a seismic swing if blacks and millennials stay home while evangelicals turnout in force. Polls do not properly account for turnout.

     ##  Obamacare is a festering wound and massive voter repudiation could happen.

A Ridiculously Early Look at the 2020 Election
Are you ready for President Tom Cotton?

     Believe it or not, I honestly think I can make a fairly accurate assessment of the 2020 election. Just as it can be easier to see longer term movement in stock prices, the same thing is possible in politics – especially given conditions and trends in the USA.

     Assuming Hillary wins in 2016, her policies will be a continuation of the failed Obama regime. The US economy will remain in a low (or negative) growth mode and lucky to avoid recession. Recessions occur every 7 or 8 years and 2020 would be 12 years since the last one. Hillary’s tax, regulatory and trade policies will prove disastrous and at some point this will be reflected in the financial markets. Obamacare will fester for four more years leading to massive voter repudiation. The global anti-government movement will build steam and morph into an unstoppable force.

     By 2020 the US will be an economic basket case with immense underemployment, stagnant (or even declining) middle class incomes and debt and deficits nearing critical mass. Malaise will define the national mood. The country will have suffered through 12 years of one party rule; historically this means change – which would have occurred in 2016 had anyone but Trump been nominated; it is merely being delayed four years. Did I mention a weak military, foreign conflagrations and a worsening of terrorism?

     It is ridiculously premature to predict who the president will be in 2021, but my bet is firmly on Tom Cotton. Remember, you read it first in this post. Heck – I am going to go all in on Cotton. Not only will Cotton win big in 2020, he will go on to lead a Reaganesque revival in America – provided America still is recognizable in 2021.


We are skipping next week; the next post is scheduled for November 20.

Les Deplorables – Special Posting

The 2016 election will be decided by les deplorables – good-hearted, hard-working
Americans branded as racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic and Islamophobic.
Les Deplorables – Special Posting

By: George Noga – September 20, 2016

       I tuned out election prattle all summer, knowing nothing much matters until after Labor Day. Back in the loop and with fresh eyes and ears, I now sense a denouement to the election coinciding with Hillary’s “basket of deplorables” comment. I don’t purport to know who will win the election, but I now know how it will be decided.

     The 2016 election will be decided by les deplorables, i.e. those who are fed up with political correctness, which is really about coercion, intimidation and control with the ultimate objective of criminalizing speech distasteful to elites. It will be decided by the  basket of deplorables in rust belt America whose jobs and income have stagnated for a decade but are patronizingly scolded that all is well. It will be decided by coal miners and energy workers victimized by elitist environmental zealots. Les deplorables even have a theme song, “Do you hear the people sing?” from Les Miserables.

 

“Do you hear the people sing?
Singing the song of angry men?
It is the music of a people
Who will not be slaves again!
When the beating of your heart
Echoes the beating of the drums
There is a life about to start
When tomorrow comes!”

     The election will be decided by les deplorables, good-hearted, hard-working Americans branded as racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic and Islamophobic. That remark was no slip of the tongue; it was an insight directly into the dark soul of progressives and their loathing of fly-over America. It will be decided by legions of 29ers, 49ers and victims of Obamacare’s high premiums, deductibles and co-pays.

     The election will be decided by les deplorables revulsed at the latte-left’s perversion of American history and its role in the world and by repugnance over campus idiocies such as trigger warnings, microaggressions and safe rooms. It will be decided by deplorables’ disgust at legalized theft by public sector unionism and particularly by teachers unions standing in the schoolhouse door blocking poor children from leaving.

     The election will be decided by les deplorables‘ outrage about being lied to ad nauseam. Elites lie congenitally about terrorism; they always opt for lies over truth.  Hillary lies so often it is hard to keep track; there was Whitewater, cattle futures, White House travel office, sniper fire in Bosnia, emails, Benghazi and now pneumonia-gate.

     Les deplorables will decide the November election; the only questions remaining are how many of them turn out and will it be enough. I can hear the people singing; it is the music of a people who will not be slaves again – slaves to political correctness, slaves to name calling, slaves to a moribund economy and slaves to progressive lunacy and lies. Could there be a new life about to start – when November comes?