Iowa Was A Massive Gift To Trump

The DNC blatant rigging of the Iowa caucus was another in a series of massive gifts to Trump in the general election.

The DNC is claiming that the app they used to calculate rankings in the Iowa caucus was due to a flaw in programming. However, that flaw did not appear until 62% of the votes had been counted, showing Sanders in the lead in the popular vote. A flaw in programming? This app should have been less complex than an over the counter pocket calculator! Definitely less complex than a high end scientific calculator, available for less than $100 at Walmart.

This was no mistake, no error in coding. To use a brand new app without extensive testing in advance and no backup system to verify calculations concurrent to the first use is something no technology expert would ever approve. Yet this is what the DNC claims they did.

Blatant caucus rigging. In 2016, Sanders had an advantage in caucus states, where he had much stronger rates of success. It was in primary, especially closed primary states where he magically had lower success rates. Same states that had problems with inadequate ballots available, broken machines, long lines, voter registration changes resulting in large numbers of provisional ballots, most of which were discarded without being counted and purging of voter rolls. As a result, the DNC has been working adamantly for four years on ways to rig caucuses in any way they can.

Sanders’ response. Before he ever released his response, I knew word for word what Sanders’ response was going to be. “I am sadly disappointed.” That’s telling ’em, Bernie! They’re shaking in their boots NOW!!! What would his response have been if this had been the GOP making the same “error”? I suspect he would have much stronger words.

This is far worse than “disappointing”. There is no reason for any reasonable person to believe that this was not fully intentional. It has been widely revealed that the company, Shadow, that developed the app has direct ties to the Hillary Clinton campaign, the DNC and candidate Pete Buttigieg, who just happened to be leading the delegate count in Iowa, though not the popular vote, led by Sanders.

Latest in a series of DNC machinations. Starting in 2015, the DNC has been demonstrated to have manipulated the 2016 election, with delegates pledging their votes to Clinton before the first debate ever occurred, before the first primary or caucus took place. As a response to the DNC fraud lawsuit, the DNC used the defense in federal court that they were under no obligation to offer a fair primary and could choose the nominee, “In a smoke filled back room” with no public input at all. The DNC use of superdelegates has come under extreme public scrutiny, leading the DNC to alter the rules regarding superdelegates so they cannot vote until the second round of voting in the primary. In other words, if there is a contested convention. Yet they have taken steps to insure the 2020 convention will most likely be contested. Still, it has been revealed that the DNC elite has been discussing changing those rules back and allowing superdelegates to vote in the first round of voting. They also implemented the DNC Loyalty Pledge, which states the DNC chair has the final say on who the nominee is, depending on how loyal the candidate is to the party, regardless of standing in the popular vote.

Russiagate/Ukrainegate. After more than 3 years of Russiagate beginning in mid-2016, Mueller lost in court to the Russian ad agency he himself had indicted. In the same week, immediately before his Congressional testimony, the DNC lost in federal court to Wikileaks. None of this mattered when Schiff presented his opening arguments in the impeachment trial, where Schiff resurrected Russia as a specter, sounding like he was attempting to impeach Putin rather than Trump. The literal fact of the matter is that Russia had absolutely nothing to do with the Ukraine issue. This led the GOP-majority Senate to disallow witnesses in the impeachment process, rather than allow the same false arguments to be continued for months, even years longer. Sanders could have and should have opposed Russiagate, if only after the Mueller report. Instead he helped perpetuate it even 2 weeks ago.

Drama, drama, drama. Yes, we all know Trump is extremely dramatic and childish. However, so is all of the DNC elite. On 2/4/2020, Nancy Pelosi made a dedicated show of tearing up her copy of Trump’s SOTU speech. All of Russiagate and Ukrainegate were nothing but drama. Mueller indicted the Russian ad agency for theater, believing they would have no representation in court to oppose him. Democrats turned their back on him during one SOTU address. Remember that? Is this how we want this country being run? When do we get someone to be the adult in the room?

What does all of this mean? This may help Sanders but only within the devoted Democratic voters in the primary. No matter who wins the DNC nomination, including Sanders, it is likely to cause immense harm. The only hope the Democrats were likely to have this year would have been to draw in new voters or attract voters across party lines. With all of the corruption and falsehood shown by the DNC, bringing in new voters is unlikely at best. Attracting voters across party lines simply will not happen. In fact, it seems most likely Independent voters will vote against the DNC. If that was not true before, this event cinched that deal. Voters who are not “Blue No Matter Who” will not trust the DNC, even if they dislike the GOP. Bernie has not helped by saying he will (AGAIN) endorse whomever gets the DNC nomination if he does not.

Even if we accept this as a mistake, that does not bode well for a party that is expected to be in charge of our national security. In fact it is terrifying when their emails were leaked months after the FBI offered to help secure their servers. Then THAT came after the whole drama of Hillary’s email server, which the Democrats defended ferociously and continue doing so to this day.

What the DNC has shown explicitly is that they are incompetent. Even when they are being dishonest, they are ragingly incompetent in doing so. To defend this is even more incompetent and nothing short of insane.

This was only the first primary of the year. How much worse can they make the remaining 49+?

3D Chess

I love the way so many people claim that candidates are playing 3D chess in their tactics. Meanwhile, that 3D chess is always some altruistic dedication to the believer, rather than obfuscation and deceit, construction of an illusion which strips you of your rights.

It’s also amusing how too often the claimants seemingly have no ability to grasp concepts any more complex than tic-tac-toe. Just try explaining why the Mueller report was a tragic comedy to them sometime. These are people who praise not the complexity of tactics being used by a candidate. Instead they praise the name (cultism) and then ascribe complexity beyond (their own) comprehension aligned with magical benevolence to the persona they so worship.

Because that works out so well.

Which brings me to my point. Election reform is anything but positive reform. Suggested reforms hold the potential to have very sharp edges which can cut numerous ways.

Too often, people see different parts of a puzzle and see them as separate images. I consider them more like chemical compounds. One alone may be benign or even beneficial. Yet when mixed together they become highly volatile.

Take for example the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC). Under this act which has been approved in 15 blue states so far, all electoral votes in the general election are meant to be cast in favor of the winner of the national popular vote. The intention is to overcome the effect of the Electoral College. Meaning no candidate could win the election via the EC vote when the popular vote is against them. What is actually does is force states to flip votes. Say you live in a state where candidate A won the popular vote. Yet candidate B wins the popular vote in the majority of states. The electoral votes for your state would automatically change to be in favor of candidate B, as though you never voted at all.

In addition, this virtually eliminates swing states. Under the NPVIC, a candidate would win the election with only a small handful of states. The most crucial would be CA, NY, FL and TX, which by themselves account for 30% of the US population. Toss in PA, OH and IL and there would be no need to campaign in any other states at all. This means candidate A could win 43 of 50 states yet candidate B would win the election.

It also happens that NY, FL, CA and TX account for over 90% of the 0.1% top earners in the US. They also comprise 100% of corporate media management, which controls at least 95% of all media in the country.

Next we have Democratic superdelegates. Note that there is no equivalent in the Republican party. Under new rules, the superdelegates no longer get to vote in the primary unless there is a second round of voting. The passage of this rule was followed immediately by roughly 20 candidates announcing campaigns for the DNC nomination, which pretty much guarantees there will be a second round of voting in the primary.

Then we have the DNC Loyalty Pledge. This declares that the DNC chairperson has the power to disqualify any candidate whom they subjectively claim is not “loyal enough” to the DNC. There are no written criteria to measure this opinion. The disqualification can occur even after a candidate wins the nomination by a landslide popular vote.

Next up we have censorship, brought to you by Russiagate. The proponents of Russiagate have been proposing nothing less than censorship of social media for some time now. To avoid claims of US state-sponsored censorship, that censorship is not being ordered by the government but corporate social media has been “encouraged” directly in front of Congress to engage in censorship. Thus handing control of all you see and hear to corporate interests. If anyone wants to talk about election interference, this is what should be discussed.

Distortion and distraction. For over 3 years we had Russiagate, now thoroughly debunked. Neither corporate media or the DNC have acknowledged that Mueller was defeated in US federal court by the Russian advertising agency which he, himself indicted. A federal judge determined there was insufficient evidence to claim that the Russian government was in any way tied to the advertising agency. The Mueller report itself stated there was no evidence of “collusion” (sic). Yet in the opening statements of the impeachment hearing, Adam Schiff claimed as evidence for impeachment that “Russia” interfered in the election. Nearly every Democratic candidate for president also propagates this fantasy. Once again, the only exception is Tulsi Gabbard.

Campaign finance reform farce. In all of the DNC campaign finance reform proposals, there is no suggestion for any limit to corporate donations to campaigns. Many people believe this to be the case because of the wording being used. In one case a proposal by Bernie Sanders suggests banning corporate donations for the DNC convention. That does not touch campaign contributions. In other cases, the Democrats have suggested matching federal dollars to equal small donor contributions. This costs taxpayer dollars and increases funding for campaigns but again places no limit on corporate donations. There is talk of funding elections federally. Elections, NOT campaigns. Elections are already funded through taxation, not donations of any kind.

There are many other factors which play into this. These are just examples. Yes, it is 3D chess and it is played against a public that pays little attention, distracted by tweets and impeachment, party loyalty and division, media sensationalism and cult mentalities.

When we put just the above factors together in one piece, we have corporate funded campaigns, government supported censorship by corporations, misleading reform proposals that nobody reads, claims of foreign interference which were proven false, party loyalty, voting compacts which nullify any third party victories in minority states, taxpayer money for campaigns with no limit to corporate funding, distractions and distortions by elected officials and MSM, consolidating the electoral power of 4 states and, most of all, avoidance of discussing the issues the people of this country want to talk about.

The problem is, most people just keep playing along. Still thinking their tic-tac-toe will win when they’re not even playing the right game.