LDS Freedom Forum

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 11:54 am**

The Republican party is dead. Well, it's dying. And with it the faux conservative movement. It'll either be replaced by people who love liberty, or be eradicated for many years or decades until the seeds of liberty find fertile ground again. I'll explain why.

First off, about me. I'm social psychologist by education (and I've studied many more fields, both in and out of university and have held/do hold certifications in a number of fields, from manufacturing, to healthcare to fitness), and I've been an entrepreneur by profession. I've lived in more than one country (and I'm not referring to a religious mission), and gone to school abroad. I've lived in a few states, and been to nearly all of them. I've studied 7 languages at the university level, and several more personally. I follow the news about 5 hours a day, sometimes more, if there's something major happening (Like Canada's unprecedented election last week). I successfully predicted the timeline for same-sex marriage coming to Utah, and the rest of the country. I'm a TRUE conservative, and liberty-loving individual. Most of my life I was unaffiliated, but in the last election, I followed the First Presidency admonition to go to the caucuses, and since in Utah the Republicans want you to be a member of the party to attend the caucus, I switched right there from unaffiliated for the first time in my life, and was drafted into the precinct leadership withing 5 minutes. My best friend was voted chair and I was voted in vice-chair, my precinct asked me to serve in that capacity within a matter of seconds of joining the party. I have served to the best of my ability, but do not like either of the major parties. I went to a prestigious high school, but meandered in University, but have friends who are politicians in many states and who have gone to virtually every major university in the country, and who literally know members of the Supreme Court. I don't have much influence in the political process (but do have some minuscule amount, haha), but what I do have is a strong network of people have are involved at all levels, so I speak with great confidence. Oh yeah, and I LOVE statistics.

Now, I've given that background to explain why I'm confident enough to make my predictions. I am going to split this post into multiple parts, and I write lengthy posts, I apologize. But I hope to draw your attention to WHY the republican party is dead (It's not because everyone loves free stuff, but everyone does, and Republicans disgust me just as much as the democrats in that capacity), in the hopes that people will change their actions to build a better country, rather than their sports team party simply fading into oblivion, or worse, trying to violently assert themselves. I suspect both will happen anyway.

So here is a list of predictions I have. My personality type is renowned for our ability to see things afar off (we're the guardians of society, so it's fitting), but we don't see a chain of inescapable events, like a prophecy (unless we're actually prophesying, lol). But what we do see is a web of interconnected possibilities, like a spiderweb. And for me, I have come to see the along each line there are events that unfold together. And like a string of pearls, one the strand is broken, all the pearls fall together. But only until those events reach an intersection, the string is NOT a slippery slope. So that's why my predictions will be vague in some ways, but detailed in others. Because I don't know precisely what and how things will happen, but I can guarantee you that the OPTIONS are very limited, and depending on which thing DOES happen first, will bring with it a series of other events. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think so, but we'll see. So here's the list of if/then predictions, and I'll follow up with the explanations separately. On each point I may be "right" or "wrong" but I'm not trying to predict an exact event (my type rarely does that, because we see more variables than anyone else, and know of the black swans, etc.), but the more important message is the NETWORK of ideas that fit together. Hopefully I can get that across.

1. Donald Trump or Marco Rubio will win the Republican nomination. No one else is even close. I suspect it will be Trump though, but it's anyone's guess. Right now the Republican party is trying to take Trump down with "10,000 points of smart negative [advertising]," so this depends on if he decides to stay in and go full bore, or to bow out because he's lost interest in becoming President. If Trump leaves (I think he won't, I think he'll fight back), the establishment is going with Rubio. (This is an example of the uncertainty, I don't know what he will choose, but I know the results of each choice with a high degree of certainty).

2. If Donald trump becomes president, he will be the last Republican President to ever walk the Earth(and maybe the best qualified, though ultimately ineffective). The democrats will block him at every turn, like Republicans have done to Obama, and he will have very little power. Democrats can obstruct just as well as republicans have. Time favors democrats. If Trump drops out, the President will likely be Hillary.

3. If any Republican (Trump pr not) is the president come 2017, they WILL be the last Republican president. If the 2017 President is a Democrat (Hillary, in this possibility thread), then the Democrats will probably take the Senate, and appoint 2-3 Supreme Court justices. (I'll explain this prediction thread in a separate post).

4. Obviously, the democratic primary will come down to Hillary or Sanders. Now here's the clincher. If Trump stays in, the variables change. Trump in=Sanders might be his opponent. Trump out=Hillary will likely be the opponent.

5. If a Republican wins 2016, the resultant 2020 opposition will be so unprecedented and flabbergasting, that Democrats will hold every branch of government after 2020. If a Democrat wins 2016, they will win Senate and Presidency, and change the face of the Supreme Court, and I don't know what will happen in 2020. But it'll still potentially expedite the certain end of the Republicans.

6. By 2025 the Republican Party will begin the process of assimilation into whatever new, more centrist Party develops.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 12:33 pm**

Well, I have another analysis and that is based on demographics. Remember when California was dominated by the Republican party? Remember when California was mostly a white state? That is no longer the case and only a minority of that new majority favors the policies of the Republicans. And as California goes so will the rest of the nation. High immigration coupled with low birthrates of whites will yield a political landscape that will never see a
Republican elected after 2020. With no Republican president the courts will become dominated by liberals as the president appoints the federal judiciary. And here is what allowed this to happen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_ ... ptive_pill" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 12:52 pm**

I think you are off on quite a few of those guesses. I probably agree with your leanings on 95% or more. I am wondering what your personality type is (I am an INTJ, and I suspect you are.) You talk about the Republican party being assimilated into a new more centrist party, but the Republican Democrat secret Combo has really made it almost impossible for a third party to rise to power. I would say we are more likely to become essentially a one-party nation than for a third party to rise up in the next decade. Only an armed revolution will change that in my opinion, and I think that is extremely unlikely.

You have an impressive resume by the way. The fact that you were elected to precinct leadership actually has me doubting you are an INTJ on further reflection. I'd be interested to know, though.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 12:54 pm**

Quite a long OP.
Reminds me of "Spencer"; going to such lengths to tell us how qualified you are, how experienced you are, and how popular you are. Not to mention a sprinkling of friends in high places for good measure. It seems to me that most of the post was about you.

As for your predictions, you seem to hedge your bets to a significant extent. "If this happens then this might happen, but maybe that, or something else".

I'll make a prediction.
With so many scenarios, it would be remarkable if you didn't get something right.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 12:55 pm**

I'm Head of the Meme Police and make a mean cup ramen but I don't tell nobody about that, I keep that to myself yo.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 1:11 pm**

Glenn Beck is also predicting the demise of the Republican Party. It has been Satan's and therefore the Democratic Party's goal since it's inception to rule and control the earth. The Republicans have largely sold out or have been blackmailed into following Satan's minions. The Republican Party as it now exists, has no purpose to exist, other than to be an extension of Satan's Democratic Party.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 1:22 pm**

So here's how I'll try and take these, maybe two at a time.

1. Donald Trump or Marco Rubio will win the Republican nomination. No one else is even close. I suspect it will be Trump though, but it's anyone's guess. Right now the Republican party is trying to take Trump down with "10,000 points of smart negative [advertising]," so this depends on if he decides to stay in and go full bore, or to bow out because he's lost interest in becoming President. If Trump leaves (I think he won't, I think he'll fight back), the establishment is going with Rubio. (This is an example of the uncertainty, I don't know what he will choose, but I know the results of each choice with a high degree of certainty).

Donald Trump is a successful ENTJ. ENTJ's are competent and effective leaders (they get the reputation of Bulldozer precisely because they ARE effective). I don't agree with all of his politics, but he has the ACTUAL executive skills a president SHOULD have. (I should state here, that I think this entire crop of candidates, on both sides, is pretty...undesirable). But Donald Trump is a real executive (ENTJ), and many people WILL flock to him. The establishment is trying to knock him down, but it may be too late. The primary method that adversaries use against an ENTJ is to all gang up on them at once (this concept as portrayed in media would take dozens of posts, itself, but think the fellowship of the ring against Sauron, that's the romantic fantasy idea of banding together and taking down the "unstoppable" ENTJ). But suffice it to say, ENTJ's are the natural leaders. People see their strength and usually trust their judgement. They don't think they know everything. I loathe "leaders" who think they know everything. Because that person is EXACTLY the type of person that doesn't listen to reason. But if you look at those polled, people say they like Trump because he is effective and sincere, even when they don't agree with him. And many/most people flock to that. And it is the best personality type to lead, but the individuals obviously aren't always "right."

The media keeps getting mad at Trump, precisely because he says he will hire the best teams once in office, rather than give them policy talking points. THAT'S the BEST ANSWER POSSIBLE, and the one that reasonable people expect. Emotional "Superfans" expect their pony to have all the answers. No intelligent person tries to, and Trump repeatedly acknowledges that planning before you have the details is meaningless (as an ENTJ I understand exactly why, because we know plans change constantly, so a general direction is important, exact details change every minute). Because he isn't privy to all the details now, and he's not going to box himself in with a plan that may change entirely with new information. Even my Octagenarian grandmother (a blue dog democrat), explained why she likes him. Because shes lived through every president since Hoover, and she's tired of "know it alls." Their plans always fail, because they lack the intellectual capacity to adapt (what's why they aren't executives, now). My grandmother's family has been in business for nearly 100 years. My two Uncles (One Staunch Republican, one Independent) are all voting for Trump. All of them (which amazes me), and all say the same, "He is sincere" (he is) and "he's bold" (he is), and "he's effective," (he is), and "if he's wrong, he'll change and figure it out," (he would).

I do believe Donald Trump would be one of the best leaders we've ever had, because all ENTJ's try and do what's best for the collective. And they want peace. But again, that's a long post. I don't agree with Trump on so many issues, but of all the candidates, he's the most likely to be reasonable, and get something done...under normal circumstances. This is a stacked deck election (I'll explain), and during this period of time, if he's elected he will not accomplish anything, and that's too bad.

So that's the thing about this prediction. The republican establishment is pushing for Rubio. And doing everything to get Trump out now. If they knock Trump out (which really would mean Trump stopped wanting to run, more than anything), but if Trump is out, his supporters aren't going to flock to anyone else en masse. They are following Trump because they want a REAL LEADER (flawed as he may be), the rest are all lackeys and puppets. They may be intelligent, but they are all either woefully incompetent or entirely unelectable. (Fiorina, for example, could be a competent leader, but may be entirely unelectable). People don't normally flop from a real leader to a readily identifiable puppet. They just don't. They may initially follow the puppet and keep following them, but they usually don't hop from genuine to puppet. A few will switch ponies, but MANY will just sit the election out. And Hillary will swoop in and win both the Presidency and the Senate. Probably not the ridiculously gerrymandered House (which I will address later). She will then stack the Supreme Court, and then I don't know what could happen in 2020. That's too far ahead, with to many variables to reliably predict. I'll come back in a few years.

2. If Donald trump becomes president, he will be the last Republican President to ever walk the Earth(and maybe the best qualified, though ultimately ineffective). The democrats will block him at every turn, like Republicans have done to Obama, and he will have very little power. Democrats can obstruct just as well as republicans have. Time favors democrats. If Trump drops out, the President will likely be Hillary.

Time favors democrats. It's as simple as that. Every year, millions of people die. Most of them are Republicans. Every year new voters become eligible. The VAST majority of them vote democrat. Republicans and democrats are both socialist. The Republicans offer corporate control of government, and the democrats offer government control of corporations. They are two wings of the same bird. I won't go on this topic too much, but suffice it to say, when given the choice between happy socialism (Democrats), and socialism with an guilt trip Republicans), they'll choose the feel good socialism every time.

And students are and will be brought up in Socialist schools as long as you have TAXPAYER FUNDED AKA SOCIALIST EDUCATION CAMPS, you will continue to get socialism. Westerners have flawed thinking in always blaming individuals (the Social Psychological term is "The Fundamental Attribution Error"), they never look at the system. And it's the system at play here. It's socialism that breeds more. (Virtually) No one wants liberty, they just want socialism that favors themselves. The church used to be against public schools. Now people in the church love it. It's essentially daycare paid for by their neighbors. They whine about minimum wage, but equally whine about welfare. People have to live, and most minimum wage earners are adults with families. So the choice has become let government make the corporation pay higher wages (fascism), or take from taxpayer to pay for social welfare since no one can live off of minimum wage (fascism). [We don't have a true free market, so EVERY option will be fascism/socialism]. And since republicans love their preferred forms of socialism, they can't really complain about the other forms of socialism. That's the problem. Republicans promise socialism (Social Security, Public Education, Corporate welfare) to a select few, and Democrats promise it to everyone (Universal Healthcare, Free College, etc.). There's really not much of a difference in the nature of the promises, besides the rhetoric and guilt tripping. So, as things progress, time favors Democrats (Both parties abuse the populace, but Democrats say nice things and provide a bigger return/more stuff for everyone, and Republicans brow beat, and provide very little to a select few).

This election, most of the seats are Republican. They may (read: will probably, but for a miracle) lose control of the Senate no matter what. So even if they win the House and the Presidency in 2016, the Democrats will just block everything the republican president does (99% sure that would be Trump). Because this is what REPUBLICANS HAVE DONE FOR YEARS. Republicans have refused to help make a budget, for example, and to nominate judges. There's HUNDREDS of federal court vacancies. Do you think the new Democratic Senate will approve anyone they don't want? NO WAY. Republicans have blocked everything (whether you agree with it or not), and the Democrats have been watching. They WILL turn the tables. The last midterm election (2014) had tiny voter turnout, it is not indicative of a change in ideologies. Republicans vote more frequently, and the midterms and special elections ALWAYS favor them. Last time was no exception, and people who think it was sending a message are absolutely incorrect (IIRC, most votes were cast overall were for Democrats, disenfranchised through gerrymandering). The Republicans flouted that they picked up Senate seats, and that was true. But it was because there were WAY MORE democratic seats up for a potential loss. And the Midterms ALWAYS favor republicans. (Senate Seats are popular, so gerrymandering isn't the problem there, but is with other elections).

This is vitally important to understand, because 2016 is the flip side, but on steroids. Remember, time favors Democrats. This time REPUBLICANS have more seats up for potential loss. Rand Paul (the presidential candidate) is even at risk of losing his Senate seat, because even though he changed the law so he could run for both offices, he can't spend time in two places. And this Election Year is also for President, which means Democratic turnout will be very high. So that's two things, more Republican seats for grabs, more democratic voters (through death/maturation), and higher democratic turnout (Presidential year). I am almost positive the Democrats will win the Senate, and how (but there's always the chance I'm wrong, but it's the objective variables that matter, I believe). But what about 2018, can Republicans take the Senate back? NOPE. Because there won't be a ton of democratic seats up for grabs like this election, and the populace will trend more and more to the democratic party with more time.

Like an anaconda, the political squeeze only tightens. They anaconda may lets you take a breath, but each time, you do, it squeezes tighter. That's what's happening. Republicans CAN'T ATTRACT NEW VOTERS because their ideology on issues that matter to younger generations are adversarial. Younger voters are consistently told their wages should fund republican favored socialism (Social Security, Medicare, certain tax credits, etc.), but should not be used for democratic favored socialism (Universal Healthcare, College Tuition, etc.). So the republicans repeatedly tell younger people to pay for older people's socialism ("because they earned it') while telling them they are lazy, and that they should simultaneously try and "work hard" enough to pay for older generations socialism, while paying for their own college and healthcare, and that they should stop feeling entitled. And they're told if they want to make more money, they should get an education. (Basically they blame the poor for being poor, and demand they work harder, and when they try and climb up the ladder, they still tax the kids to pay for their pet programs, like social security, while denying them help to get an education, so they're stuck being poor, in a viscious loop). Wherever one personally falls on the "blame the next generation" continuum, the objective fact remains, minority and young voters are largely turned off by the Republican Party. So I'll leave that point at that.

I don't like democrats more than republicans, and I hate the sneaky baloney that both do. So please don't think I'm rooting for democrats. But I am confident in the prediction, because if you can see the factors, you can see the end, or at least rule out and narrow down possibilities. And this is important. The Republicans have not compromised and have forestalled everything (Look at the current Speaker fiasco!). Budgets, Judicial Nominations, everything. And it's like water behind a holding dam. And if Democrats win now, they get to have the presidency, and the Senate. Which means they get the Courts, too. So then, the next (2020) election is up in the air, but their party's structure is in place. So if democrats win the Presidency this time around (2016), they further their agenda. But if they don't win the presidency, they still win the Senate. But then, for the next 4 years, people will blame Republicans, and the Republican President for government doing nothing, and more and more pressure will build. And then in 2020, the dam WILL break, and they will get everything. House, Senate, Presidency. And if they win the house in 2020 (and they certainly will if a republican wins this time--I believe not even gerrymandering will be able to stop the politically adversarial and demographically amplified sweep, of 2020) they will be able to undo the Republican Gerrymandering, and may even turn the tables, thereby cutting the Republicans off forever. A republican winning the Presidency this go around will be to the doom of their party, I'm certain of that, barring some wild miracle or black swan.

So whether the democrats win or lose this Presidential election (barring some enormous outlier event), they WILL win in the long term. Hence the point of this post. Candidates moving more and more extreme to win the Republican Party Primaries (and winning the "tea party" purity test), only speeds the demise. Because the fringe cannot dictate the candidate for the average Joe. Tea Party approval was at I think 17% this morning, and Republicans can't even find a Speaker of the House. They are in a death spiral, and want to slam on the gas pedal. That's a recipe for disaster.

(P.S. I should not that the original, bipartisan tea Party was admirable in scope, but now it's been taken over by the most fringe of the fringe, that is cannibalizing itself. Because the thing about extremism, is that after a certain point, no one can keep up with the crazy train. The original, leaderless tea party was great in theory, but now it's gone, subsumed by ever dwindling numbers of ever-increasingly irrational extremists).

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 1:28 pm**

Fiannan wrote:Well, I have another analysis and that is based on demographics. Remember when California was dominated by the Republican party? Remember when California was mostly a white state? That is no longer the case and only a minority of that new majority favors the policies of the Republicans. And as California goes so will the rest of the nation. High immigration coupled with low birthrates of whites will yield a political landscape that will never see a
Republican elected after 2020. With no Republican president the courts will become dominated by liberals as the president appoints the federal judiciary. And here is what allowed this to happen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_ ... ptive_pill" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I agree, I actually brought up the demographic numbers in my first, more in depth approach. the demographics don't lie. The trend is absolutely towards the Democrats. I think it's nigh unto impossible to reverse the tide, as Edward Griffen/Yuri Bezmenov (the KGB defector in the 1980's stated). Because public education is Socialist, and churns out more socialists. It's a systemic problem, but most westerners love to blame individuals, not seeing the forest for the trees.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 2:08 pm**

2EstablishZion wrote:I think you are off on quite a few of those guesses. I probably agree with your leanings on 95% or more. I am wondering what your personality type is (I am an INTJ, and I suspect you are.) You talk about the Republican party being assimilated into a new more centrist party, but the Republican Democrat secret Combo has really made it almost impossible for a third party to rise to power. I would say we are more likely to become essentially a one-party nation than for a third party to rise up in the next decade. Only an armed revolution will change that in my opinion, and I think that is extremely unlikely.

You have an impressive resume by the way. The fact that you were elected to precinct leadership actually has me doubting you are an INTJ on further reflection. I'd be interested to know, though.

I'll take it line by line, so I can give you a worthy response.

I think you are off on quite a few of those guesses. I probably agree with your leanings on 95% or more.

Thank you, I appreciate the kind words. I'm going to go into great, objective detail and why I'm making these assertions, and hopefully we can try and solve the ideas together, or at least bring in more variables, when I finish all the points, but I tend to write too much for most people to handle in one reading (as a lead extroverted thinker, and that I can type pretty fast, it adds up quickly, lol).

I am wondering what your personality type is (I am an INTJ, and I suspect you are.)

I'm an ENTJ. Which, explains my sporadic posting, and jumpy thoughts, because I'm pretty busy and so is my brain, lol. I'm going to just trust that that's your personality type and accurate (online tests are often wrong, and can mistype, so we have to look at the Jungian functions to get a good picture), but operating under the idea that you're an INTJ, then we would be very similar. (INTJ's and ENTJ's share the same functions, but have different priorities). The main difference between ENTJ/INTJ types is that the ENTJ's are a little broader in their thinking (Lead Te function), and more likely to change with the circumstances (secondary Ni), and INTJ's are more resolute (Lead Ni), and less assertive in action and broad in thoughts (Secondary Te), but overall they are pretty similar. One thing that's characteristic is that I seldom make value judgements (I have a hard time thinking, "This is best," because my Te function means I see more variables, and my second Ni function makes me not as concrete), so I look at everything very, very objectively, in terms of "Does this actually work." (My lifelong challenge is to help the other types feel valued and appreciated, and not run over). But no other type is more outwardly/extrovertedly logical than the ENTJ, though the ESTJ is comparable, though the rest of the traits greatly change our practical personalities. (Also lead Ti functions are internally logical, but I'm digressing, lol).

You talk about the Republican party being assimilated into a new more centrist party, but the Republican Democrat secret Combo has really made it almost impossible for a third party to rise to power. I would say we are more likely to become essentially a one-party nation than for a third party to rise up in the next decade. Only an armed revolution will change that in my opinion, and I think that is extremely unlikely.

I agree on every point, but have trouble articulating this, so I apologize in advance. This is a variable I'm not certain HOW it will play out, only that it will, in some fashion. I think what will happen is that both parties (Democrat and Republican) will morph, and effectively the Republican party as it now exists will disappear altogether, regardless of name. I think it's possible that the Republicans will simply "rebrand" themselves as something like, "The New Republicans" or something along those lines, and the ideology will change, and they will eject the old platform that refuses to change. But something must change, because they will literally die off, otherwise. And those in charge want the appearance of two major parties, to simulate choice (us vs. them). They may not even change names. I don't think a "new" third party (how we traditionally think of them) will form/grow to overtake the "republicans." It's difficult to express because Republican VOTERS and Republican PARTY LEADERSHIP have very different goals, methods and platforms. That's why many say, "My Party has Left Me." They aren't represented, and it won't go on forever, there has to be a division/fracture, or an exodus. If that makes sense. You are right, that the leadership is all puppet-ed by the secret combinations, so we have to think of the party, and the public as two separate entities.

So I apologize because I don't think linearly in that fashion to know exactly what the result will be, but even writing this now, I'm think more about it, and leaning towards a splinter. (Thank you, because your post is what I'm hoping for, that we can all add our unique perspectives to get a good picture, from whence to effect beneficial change). I feel now, that maybe the process to keep up the status quo will be that there has to be a simultaneous expulsion of the current extreme fringe of the republican party, and a simultaneous draw. I don't think republican VOTERS will revamp their party so much as they will have a civil war and SPLIT, making two parties (that may or may not have new names).

So perhaps the most likely, is that the most extreme and the most centrist will split the party in two (the centrists will take more with them, and pick up more independents), and the extremists will fall by the way side, slowing dwindling through attrition (They tend to wane, without numbers to bolster their bluster). The only other alternative I can see (and I'm open to more ideas) is for the centrists to eject the extremists (a possibility), and then the "Republican Party" could keep it's name, but still actually "die" as we know it. (this could help or hurt them, though, because they will lose numbers, and may not get them back). But either way, there will be some kind of split, and whatever ultimately survives will be more centrist. That much I am confident of, and what name they will have, I'm not sure. But that's what makes the most sense to me. Not the rise of a "new" third party, so much as a splintering off, and what's left is fundamentally different.

You have an impressive resume by the way. The fact that you were elected to precinct leadership actually has me doubting you are an INTJ on further reflection. I'd be interested to know, though.

I appreciate your kind words, again. To be honest, I didn't want the job, but I didn't know I could reject it at the time! The parliamentary procedures went, and I went along since the vote was unanimous and didn't find out until later that I could have said, "no." But I decided to stick with it, hoping I could do some good, and influence some ideas. Time will tell.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 2:24 pm**

Yeah I'd agree with that, I mean right wing politics aren't the sort my generation wants, I mean you can only tell a group of people they suck so much before they stop listening and go elsewhere.
Kind of got to give someone an intensive to vote for a party or else they'll vote for another one.
I don't see enough people asking why people are going left instead of right, just anger that it's happening, which leads to nothing but rage on the internet.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 2:32 pm**

Robin Hood wrote:Quite a long OP.
Reminds me of "Spencer"; going to such lengths to tell us how qualified you are, how experienced you are, and how popular you are. Not to mention a sprinkling of friends in high places for good measure. It seems to me that most of the post was about you.

As for your predictions, you seem to hedge your bets to a significant extent. "If this happens then this might happen, but maybe that, or something else".

I'll make a prediction.
With so many scenarios, it would be remarkable if you didn't get something right.

Thank you for taking the time to reply! The OP was largely about me. I think I said that (Not sure, I meant to say that it would deal with me, before jumping into the details, sorry if I missed it). But, if you thought that post was long, just you wait, for there's many more to come (And you don't have to click on any of them! It's completely up to you, friend, I promise it won't hurt my feelings.) And of course the initial explanations weren't detailed, that's what the subsequent posts are for; I won't let you down on lengthy details, I ASSURE you of that.

Who is "Spencer?" President Kimball? Sorry, I'm not familiar with the reference.

I'll make a prediction.
With so many scenarios, it would be remarkable if you didn't get something right.

There's not that many scenarios. And there will not only be lots of evidence to support them, there will be absolutely logical connections to show their cogency. I'm a scientist. Scientists are familiar with dichotomies. Everything in life is "this or that." Even the computer most of us are typing on is "this or that." Binary, 0 or 1. Off or on. All Logic is "this or that." (Well, "If this, then that"). I'm not omniscient, but I AM good at predicting probable outcomes. If you see a flaw in the logic, please let me know. Show me where you think the facts don't add up. We can add them up together. You can add more facts to the understanding of the situation that you think will effect the outcome. That's the point, once we can lay facts onto the table, we can see what to do. I'm seldom surprised by anything, and many people are taken off guard (See: Karl Rove and the 2012 Ohio Election results). Having a clear picture helps us choose our path. I would love for you, and everyone else to add details, the more, the merrier.

I think a portion of your hangup is that I didn't include everything in my first post, which you seem to have thought was too long for your taste. (That and the fact that you're an introverted thinker/extroverted feeler, obviously; see my post on Monkeys and Dolphins). But even that tells me to try and hone my thoughts, or make them into more manageable bites. That's helpful, thank you. I don't expect you to take my word on anything. I will back any of my predictive assertions with the relevant details. We must first gather the facts (that's what I've been doing my whole life, it's just my nature), and then we can verify or refute their veracity, and their relationship. That's what logic is. The consistency and relationship of facts.

As for telling people about myself, in my years of posting on this forum, I have seen many iterations of "tell us about yourself." My life might bore one person, but interest another. I told the details relevant to my political experiences, in this case. Living in various areas, exposure to different cultures, and knowing people who are part of the political process (Local to National) are all relevant when discussing POLITICS. But I wouldn't dream of you living your life based on my logic, knowledge or experience. That's silly. But at the final day, I don't want to hear, "You knew _____ and didn't tell anyone."

If you want to contribute that's great, I appreciate that. I'm not affected by personal, emotional attacks either, be they overt or covert (That's why ENTJ's are caricatured as uncaring bulldozer; we have feelings, but they're closed to the outside world, unlike the Ti/Fe, who is dependent upon outside emotional interaction). So if you want to join in, I am grateful, if you want to move on, that's fine too. But thank you for airing your thoughts. I appreciate the chance to address the concerns.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 2:33 pm**

Sirocco wrote:I'm Head of the Meme Police and make a mean cup ramen but I don't tell nobody about that, I keep that to myself yo.

LOL, I had uncharacteristic session of meme-sharing with a lonely friend this morning. That made me laugh!

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 2:41 pm**

light-one wrote:Glenn Beck is also predicting the demise of the Republican Party. It has been Satan's and therefore the Democratic Party's goal since it's inception to rule and control the earth. The Republicans have largely sold out or have been blackmailed into following Satan's minions. The Republican Party as it now exists, has no purpose to exist, other than to be an extension of Satan's Democratic Party. ...

People who seek things to destroy, without the proper reasons, can also be weapons of Satan. I think certain things may unfortunately be inevitable. But the best I have to offer to this harsh world is reason and constructive thinking, and if those fail to resolve the issue, then they can at least be hopefully used to guide the actions and thoughts of people that choose act out in other ways, and at least temper them in meaningful ways.

I disagree with Glenn Beck on a number of issues, and I'm not prone to believe that violence is the only answer. Sometimes violence only incites more violence. Sometimes, less than that. I'll stick to reason, because I believe that it's more effective than the sword. Just be careful that you don't reacts rashly, or harshly when you should be merciful. We have all gone astray. Take care of yourself. Peace be unto you, I pray, in the name of the Prince of Peace, even Jesus Christ, amen.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 2:47 pm**

jdawg1012 wrote:
Sirocco wrote:I'm Head of the Meme Police and make a mean cup ramen but I don't tell nobody about that, I keep that to myself yo.
LOL, I had uncharacteristic session of meme-sharing with a lonely friend this morning. That made me laugh!

I remember when I was damned by not-Jesus for sharing memes here lol

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 2:49 pm**

Sirocco wrote:Yeah I'd agree with that, I mean right wing politics aren't the sort my generation wants, I mean you can only tell a group of people they suck so much before they stop listening and go elsewhere.
Kind of got to give someone an intensive to vote for a party or else they'll vote for another one.
I don't see enough people asking why people are going left instead of right, just anger that it's happening, which leads to nothing but rage on the internet.

Yes, I just watched your country's elections last week, and noted that it was yet another in a long, steady series of democratic sweeps, that's occurred lately.

Kind of got to give someone an intensive to vote for a party or else they'll vote for another one.
I don't see enough people asking why people are going left instead of right, just anger that it's happening, which leads to nothing but rage on the internet

This is called, "Ingroup/Outgroup Dynamics." It's also known as the "Us vs. them," mentality. Strange things happen as a result, and it's completely intrinsic to humans. Humans divide themselves quickly into groups. Experiments have shown that just handing a person a certain color shirt, or slip of paper, will make them divide themselves without ever being told to. Then those ingroups/outgroups take on characteristics. People forget the bad aspects of their ingroup. People accentuate bad aspects of their outgroup. People remember and embellish good characteristics of their ingroup. And they refuse to acknowledge the good things of their outgroup.

This is why so many institutions, such as spectator sports are sneakingly pernicious tools of Satan. Rather than helping us to realize we are of one heart and one mind, they serve to divide people along arbitrary lines, up to and including, killing each other outside stadiums, for no reason other than "us vs them." It's not the sport that brings the evil (though some sports ARE intrinsically evil), but the institution preys on human nature, to drive the division and purposes Satan has in mind.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 3:01 pm**

I don't believe in a Satan, not in that sense. Obviously us dividing ourselves is real but I don't like to place blame on an all powerful evil force, really it's just another layer of that good vs bad idea movies, sports, and politics (and of course religion) divides us with.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 3:15 pm**

JDawg, I am also a bit surprised you discount Jeb Bush as a likely GOP candidate. Thoughts?

I mean, i wouldn't vote for him, but I think the establishment would back him in a heartbeat.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 3:31 pm**

Trump is enough of a joke in people's minds that he will likely not be able to continue swaying enough conservatives his way. If, by some weird chance he does pull off the nomination, it will be for naught.

The media has already decided the hildabeast will be the next President.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 3:45 pm**

If Romney had run again, what chance would he have had?

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 4:13 pm**

Fascinating to me that people still contend with each other about it as if they actually had a voice or a say in the matter...

You know, comrades, that I think in regard to this: I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this — who will count the votes, and how.

- Joseph Stalin, "Memoirs of the former secretary of Stalin" by Boris Bazhanov

And with that regard only two votes matter - ES&S and DVS (...maybe three if you add in the minority market share of HI (Hart Intercivic)

We are much more than a systems manufacturer; we are an election solutions company.

http://www.dominionvoting.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...leveraging off of Ezra Taft Benson's reference in that the sole remaining thread was the franchise or right to vote...

http://www.youtube.com/v/1thcO_olHas" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.youtube.com/v/GhBtfiRKaVY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.youtube.com/v/SRTnmpDZPS4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.youtube.com/v/ejue4onX5OQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.youtube.com/v/BMqVM79-5C0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.youtube.com/v/CMjk48AzCJY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.youtube.com/v/9VS5ZTaQGSw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.youtube.com/v/BrFKkIGJ9HM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA

1. 80% of all votes in America are counted by only two companies: Diebold and ES&S.

http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/04 ... andes.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diebold" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

2. There is no federal agency with regulatory authority or oversight of the U.S. voting machine industry.

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0916-04.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/04 ... andes.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

3. The vice-president of Diebold and the president of ES&S are brothers.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/p ... mpany.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/04 ... andes.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

4. The chairman and CEO of Diebold is a major Bush campaign organizer and donor who wrote in 2003 that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/ ... 2436.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.wishtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1647886" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

5. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel used to be chairman of ES&S. He became Senator based on votes counted by ES&S machines.

http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/c ... 3_200.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/03 ... rakis.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

6. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, long-connected with the Bush family, was recently caught lying about his ownership of ES&S by the Senate Ethics Committee.

http://www.blackboxvoting.com/modules.p ... cle&sid=26" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.hillnews.com/news/012903/hagel.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/000896.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

7. Senator Chuck Hagel was on a short list of George W. Bush's vice-presidential candidates.

http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_28/b3689130.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://theindependent.com/stories/05270 ... gel27.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

8. ES&S is the largest voting machine manufacturer in the U.S. and counts almost 60% of all U.S. votes.

http://www.essvote.com/HTML/about/about.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/04 ... andes.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

9. Diebold's new touch screen voting machines have no paper trail of any votes. In other words, there is no way to verify that the data coming out of the machine is the same as what was legitimately put in by voters.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.itworld.com/Tech/2987/041020 ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

10. Diebold also makes ATMs, checkout scanners, and ticket machines, all of which log each transaction and can generate a paper trail.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.diebold.com/solutions/default.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

11. Diebold is based in Ohio.

http://www.diebold.com/aboutus/ataglance/default.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

12. Diebold employed 5 convicted felons as consultants and developers to help write the central compiler computer code that counted 50% of the votes in 30 states.

http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,61640,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/10/301469.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

13. Jeff Dean was Senior Vice-President of Global Election Systems when it was bought by Diebold. Even though he had been convicted of 23 counts of felony theft in the first degree, Jeff Dean was retained as a consultant by Diebold and was largely responsible for programming the optical scanning software now used in most of the United States.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0312/S00191.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.chuckherrin.com/HackthevoteFAQ.htm#how" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-8.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

14. Diebold consultant Jeff Dean was convicted of planting back doors in his software and using a "high degree of sophistication" to evade detection over a period of 2 years.

http://www.chuckherrin.com/HackthevoteFAQ.htm#how" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-8.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

15. None of the international election observers were allowed in the polls in Ohio.

http://www.globalexchange.org/update/press/2638.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/1 ... lexoh.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

16. California banned the use of Diebold machines because the security was so bad. Despite Diebold's claims that the audit logs could not be hacked, a chimpanzee was able to do it! (See the movie here: http://blackboxvoting.org/baxter/baxterVPR.mov" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.)

http://wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,63298,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4874190" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

17. 30% of all U.S. votes are carried out on unverifiable touch screen voting machines with no paper trail.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/ ... 2436.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

18. All -- not some -- but all the voting machine errors detected and reported in Florida went in favor of Bush or Republican candidates.

http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65757,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.yuricareport.com/ElectionAft ... hIsOut.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.rise4news.net/extravotes.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.ilcaonline.org/modules.php?o ... le&sid=950" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00227.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

19. The governor of the state of Florida, Jeb Bush, is the President's brother.

http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/tallahas ... 628725.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... Oct29.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

20. Serious voting anomalies in Florida -- again always favoring Bush -- have been mathematically demonstrated and experts are recommending further investigation.

http://www.yuricareport.com/ElectionAft ... hIsOut.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.computerworld.com/government ... 14,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/t ... sands.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1106-30.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/110904.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://uscountvotes.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICL ... facts.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As you can see from the previous links and info......the industry has consolidated much further since this article was written. ES&S purchased Diebold (renamed Premier Election Solutions prior to the sale to ES&S to keep attention down - like Blackwater renaming itself Xe Services Inc.)...then when protests go nuts....this little privately held Canadian company moves to the US and somehow purchases #2 market leader Diebold from ES&S and then just a month later the #3 market leader Sequoia. Isn't that just amazing that this tiny little company (roughly 8 years old) is able to gobble up #2 & #3 market leaders in the industry? Companies exponentially larger????

Now 90-95% of the market resides with 2 companies. ES&S and DVS.....the only two votes that matter!!!

ES&S is a subsidiary of McCarthy Group, LLC. Mike McCarthy and Rich Jarvis founded McCarthy Group in 1986 as a merchant bank dedicated to brokering businesses and making and managing investments. Today, McCarthy Group is an investment company that primarily invests its capital through the private equity funds managed by McCarthy Capital.
http://www.mccarthycapital.com/mccarthy-group-llc/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...gee I wonder who their investors are???

Premier Election Solutions,[1] formerly Diebold Election Systems, Inc. (DESI) was a subsidiary of Diebold that makes and sells voting machines. In 2009 it was sold to competitor ES&S. Another subsidiary selling electronic voting systems in Brazil is Diebold-Procomp, with minor market share in that nation. In 2010, Dominion Voting Systems purchased the primary assets of Premier, including all intellectual property, software, firmware and hardware for Premier’s current and legacy optical scan, central scan, and touch screen voting systems, and all versions of the GEMS election management system from ES&S.

At the time ES&S spun off the company due to monopoly charges its systems were in use in 1,400 jurisdictions in 33 states and serving nearly 28 million people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Dominion was founded in 2002 in Toronto, Canada, by John Poulos and James Hoover.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_Voting_Systems" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sequoia Voting Systems was a California-based company that is one of the largest providers of electronic voting systems in the U.S., having offices in Oakland, Denver and New York City. Some of its major competitors were Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold Election Systems) and Election Systems & Software.

It was acquired by Denver-based Dominion Voting Systems on June 4, 2010. At the time it had contracts for 300 jurisdictions in 16 states through its its BPS, WinEDS, Edge, Edge2, Advantage, Insight, InsightPlus and 400C systems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequoia_Voting_Systems" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...the verbiage didn't stick around very long on their homepage after I publicized it in 2012....but here is what they used to claim on the home page...

We are much more than a systems manufacturer; we are an election solutions company.

http://www.dominionvoting.com/company" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Canadian-based Dominion Voting Systems has quietly announced its second acquisition of a major U.S. voting machine company in as many months and, right out of the gate, they've lied about it. Not an auspicious beginning for the company which may now, virtually overnight, have become the dominant private e-voting machine company in this country.

In our recent breaking coverage detailing the SEC's fraud lawsuits filed against Diebold and a number of their top executives -- including their former Chief Financial Officer who, as we reported exclusively back in 2007, was the top earner from an apparent insider sell-off at the company just days before its stock would plummet from its all-time high on the announcement of spinning off their troubled election division to a "new" company renamed Premier -- we noted that Diebold/Premier's assets had recently been purchased by a small Canadian firm by the name of Dominion Voting. But Dominion hasn't stopped there.

Their purchase of Diebold/Premier's assets was actually made from ES&S, the world's largest voting machine company, who was forced to divest of the assets they'd purchased from Diebold (previously, the second largest voting machine company in the country) for $5 million last year, as part of an anti-trust suit settlement with the DoJ.

In our coverage, we noted the comment of Dominion CEO John Poulos who, in the company's press release [PDF] announcing the Diebold/Premier asset acquisition, stated ominously: "We are extremely pleased to conclude this transaction, which...will allow Dominion to expand its capabilities and operational footprint to every corner of the United States."

Indeed, the DoJ-scuttled ES&S merger with Diebold/Premier had been legally challenged since, among other reasons, the merger of the largest e-voting company with the country's second largest would have given a single company control of at least 70% of all votes cast in the nation.

What we had replaced for length, however, with the ellipses in Poulos' quote above, was this [emphasis added]: "We are extremely pleased to conclude this transaction, which will restore much-needed competition to the American voting systems market and will allow Dominion to expand its capabilities and operational footprint to every corner of the United States."

How much is Poulos actually interested in "restor[ing] much-needed competition" for "the American voting systems market"? Apparently not so much, as according to a company press release [PDF] quietly issued late in the afternoon on Friday, June 4th, Dominion has now also acquired what had previously been the third largest voting machine company in the U.S., Sequoia Voting Systems.

Not surprisingly, that late Friday announcement didn't say anything at all about "competition".

Worse, as The BRAD BLOG has confirmed, the new press release from Dominion simply lied about what the company has and hasn't purchased from Sequoia, a company which had lied themselves, for years, about the real ownership of its proprietary voting systems.

America's New E-Voting Goliath

Given the enormous share of the U.S. voting "market" now potentially controlled by Dominion -- and the now-customary revolving door between public and private officials in the "election industry" which now places former Diebold/Premier officials, former Sequoia officials, and even former state election officials at the helm of the private, little-known Canadian firm -- it comes as no surprise that Dominion would hope few in the public actually noticed their sudden acquisition of e-voting assets from some 50% of the U.S. "voting market".

Prior to ES&S' doomed purchase of Diebold/Premier last September, there were essentially four major election firms divvying up ownership of the U.S. voting market. The very rough breakdown of voting jurisdiction control by those four corporations was as follows:

40% ES&S
30% Diebold/Premier
20% Sequoia
10% Hart Intercivic

Following Dominion's May acquisition of Diebold/Premier's assets from ES&S and their subsequent purchase of the entirety of Sequoia Voting Systems announced June 4th, the very rough private ownership of public elections in the U.S. may now stack up as follows:

50% Dominion (Diebold/Premier, Sequoia)
40% ES&S
10% Hart Intercivic

We're using "very rough" percentages above for a number of reasons. Among them, there are different ways to determine market share here, such as number of jurisdictions vs. number of voters vs. contract worth, etc. Also, many of Diebold's former customers had already determined to move their contracts to ES&S during the long interim while the DoJ dithered following ES&S' initial, now-scuttled, acquisition of Diebold/Premier.

As one e-voting industry insider explained to The BRAD BLOG, Dominion purchased the remaining hardware and software assets and potential customer base of Diebold/Premier, but they purchased the actual customer contracts, as well as the hardware and software, in their acquisition of Sequoia.

Dominion's spokesperson, formerly of Diebold, formerly the Press Secretary for the Secretary of State of Georgia, the unfortunately named (at least for a voting-machine company spokesman) Chris Riggall, confirmed the insider's take to The BRAD BLOG, responding to our queries by noting Dominion "did not purchase any existing contracts, thus market share," in their agreement to buy the Diebold/Premier assets.

"Under the agreement," Riggall explained via email, "jurisdictions operating Premier equipment are given the choice to either continue their existing relationship with ES&S or assign their old contract to Dominion. It's going to take some time to see how that plays out and what decisions jurisdictions make in regard to their future needs (if any) for support, maintenance, warranties, etc."

But no matter how the numbers eventually shake out, Dominion is now a serious power-playing Goliath in the U.S. e-voting industry, and potentially even the biggest kid on the block -- all in a matter of weeks, with virtually nobody in the public or media paying attention, and even fewer seeming to give a damn about what it all means, and what it all actually amounts to.

Little wonder their press release on the Sequoia purchase mentioned nothing at all about "competition", just two weeks and change after touting the "restor[ation of] much-needed competition to the American voting systems market" after they'd purchased the assets of Diebold/Premier for $5 million.

Just another day in our bought and paid-for, fully privatized system of "public" elections in the world's once-greatest democracy.

But wait -- the story gets still worse...

Whose IP Is It Anyway?

There are a few more points concerning Dominion's purchase of Sequoia worth flagging here for now. The first, and perhaps most disturbing, concerns the following announcement in Dominion's press release upon the purchase of Sequoia [emphasis added]:

As part of the transaction, Dominion has acquired Sequoia's inventory and all intellectual property, including software, firmware and hardware, for Sequoia's precinct and central count optical scan and DRE voting solutions, including BPS, WinEDS, Edge, Edge2, Advantage, Insight, InsightPlus and 400C systems.

That statement is an out-and-out lie -- one which continues to propagate a years-long deception of the public, the media and election officials by Sequoia themselves.

As long time readers of The BRAD BLOG will recall, the matter of the true ownership of the intellectual property (IP) of Sequoia's voting systems wasn't at all what the company had represented to the public, to media, to election official customers, and even in courts of law.

As part of a detailed investigative exposé series in 2008, as we broke the story of Hart Intercivic's quietly attempted hostile takeover of Sequoia, we revealed the fact that -- despite representations to the contrary, possibly even to U.S. government investigators -- the IP for the vast-majority/near-entirety of Sequoia's voting systems was actually secretly owned by the Hugo Chavez-tied, Venezuelan-based firm, Smartmatic.

The continuing control of the IP was discovered by The BRAD BLOG long after the (largely) Rightwing outrage which had forced a federal investigation into Smartmatic's control over American elections had died down. The initial concern had coming following revelations that Smartmatic seemed to be directly tied to the Venezuelan President Chavez. Angry sentiment led by CNN's Lou Dobbs and some members of Congress (including NY's Democratic Rep. Carolyn Maloney) led to an investigation by the federal Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), subsequently forcing Smartmatic to divest of Sequoia. Sequoia was then supposedly purchased away from Smartmatic by a team of its U.S. executives, in order to make it fully independent from the Chavez-tied parent company.

But that divestiture was a lie.

Sequoia hadn't publicly disclosed that Smartmatic still retained legal ownership of the IP used in all of their voting machines, a fact that wasn't publicly revealed until our exposé which forced a subsequent admission by Sequoia's then CEO and President Jack Blaine. Blaine admitted -- in what he thought was a "confidential" company-wide conference call convened to explain the attempted Hart takeover to employees after they'd read the news on The BRAD BLOG -- that the company hadn't actually acquired the the IP from Smartmatic in their deal.

We subsequently detailed how Blaine had utterly dissembled on that point, in writing, while under very specific questioning about it from one of Sequoia's largest clients, the City of Chicago and Cook County, Illinois.

So who now owns the IP for Sequoia's voting machines used in some 20% of the U.S.? If you believe Dominion's press release, which states "Dominion has acquired Sequoia's inventory and all intellectual property", that would be Dominion.

But that is simply not true.

Dominion's Riggall admitted directly in a follow-up reply email to The BRAD BLOG, after we'd sent a direct query on this point [emphasis his]: "Smartmatic IP was not included in the Sequoia transaction, since Sequoia did not own it."

Despite Dominion's asserted belief in "transparency" (the front page of their website boasts "Welcome Transparency", and their announcement of the purchase of Diebold/Premier cites "Dominion's culture of transparency"), Riggall was unable to share the company's two purchase agreements with us due to "non-disclosure provisions in both" of them. "Legally," he wrote, "neither can be shared."

Nonetheless, the answer is clear: Venezuela's Hugo Chavez is still tied to a huge percentage of U.S. Elections, as now overseen by a Canadian firm.

When we asked Riggall for the company's explanation for their misleading press release announcing that the Sequoia transaction included "all intellectual property" when it actually didn't, he offered this Hoytian response:

The Smartmatic IP is Smartmatic IP. Sequoia did not own it, and thus it was not part of the transaction. Dominion purchased all of the IP that Sequoia owned. That's what was reflected in the news release.

According to the Dominion press release, if the rest of it can be believed, the Sequoia purchase was "reviewed by the U. S. Department of Justice and nine state attorneys general," and "also reviewed in detail and received approval by the Committee of Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)."

Unfortunately, federal CFIUS investigations are held entirely in secret, so we are unable to find out from them whether the federal body was informed of Smartmatic's continuing ownership of the Intellectual Property, and all the legal rights and privileges that go with it, as employed to conduct some 20% of U.S. elections.

Were the DoJ or any of those "nine state attorneys general" made aware of Smartmatic's continuing ownership of the IP? Do any of the "26 million U. S. voters, including the City of Chicago and Cook County, Illinois, the State of Louisiana, the State of Nevada and the majority of counties in California," who use Sequoia's systems, according to the Dominion announcement, know about it? Do they even care? How about the folks on the Right who were so outraged before?

Deafening silence continues on all fronts.

Two inquiries to Riggal, on whether CFIUS, DoJ or the nine state attorneys general were informed of Smartmatic's continuing ownership of Dominion/Sequoia's IP were sent. Neither was answered. The last query was sent on June 12th (we had to hold publication of this story as South Carolina U.S. Senate Primary E-Vote Mystery broke two weeks ago), and neither Riggall nor anyone else from Dominion has bothered to answer the simple question.

The Revolving 'Election Industry' Door

One last point worth noting, for now, on all of this. The appalling revolving door of U.S. electoral control and administration continues to spin, along with the compromise of federal and localized oversight.

Think the oil industry's corruption of federal regulatory commissions was bad in light of the BP disaster? "Big Oil" has nothing on "Big Elections" -- but because the U.S. media hasn't bothered to cover the gusher of corruption spewing into the American election system, neither has the U.S. public.

When we had questions about Dominion's acquisition of Sequoia, we called the contact phone number given "for information", as offered on their press releases.

Happy to find we wouldn't be charged for an international call to Canada, we wondered why the number had a 404 area code in Atlanta, GA. When we called it, we found out as we reached Riggall's answering machine. With the exception of the very important point about whether Dominion had informed CFIUS, the U.S. DoJ and the nine state attorneys general about the true IP ownership of their voting systems, Riggall was very helpful and quick to respond.

However, as mentioned, Riggall had formerly served as press rep for Diebold and, prior to that, as the Press Secretary to GA's Democratic Sec. of State Cathy Cox until she left the post. In 2002, long before she left office following an unsuccessful primary bid for her party's Gubernatorial nomination in 2006, Cox infamously brought Diebold's horrendous touch-screen voting system to the entire state of Georgia. The Peach State, along with Maryland, was the first to adopt state-wide use of Diebold's infamous, oft-failed, easily-manipulated, 100% unverifiable touch-screen voting systems. Chicanery with the systems has been the subject of much controversy -- fueled in part by a company whistleblower, as detailed by Bobby Kennedy Jr. at Rolling Stone in 2006 -- in regard to the declared upset victory of Republican Saxby Chambliss over then incumbent Democratic Sen. Max Cleland.

Cox also took the opportunity, along with her state's acquisition of Diebold systems, to grace the cover of Diebold's sales brochure, as seen below, to help the company sell more easily-hacked, often-failed, always-unverifiable e-voting systems to an unsuspecting, uninformed nation...

Meanwhile, last year Dominion had already hired away Sequoia's VP Edwin Smith. Readers of The BRAD BLOG may remember the woeful Smith as the one who'd first sent threat letters to Princeton computer scientists, promising legal action if they independently reviewed Sequoia's voting machines after the systems had been found to have miscounted in a New Jersey election. He then upped the public blunder by hiring his own buddy and long-time Sequoia contractor/bag-man to carry out an "independent, third party" review instead.

Smith's "independent" hire, in addition to being anything but independent, was subsequently revealed by The BRAD BLOG to have had a, um, somewhat unsavory (if very amusing) background. After we revealed all of the chicanery, the hire was fired and Smith was disciplined by the company. But apparently he's still welcome at Dominion, now one of the largest e-voting firms in the U.S. (and maybe even in Venezuela!)

And even more shamefully, last December Smith was even be welcomed onto the U.S. Election Assistance Commission! As we reported late last year, Smith, now "VP of Compliance and Certification" for Dominion, was disgracefully appointed to the EAC's "Technical Guidelines Development Committee" as one of their new "Technical and Scientific Experts". As we wrote at the time: "This would be the equivalent of appointing the sitting Vice President of Exxon Mobil to an EPA advisory committee."

What could possibly go wrong?

As we explained: "So Smith went from voting machine company Hart Intercivic to voting machine company Sequoia Voting Systems and is now at voting machine company Dominion Voting Systems, where he is a VP, selling e-voting systems to jurisdictions around the country that receive federal money doled out by the EAC. And now he'll also sit on an advisory board at the EAC helping to advise which one of those companies sees their systems certified for use in U.S. elections by the EAC. Just amazing."

Now, of course, Smith's power is even more concentrated as his new firm Dominion has acquired his old firm, Sequoia.

Around and around they all go. Where it stops, the voters never need know...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-frie ... 20084.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

....all that said.....the sole remaining thread for the Constitution - the franchise or "right" to vote still exists. You have the right to go to the voting booths and click your choices. Doesn't mean it gets counted though....

http://www.youtube.com/v/6KWGzSSCgoo?fs=1&hl=en_US" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 4:16 pm**

2EstablishZion wrote:JDawg, I am also a bit surprised you discount Jeb Bush as a likely GOP candidate. Thoughts?

I mean, i wouldn't vote for him, but I think the establishment would back him in a heartbeat.

I'll go ahead and mostly adress these other points I made, since this is going to be a really long reply anyway:

3. If any Republican (Trump pr not) is the president come 2017, they WILL be the last Republican president. If the 2017 President is a Democrat (Hillary, in this possibility thread), then the Democrats will probably take the Senate, and appoint 2-3 Supreme Court justices. (I'll explain this prediction thread in a separate post).

4. Obviously, the democratic primary will come down to Hillary or Sanders. Now here's the clincher. If Trump stays in, the variables change. Trump in=Sanders might be his opponent. Trump out=Hillary will likely be the opponent.

5. If a Republican wins 2016, the resultant 2020 opposition will be so unprecedented and flabbergasting, that Democrats will hold every branch of government after 2020. If a Democrat wins 2016, they will win Senate and Presidency, and change the face of the Supreme Court, and I don't know what will happen in 2020. But it'll still potentially expedite the certain end of the Republicans.

Jeb was the originally first bet-upon pony of the establishment (they have many that aren't intended to go far, but just serve as attack dogs). But he can't get any momentum despite the initial deposit/donation round they first invested. He was kind of like an ablative shield, if you know that that is. But in any event, he was never believed to be the likely winner, though he would have served the purposes fine if he had. I'll explain.

If you look on the Democratic side, they started with 5 candidates less than two weeks ago. One has already dropped out. Another has mused running third party. They are basically down to Sanders/Clinton and an "Also ran' (O'Malley). Depending upon how the GOP race starts to look, the Democrats will decide who to run with, Clinton or Sanders, and it will depend upon the Republican nominee. Clinton will handily win against anyone BUT Trump, and maybe Rubio (Rubio just drops his Senate re-election, today, this is why the more you know the more you can see, Rubio giving up his Senate seat means he's all in to try for the Presidency, which indicates he's received the nod). Carson (a completely unelectable candidate, who may drop out for health reasons) is being propped to whittle at Trump's lead, and the rest will run out of money, leaving Rubio as the only one with the establishment's financial backing. Rubio is also the most personable in the generals, but that's not saying much. Middle of the road doesn't usually win the generals, but he may not get a chance, if trump plays hardball.

Do not doubt, most of the GOP establishment will go nowhere in the general election, even if they had the chance and the nomination, because they CAN'T. They are already too far away from the populace, and they will have to go farther and farther to the extreme to get the fringe donors to give them enough money to survive the primary, which is why Trump has the edge. He doesn't have to pander, if he wasn't to assume the financial risk. So the question is really one of, how much money will Trump risk to win, and if he'll come with both barrels firing. He CAN come out swinging if he doesn't have a hissy fit and remains calm, and funds the effort and will win it (being patient isn't a trait of an ENTJ, so it's why they're attacking collectively, to make him falter under assault from every angle, otherwise, he'd just beat the opponents one by one, systematically, until he was the biggest dog left), but he may NOT decide to go all in, and he may not do things in the best POLITICAL way. This is why the prediction MUST be an if/then, because Trump may wake up tomorrow and get out, or may wake up tomorrow and go full bore. It's impossible to know, but once that chain of events happen, the others solidify. That's the purpose of Political Science, it is indeed science, and they're using it to campaign negatively to try and knock him out, now. If it doesn't work, they will have expended their ammo, and will have nothing left. (This is why the Republicans are terrified of Hillary's campaign, because they failed at both the Benghazi and e-mail attempts). If a group attacks an ENTJ, and they don't succeed, they merely have wasted their ammo AND given them a list of political enemies/Targets. That's why Ted Cruz is unabashedly smoozing Trump, because he can't survive a direct confrontation, so he's waiting to pick up if/when Trump gets out.

Right now against Trump, Sanders probably has the better chance. I cannot effectively predict that type of outcome just yet, because Sanders may ramp up, or not. The democrats I know, seem to think he won't get enough momentum, and I believe that, unless Trump is running, and they use him as fodder until 2020. This is a game that most people can't see and worse yet, cannot understand.

I think that everything depends on the Republican winner, and not long after super Tuesday, whings will be set on their final collision course. The Democrats are definitely factoring the Republicans into their decisions. Hillary is young enough to Run in 2020. Combined with all the other variables, if they hold the line in the Senate, ANY democrat will win in 2020, if a Republican wins in 2016. The Democratic party is waiting to see what shakes out with the republicans, before deciding who to run, but they win either way. They either win the Senate/President and get the Judiciary, or they kick the can, and get everything. For them, both options are ok.

Time favors the Democrats. I cannot stress that enough. Because new every generation is run through socialist schools, and they replace dying Republicans. It's the systemic law, it cannot change without changing public education (As Edward Griffen/Yuri Bezmenov the KGB defector explained in the 1980's. The KGB was almost exclusively oriented toward government subversion, and they do it through the schools, you cannot change anything while sending a new batch of kids to socialist schools each year. It's just NOT possible).

But if some inferior and completely unelectable candidate, like Ted Cruz were to get the nomination, the Democrats would run Hillary, now, and it would be a landslide for her, and they'd win the Senate, courts, etc. Then they'd just try and solidify that in 2020, and they're good at constant pressure, but it would slightly delay the Republican demise, because they could be the opposition party a little longer. But, if Trump gets the nod, Hillary is not sufficiently different in policy from Trump to risk wasting her, so the result would be uncertain. And they wouldn't risk running the first woman candidate and risk losing. (That could rally republicans in the long term, so I'm near positive it won't be Trump v. Hillary, unless he's so badly bludgeoned, that they think she can beat him--which right now, she probably can't, unless he's too weak to win the Primary, then it doesn't matter anyway). Unless Trump is the democratic mole people have said he is, then it's all a farce, lol.

I think they would table Hillary again, like in 2008, sacrificing Sanders to lose, with Sanders running against Trump, thereby losing the presidency. But they would get the Senate, neutering Trump until they rally in 2020, sweeping everything, probably with Hillary. So it really does greatly depend on just how Donald Trump feels on any given day. The pressure is building, so we'll see very soon. That's the things, if you can measure the forces, the movements don't surprise you.

Now, back to Jeb. Jeb, is a throwaway candidate. Think of the most of the Republican primary circus like a political gambling spread. The establishment has hedged it's bets by putting in many candidates (Rubio, Walker, Bush and Perry, etc.), because they stacked the deck with several in case they needed to use them up attacking other people (they didn't except it would be Trump), and once expended, letting them fizzle out (Presidential Candidates can pay themselves a Presidential wage from their campaign funds, every year that they run, so they aren't hurting to stay in a losing campaign that has no chance. See: Mike Huckabee). The establishment invests say 5 million in 5 candidates, rather than 25 million on one. They can always pump more money in later, but at this stage, they need to dilute debate time, and use puppets to attack in unison.

No one expected Trump to be this popular, that's why the Republican establishment is trying to knock him down, now. If they wait any longer, he'll have drawn too much support. They're running out of time, because they have to either prop up all the puppets to compete with his increasing momentum, and that's VERY expensive, or they have to stop him now. Really they waited too long, so I think it's likely he'll just bite the bullet. ENTJ's are bad at sustained battles (including political ones), they are swift, effective and brutal. But they don't like sustained fights (see: Captain Moroni's anger at having to retake cities he previously liberated). That's also why Trump demanded the debate time for the next debate be shortened. He wants to limit exposure and dominate the time, to further knock out the fading opponents. He wants to proverbially joust with serious competition, not dodge pot shots from failing, retreating guerrillas. Time will tell. It's going to be interesting, but ultimately it won't change the Republican's demise. That's a certainty, because their platform ideology is too awful for most of the populace to ignore.

But Jeb won't be the nominee if they succeed. that's been decided to be Rubio. Because if Trump goes down, Hillary is in, and Rubio is the best republican contender (after Trump) that could beat Hillary.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 4:47 pm**

skmo wrote:Trump is enough of a joke in people's minds that he will likely not be able to continue swaying enough conservatives his way. If, by some weird chance he does pull off the nomination, it will be for naught.

The media has already decided the hildabeast will be the next President.

I know you are a history buff, so I'm grateful for past election knowledge you can add.

I agree that Trump is a turn off for many people. Most real life people I have talked to him, have a love/hate relationship with him. While he's an effective executive (as I mentioned) his policies aren't necessarily popular (though, in fairness, I think he ramps up the bluster even more. I can't stand the man during debates, but find him much more personable in interviews--still, I think the whole crop is lacking).

The problem during a primary isn't that he has to be more popular then everyone else, he just has to beat out the other Republicans. IF and I stress IF that happens, then he'll face a democrat, not a Republican. I don't think it'll be Hillary (I just posted my reasoning to why, upthread). They'll just blame misogynists, stall in the Senate, and take the whole thing in 2020, I believe. I'm open to persuasion, though.

If the Republican party moves away from the extremists and electing Trump as their nominee (more centrist of their group), then he's close enough that he can win the Independents over, so I think they won't risk Hillary at that point, but it's possible (Nothing in life is 100% certain, and all), they'll sacrifice Sanders and bide their time. If Trump is primaried out, they WILL go with Hillary, and I agree, she'll be the next President. Because SHE will be the centrist candidate left standing (Rubio isn't personable enough, I think, but I guess it's possible). She'll just on the other side of the equation.

The thing is, people pick their "side," but elections are not won by sheer numbers in the parties, there are more democrats than republicans, period. And Tens fof millions of independents. And that's the problem for Republicans today. No one is good enough, hence the war over the Speaker of the House, right this very moment. Elections are won by winning the other side, not your own, and no other Republican but Trump and maybe Rubio can win over ANY democrats, and not many independents.

I'll give you an example (which I know is a hot button). Same-sex marriage. Over 60% of the country is for it. Over 70% are for employment and public accommodation laws (meaning you can't fire gay people for no legitimate reason, or deny them services provided to everyone else). Any Republican who tries to ardently oppose same-sex marriage (regardless of ones personal convictions) is going to lose. They would start with nearly a 2 to 1 opposition against them. It's not going to happen. Because it's not an issue people compromise on. It's a deal breaker. Aunt Susies won't vote for Ted Cruz, because at some point she'll have to live with the guilt when Nephew Timmy is fired for being gay. Most people will not compromise on that, and the number goes up every day. Just like interracial marriage support did. And that's just one issue Trump said follow the Law, Fiorina said follow the law. But any Politician who fights against marriage equality, a now settled civil rights/law issue (Even Elder Oaks said so) will lose. That's half of the Republican contenders, still trying to fight a battle that's over. They literally will lose in a landslide, just like brith control issues, and social security. Some issues society will now go back on. Marijuana is about to become one. But going back to same-sex marriage, most people WILL NOT vote for anyone against same-sex marriage. Almost 2 to 1. And from there, it's an uphill battle on many more issues. But that is a hard baseline. I assure it. Like dating, there's political dealbreakers. And for most people (more than 50%), it's a dealbreaker. A few years ago, it was the other way. Now it's not. And that's going to hurt anyone who's seriously running, and trying to run on an anti-gay platform.

The normal dynamic is that during the primaries, candidates move to the fringes, then move back to the center to court the general populace in the General election. The internet makes that hard to pander when anything you ever said can be brought up and played in a loop. Remember, you don't have to win your base in the General Election, you have to win independents and opponents, and keep your base from sitting home. Trump can possibly do that if he can shrug off the most extreme republican candidate's attacks. Rubio would be a very long bet, but possible. No fringe Republican can. It's simply not possible.

With the party disarray today, they cannot win a general, and I don't think they can, after this one. They might eek out this one, or they next one, but that's the end of it all. IF they win now, it's a swift end in 2020. If they lose now, they might get a small win in 2020, and never win after. So I think they have a shot at winning one more, because the anaconda will let them draw a little more breath. But the grip is still tightening, and it's irreversible.

Because the people they cater too for the primary are in the extreme minority. If anyone wins the primary, they have to go so extreme that they can't recover back to the center. That's the Foustian deal they made, like Barry Goldwater warned them would come. That's my 2 cents.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 4:58 pm**

Robin Hood wrote:If Romney had run again, what chance would he have had?

Today? Zero.

In ye olden days, pandering was easier. Information was harder to come by. You could move to the fringe to win the primary, and come back to the middle and win the general. People could ignore the flopping (like Romney's) because you could just pretend you never said something, or sweep it under the rug. You used to be able to pander a bit and then come back.

Not now. Republicans made a Foustian deal and now must move so far extreme, they can't rebound to court the middle. And the internet makes their words last forever. Some of the populace may have happily accepted Romney's 47% open mic comment, but well, we see how that played out in the general (a landslide loss). And now there's IIRC 2 million more democrats vs republicans than in the 2012 election. Soon it won't matter who Republicans run, they will be too small in number to win anything (And the House will be turned against them, using their own gerrymandering tactics). And I don't know what happens then. War I suspect. If there's an Oz behind the curtain, they have to keep the "Us vs. Them" illusion going, because if only one party has power, they can't blame anyone.

I think civil war is likely, with a foreign invasion. I've said that for many years. But at that point, not even the best "Trend analysts" with entire teams can predict with any degree of reliable accuracy. But my hunch (and not a supportable theory) is a China/Russian Invasion during the civil war, a little while after the 2020 elections. So I'll be sure to get back in 6-7 years, if I'm right! LOL, jk.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 5:46 pm**

There is voter fraud, national and in many if not all states. They have to keep a member of the cartel/NWO in White House at all times. It will not change. Either Hillary or Jeb will win as our next President. At some point, the federal government will become completely irrelevant and impotent, while we are living through tribulations. November 2016 with the election of another crook, a civil war will start. Conservatives/righteous citizens will not tolerate any longer and will rise. But Saints need to stay close to the Lord to receive direction from Him on IF we are to defend ourselves. We will be instructed at times to navigate around federal and foreign troops, to not provoke, and to not fight. We will be given extra Priesthood power of protection. There is less than a thread left.

Posted: **October 26th, 2015, 5:50 pm**

I did not vote for Romney. He is a moderate and I don't trust him. And I believe if he had of become President his actions would have caused great damage to the Church. It was a great blessing he was not elected. Of course, with voter fraud, it would never have happened.

LDS Freedom Forum

Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)

Re: Why the Republican Party is Dead--Forever (And my election predictions)