Very, Scary, Hairy Juice

If disaffected and discounted millennials as well as Sanders supporters stay home in droves or who waste their votes on Johnson the Libertarian or Jill Green Stein, Donald Trump will win in November. If on the other hand these people hold their collective noses and vote for Clinton, then she will win.

I can see staying home before I would go out and waste my vote on a guy, Gary Johnson, who not only has zero chance of winning but also, as a presidential candidate and leader of the so-called libertarian movement) didn’t have a clue about what Aleppo is and who couldn’t even name one head of government outside the US. (Nor could I bring myself to waste my precious vote on Stein who is polling at around 1% of those polled.)

Back to Gary Johnson, presidential candidate. Take a look at Johnson’s Libertarian platform : he believes that the less the government (gets itself involved in the social and economic life of its citizens), the better. This classifies Mr. Johnson as a reactionary, a political philosophical place on the left-right continuum which preaches devolution,as it were, and wants society to return to a bygone era, prior to governmental interventions like the 1832 British (First) Factory Act which limited the hours that kids could work and the 1911 National Insurance Act which guaranteed a minimum income to men too sick to work as well as to those unfortunate enough so as to suffer the negative consequences – both financial and social – of unemployment.

Libertarianism is based in the theory of “trickle down economics” where, while being left to its own devices and paying little or no corporate income tax, businesses will naturally expand (mysteriously), create jobs, and, in today’s vernacular, grow the economy. In the latter part of the EIGHTEENTH CENTURY, Adam Smith postulated his theory of the “invisible hand” which theorizes that individuals and businesses, all operating individually to increase their own market shares, will naturally take economic action serving to benefit the economic interest of their society as a whole in the same stroke. In other words, in the absence of government intervention to, for instance, establish a minimum wage, workers could be forced to sell themselves for wages established based exclusively on the laws of supply and demand, regardless of whether or not this is a living wage. Also, in the absence of some other form of intervention beyond the idea of “self regulation” there would be nothing to make gouging by producers and sellers of goods illegal

Anyway. Now for Trump v. Clinton :
With allegations coming fast and furiously concerning Trump’s sexual assaults on at least eight different women, at last count, the man is done. Stick a fork in him. He says he has evidence that these allegations are false and all he has offered to this point is stuff to the effect that … trust me, this never happened, it’s all a fabrication of the Clinton campaign, these women are liars blah, blah, blah plus this gem: That accusation has to be a lie because I rarely sit alone at night clubs in Manhattan. Jerry just asks you to think about that and to understand that it represents two levels of bullshit, general and specific. I don’t trust the guy. Not at all. He “rarely” sits alone … how many times is rarely? This could have happened on one of those rare times. Donald definitely talks too much while at the same time saying nothing.

Running through my mind while hearing all this shit was Bill Cosby and the allegations against him made by a large numbers of women – where there’s smoke, there’s fire. Give it up Donald, which I think he already has. His intention now is to keep that base of his fired up for action after November 8th, the date of the big vote. What kind of action, you ask? I don’t know, I answer, but I have a few ideas, all of which are scary, and none of which concerns supporting President Clinton and her administration. With his money and resources, we can only hope that he has done something, or will in the future do something to get himself locked up. The irony of the whole thing.

So I guess I hope that people don’t choose not to vote, and hopefully when they do mark their ballots, they mark them for a candidate who has a chance of actually winning, i.e. Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.

Peace be with you.

P.S. One national poll of likely voters has Hillary in front by a meagre 4%, within the margin of error here. Another national poll has her ahead by 11%.
What’s happening, folks?

2 responses to “Very, Scary, Hairy Juice”

  1. an accountant once told me that “FOOLS FIGURE, BUT FIGURES DON’T FOOL”! So Trump the Rump likes to figure that a lot of people trust him, so maybe this will be a consensus on how many people trust him. Eh? Or figure he is lying to them!
    Now as for those mysterious poll figures, eh? Got any good theories? Maybe “TRUST ME THE NUMBERS ARE REAL” Eh! Fools figure, but figures maybe are maybe, maybe??? Eh!

  2. Doubting Phil : I just noticed this comment and would like to thank you for it.
    In retrospect, I was totally wrong in thinking that Trump wouldn’t/couldn’t win. So were the polls, those in the mainstream media at any rate. Thinking a bit about it, it’s possible that those media could have manipulated poll numbers. If not, how do we explain Trump’s winning states like Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania when the mainstream polls were showing Clinton winning those states by not too narrow margins, let’s just put it that way without getting into a debate about “alternative facts” in the immortal words of Kelly Conjob? Did Trump really have access to different polling info and if so, was the data he had real or more wishful thinking, but this time from the right?
    How come Trump’s clear path to victory did not seem possible until the election results began to be tabulated?
    Taking the popular vote result into account, we can say that Trump did lose the election by 3 million votes, about 8-9% of Canada’s total population of some 36 million. It’s the way the electoral college voting broke that screwed things up if you believe what certain so-called pundits, news commentators and analysts are saying. How come the mainstream media could not see a way for Trump to win even one of the aforementioned states, let alone all three of them – Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania? Strange indeed? A buncha crooks and liars, out to somehow fill their own materialistic and financial pockets as best they can for as long as it lasts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *