Donald Trump’s Victory: The Implications

The last three weeks have shown us that the American people made the right choice in this election. Cities have been swarmed with thousands of protestors, who shut down traffic and clashed with the police. There is even an online petition to ask the electoral college not to vote for Trump. Undermining our electoral process is certainly a wonderful example to set. The riots and this foolish petition reveal the character of the people who were vying for power in this election, and thankfully were unsuccessful. The violence that has been committed will only make Americans move further away from the left.

The people who rioted are indeed a representation of the left. This is because there has not been any condemnation of these acts on the part of prominent Democrats, especially by Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. “I suspect that there’s not a president in our history that hasn’t been subject to these protests,” said Obama. “So, I would not advise people who feel strongly or who are concerned about some of the issues that have been raised during the course of the campaign, I wouldn’t advise them to be silent.” He did not have a word of condemnation for those who started the riots, and instead gave them legitimacy as people who “feel strongly” about the issues. These people are not protestors, but rather they are thugs, rabble-rousers and vandals who are disrupting domestic tranquility. Given what we have learned from Project Veritas’ videos, the rioters are likely to be funded and organized by democratic operatives.

Hillary Clinton herself publicly attacked Donald Trump for not being clear about whether he would accept the results of the election. Clinton said “it is a direct threat to our democracy.” Are these riots not a threat to our democracy? If disputing the election results is a threat to our democracy, why did she then join in the recount process initiated by Green Party candidate Jill Stein? Funnily enough, the potential recounts would be in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, states which Trump won. Clinton is looking like even more of a hypocrite now, which I did not think was possible. I think this action on her part shows just how shell shocked the left is at her defeat. The Democratic Party used all of its capital trying to get Hillary into the White House, and now faces an existential crisis.

The Democratic Party for all intents and purposes, will never be the same. There is a civil war being waged within the party over which direction the party is to go in. Robert Reich called for a new Democratic Party “that will do everything possible to advance the progressive agenda at state and local levels.” The progressives are trying to take control of the party and shift its policies even further to the left. They want to double down on their policy preferences because they believe that they lost the election because they were not progressive enough. Reich wants the new Democratic Party to “turn millions of people into an activist army.” America has already seen this “activist army” disrupting traffic and causing civil unrest in its cities. Reich’s proposal will only serve to scare more Americans into supporting Republicans. I predict that the progressives will succeed in taking the party even further to the left. They will most likely adopt Bernie Sanders’ economic policies and attempt to gain more control over the lives of Americans. Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks issued a threat of “rebuilding the Democratic Party to the point that they are afraid of us.” The word “us” referring to the progressives. The Democrats who do not join the progressives will either be bullied into accepting the progressive agenda or be made to leave the party all together. This will only serve to push more people further away from the Democratic Party. The implications of such a shift remain to be seen.

The Republican Party has also been transformed, from a party that was not fit for purpose, to one that will be led by Donald Trump. Republicans in congress who did not support him were weeded out in the election. Senator Mark Kirk from Illinois lost to Democrat Tammy Duckworth after criticizing Trump, saying he was “too bigoted and racist for the Land of Lincoln.” The Republican party is at last being held accountable by conservatives in America. Trump is the future of the party and those who do not support him will not be reelected. The next two years will reveal how the Republican party responds to its base repudiating the establishment. I believe that Trump will be able to implement key parts of his agenda, which include building the wall, deporting criminal illegal aliens, and repealing Obamacare. The 2018 midterm elections could be good for Republicans should Trump do well with this congress.

In addition to defeating both party establishments, Donald Trump has effectively destroyed the mainstream media and its influence on the American people. This is because the media used all of its political capital trying to get Hillary Clinton into the White House. They lied, race-baited and slandered as much as they could to stop Trump. Media outlets were certain of a Hillary victory, with the Huffington Post election forecast giving Clinton a 98% chance of winning the election. The New York Times gave Clinton an 85% chance of winning. CNN’s road to 270 map gave Clinton 268 electoral votes before election day. NBC’s final battleground map had Clinton at 274 electoral votes and Trump at 170. The organizations involved in data modeling have also been discredited. Professor Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia went on CNN and said that Clinton would get 352 electoral votes. The Princeton Election Consortium gave Clinton a 99% chance of winning based on their statistical models. FiveThirtyEight’s models predicted a 71.4% chance of a Clinton victory. These numbers show the disconnect between the media and the American people. They had no idea just how many silent Trump supporters there were in the country. Have media outlets learned from this election? No. Instead, they continue to try and turn the public against Trump by calling his cabinet appointees racist and saying he will go back on his campaign promises. They have already tried this during the election, and it will fail again. The fact that the media has not learned from this election means that they will continue to lose even harder in the future.

It was satisfying to see the sad faces on members of the media as the results came in. Trump played the media like a fiddle in this election, using them to propagate his own message as a form of free advertising. CNN president Jeff Zucker confessed at a talk at Harvard that “we probably did put on too many of his campaign rallies.” Donald Trump understood that he is the media’s main source of viewership, and that they could not resist covering anything he said or did. The mainstream media tried to create their own narrative about how bigoted Trump is, but they were quickly debunked by alternate news sources. Alternative media sources are what made Trump’s victory possible, because they had the ability to deconstruct the media’s narratives as they were being created. They have effectively turned mainstream media outlets into dinosaurs through their usage of the internet. The mainstream media is not worth paying attention to anymore, given how detached they were from reality in this election.

Donald Trump’s victory has also discredited all of the pollsters who predicted the results of this election. Bill Mitchell of YourVoice Radio examined the polls and found that they had oversampled democrats, women and college-educated people in their polls. All of those demographics leaned towards Hillary Clinton. He also found that most of the national polls were an average of D +11 in their sampling, which means that Democrats were way oversampled. It is little wonder that the election results contradicted the polls, since they did not represent reality at all. Megyn Kelly of Fox News asked her colleagues, “You tell me if the polling industry is effectively done?” I think we all know the answer to that question.

I believe that Donald Trump’s victory could also spell the end of the social justice movement in America. Having seen the exit polling in this election, it is clear that the social justice warriors do not represent who they profess to represent. Exit polling showed that 52% of white women voted for Donald Trump. SJWs profess to be advocates for women, but they were clearly rejected by white women who felt that Trump, the polar opposite of an SJW, would serve their interests better. It also goes to show that people are not just the racial and gender identities that are assigned to them by progressives. Identity politics was not effective in this election. The American people voted against progressives and SJWs in this election more than they voted for Donald Trump. Among those who saw both candidates as unfavorable, Trump had an advantage of 47% to 30% over Clinton. The electorate was willing to vote for Donald Trump in an effort to stop Hillary Clinton and the progressives. Donald Trump did not win the election because of racism. Unless the progressives and SJWs confront this reality, they will continue to lose in the future just as they have lost consistently this year.

Donald Trump’s victory is a result of a confluence of dissatisfaction amongst voters with the political establishment, mainstream media and progressives. Americans voted Trump into office on the promise that he would bring change. Among voters who thought the ability to bring change was the quality that mattered most in a candidate, 82% voted for Trump. The American people are tired of identity politics and the leftist agenda. They want to see America be great again. Should Trump deliver on his promises, he could wound the Democrats and the progressives who control them for at least one generation, and the country would be better for it.

Trump Wins! Time to Rejoice

In the early hours of November 9th, we saw perhaps the greatest political feat in American history. Donald Trump, against all odds, both party establishments, a corrupt media, misleading pollsters and millions of naysayers, has become the president elect of the United States. He has changed the face of American politics forever by finally giving a voice to people who were disenfranchised by the elites in Washington. Trump is not bound by special interests, unlike all of the other candidates who ran for president. He will also have Republican majorities in both the Senate and the House. I am confident that he will do everything that he said he will do in his campaign.

I would like to personally thank everyone who has worked to get the facts out to people and voice their opinions in the face of an avalanche of vitriol. I would also like to thank everyone who has read this blog and kept their minds open to my perspective. History will look favorably upon all who contributed to this movement.

Most of all, I owe my gratitude to Donald Trump. Before this election cycle, he had a wonderful life. He was the head of a multibillion dollar real estate empire and is married to a supermodel. He chose to forego all of that and subject himself to the innumerable attacks and slanders directed towards him in his campaign. He stood tall and strong in the face of all the opposition from the media and both parties and defeated them all soundly. He discredited all the pollsters who predicted he would lose and all the media outlets that slandered him. Donald Trump chose to campaign because he loves America and wants to make it great again. Now, we will have the pleasure of enjoying the fruits of his endeavors in the coming years.

To all of those who spread vitriol, biased polls, false media narratives and promoted unfounded rape allegations against Trump, there is no forgiveness. Thanks to the internet, your words will be online forever. The next time you decide to push the same blather or make any predictions everyone will point to what you said during this election cycle. You will not longer be a part of rational dialogue in this country. I spent a lot of time on Facebook after the election and was angered, but not surprised, at the level of hatred that was directed towards Trump and his supporters.

I know that those who support Hillary don’t know why people voted for Trump. I know that they think that Trump supporters are racist, when in fact they are not. The people who voted for Donald Trump did so because they thought that his policies would be in their best interest. They had their interests ignored by the media and the political establishment. Trump supporters were repeatedly told by those on the left that voting in their own self-interest was racist. When those disenfranchised people ended up voting against Democrats, people on the left reeled off a list of insults (dumb, racist, sexist, misogynist, xenophobe, islamophobe) to demean them. Ana Kasparian of The Young Turks exemplified this when she described women who voted for Trump as “fucking dumb” and that she “had no respect for them.” The left only respects women and minorities when they vote for them. If they are on the right, they are treated not as people, but rather objects that can be attacked mercilessly and cruelly. Also, isn’t it amazing how Donald Trump, after being in the public eye for four decades, was only accused of being a racist, sexist, xenophobe when he chose to run against Hillary Clinton? This sort of political discourse must stop if our nation is to survive another election.

I think everyone who participated in such slanders against those who disagree with them should be laid out to pasture. We should deny all media outlets that have done so viewership and make public all of the hateful statements made by vicious ideologues. They are the real “basket of deplorables.” We need to take away all the incentives to engage in such repugnant behavior through economic boycotts of the media and social ostracism of those who smear people who disagree with them. We cannot hope to have a civil society when this is the level of discourse that the citizenry is engaging in. Perhaps this will change during the Trump administration, but it is going to take the efforts of those of us involved in the movement to ensure that it happens.

Trump’s victory showed all the peoples of the world that they too can push back against the elites and take back control of their countries. I look forward to seeing this trend continue. But for now, we celebrate. For all of you who have played a part in this movement to save Western Civilization, take a well-earned break. You truly deserve it.

Saving Western Civilization: A Call for Action

With the general election taking place tomorrow, I would like to make one final plea to the American voter to save our civilization from more of the corruption and mediocrity that has gripped our nation. Wikileaks has recently revealed that there is a group of overlords in our government who seek to use us as pawns for their benefit. We are simply livestock to be herded around manipulated. The Podesta emails showed how the political class truly views us. “We’ve all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry. The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly. This problem demands some serious, serious thinking – and not just poll driven, demographically-inspired messaging,” said National Endowment for the Arts Chairman Bill Ivey to John Podesta on March 13th, 2016.

Government officials want us to be “unaware and compliant” so that they can continue to use as a pawns to trade upon. Our economic productivity is hijacked for the purposes of financing their own lust for power and for use as collateral to sink us further into debt. We need to remain uneducated so that we can be “compliant” to their whims and exploitation. Donald Trump has done more than throw a wrench into this system. He is an outsider that threatens all of the interests of the lobbyists, entrenched politicians and corrupt media figures that condition our society to remain “compliant.” John Jay wrote in Federalist No. 3 that “It is not a new observation that the people of any country (if, like the Americans, intelligent and well informed) seldom adopt and steadily persevere for many years in an erroneous opinion respecting their interests.” The political class does not want Americans to be “intelligent and well informed” like they were in the past. If Americans do revert to that level of knowledge, they would end up “respecting their interests” rather than complying to the dictums of their politicians. I have done my best to get the facts out to the people with this blog and other videos that I have shared in an effort to educate the electorate.

The FBI investigation has recently taken a turn with the discovery of 650,000 new emails during their investigation of Anthony Weiner. The emails were found in devices used by the Weiner and Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s close confidant. The case was never officially closed. It is wonderful to see James Comey, the Director of the FBI, continue the investigation after not recommending charges. Hopefully, this can put some faith back in the American justice system. I think the electorate can see that Hillary is not trustworthy.

In addition to the email scandal, Wikileaks also revealed that Donna Brazile, the current chair of the Democratic National Committee, had leaked at least 2 questions, one in a debate and one in a town hall debate ahead of time to the Clinton campaign. “From time to time I get the questions in advance,” she told Podesta on March 12. She added, “I’ll send a few more.” Brazile was also a contributor to CNN, who has since severed ties with her. Can anyone honestly believe that the media is credible after this scandal?

I think everyone who has done research and benefitted from the knowledge I have shared has a duty to act on election day. I have done my level best to push back against the corrupt media narrative. This election is not just for the presidency of the United States, but rather a referendum on the future of Western Civilization. If current trends continue, our civilization as we know it will come to an end.

That is why I chose the painting on my blog to be Destruction by Thomas Cole. It is one painting in a five-part series of paintings called the The Course of EmpireDestruction is a very appropriate image right now because Western Civilization is in decline and is in danger of being overrun by the barbarians. Europe is dealing with a migrant crisis that threatens to change the demographics of the continent irreversibly. The native population is being far outbred by the migrants who are settling in their countries. The United States has had its demographics radically altered by immigration policies bringing in millions of the third world and Mexico. Should Hillary Clinton be elected, this process will hasten and America will cease to be America.

When the people of a country are replaced, the country itself is replaced. For example, if all of the people in Mexico moved to America and all Americans moved to Mexico, you would get a hotter version of America in Mexico and a colder version of Mexico in America. People are not interchangeable. Even if they move to another country, they still retain their culture and beliefs. There is no magic in our soil that will automatically turn third world immigrants into Americans when they set foot on it. Our country has followed the misguided notion of multiculturalism, where disparate cultures can cohabit the same country and get along.

Donald Trump is a true conservative in that he recognizes how America has been altered by huge levels of immigration. He wants to deport illegal immigrants and bring in immigrants who are going to assimilate to our values. He framed immigration in a way that benefits the American people, rather than focusing diversity. Americans who have seen their country change due to immigration finally have a voice in Donald Trump. Before Trump began his campaign, anyone who opposed or wanted to control immigration was ostracized and labeled as a bigot. Should Trump get elected (which I think he will), the discussion on immigration will continue and lead to a more sensible immigration policy.

If you are someone who is interested in changing the status quo, you would have to vote for Donald Trump. He is the outsider and the change candidate. He fought against both the Democratic and Republican establishments during his campaign. He even had to contend with the corrupt media, that favored Hillary. As Michael Moore put it, electing Donald Trump would be the biggest “fuck you” to the political establishment in history. He will disrupt the current political system more than any candidate in American politics. He has dedicated his life’s work to the people of this country and will continue to advocate for our interests as president. My faith in him is bolstered by his track record of getting things done as a businessman.

Unlike all of the career politicians that have infected the political landscape of America, Trump actually has tangible results to show for his efforts. Those results are his buildings. Unlike the politicians he ran against, he has been subject the pressures of the free market his entire life and had to produce value for others. When you ask what Trump has achieved, you can point to the buildings that he has built as a developer. No other politician, especially Hillary, can do the same. An example is when he built Wollman Ice Rink in New York City in 1986. The city has spent six years and $13 million on the rink and did not finish the project. Donald Trump took over the project for $3 million and promised to cover all excess costs himself. Trump finished the project by late October and was three quarters of a million dollars under budget. Trump also recently opened a hotel in Pennsylvania Avenue at the Old Post Office building in the midst of his campaign. These are results that he has produced throughout his career.

Donald Trump has brought this competence to his newfound political career and descended into American politics as a supernova. Trump summarized it himself, when he said, “You know it’s interesting, 10 months into the campaign, I had 10 months worth of experience because I never did this before — meaning political experience — and the other candidates had 219 years.” He was more successful than all the career politicians who had more experience and party support than him. He even beat Jeb Bush, who had two former presidents in his family to advise him and the Republican establishment at his side. I think Trump will bring this same competence to the White House if elected.

If you are still undecided, the promise of a Trump presidency is the chance for real change with an outsider who has taken on the political establishment to get where he is. It will not be business as usual if Trump is elected, and at last we will have someone capable in the White House. Should Hillary get elected, will see more corruption and watch helplessly as we become a banana republic. As Ronald Reagan said, “If we lose freedom here there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth.” So goes America, so goes Western Civilization. Please, use the power of your vote to save the West for yourself and your posterity. Should we err in our choice tomorrow, history will record how the most free and prosperous people on Earth had chosen their own demise, much to the general misfortune of mankind.

Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton: Third Presidential Debate Analysis

Having just finished watching the final debate, I will once again go through a stream of consciousness on what I thought.

Stylistically, I thought Donald Trump was much more disciplined and prepared for this debate than the other two. He did not interrupt Hillary as much as he did in the previous debates. Trump was far more restrained than he was in the first debate. He sounded like a president. He was also much more articulate and to the point in his answers. Hillary Clinton was her usual self, although she was on the defensive far more in this debate than the previous two. I think Trump showed a better arc over the course of the debates by improving over time, while Hillary did not change and even regressed last night.

Chris Wallace was the best moderator out all of the moderators in the three debates. He asked both of them thought questions and did not show any bias towards either candidate. The previous moderators asked questions that favored Hillary. Wallace was willing to challenge their stances and their responses. I think last night provided good exposure to people on both sides of the isle to hear each candidate’s arguments.

On the issue of the Supreme Court, Donald Trump gave the same answer he gave in the previous debates and in speeches in the past. He was going to appoint justices from the list of 20 people that he had compiled. Trump also said that they would interpret the constitution the way that the Founding Father’s intended. He did not believe the constitution is a “living document,” just like Antonin Scalia did not. Hillary said that she would appoint justices who defend Roe vs. Wade and look to overturn Citizens United, which she thought kept “dark, unaccountable money” in politics. She would certainly know about “dark, unaccountable money” given how she received millions for giving speeches to big banks and millions from foreign governments.

I was glad that Trump mentioned how the Clinton Foundation has received millions of dollars from Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Hillary claims to be a supporter of women and gays, but took money from governments that press both groups. He asked her to return the money on principle. Hillary did not deign to reply to that point.

On the issue of abortion, I think Clinton did come off strong for her base in defending Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood. It is so great to see a Democrat trust people with making their own decisions. Clinton did not give a clear answer about where she would draw the line when it comes to abortion. She said that it is the most “painful” decision a woman must make and bureaucrats should not be involved. This position would clearly allow for later term and partial birth abortions. Trump gave a visual of what would happen in those situations saying that it would allow for 9-month-old babies to be ripped out of the womb.

With regards to gun rights, Hillary will most likely overturn the Heller decision with the justices that she appoints.

On the issue of immigration, Hillary immediately made an emotional appeal by mentioning a girl named Carla who was scared of her parents being deported. This appeal is meant to get voters to forget about the rule of law and make a purely emotional decision. She said that she supported a pathway to citizenship, which is another way of saying amnesty. Hillary also tried to scare the American public with Donald Trump’s “deportation force” that will be rounding people up. We already have a deportation force, and it is called Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Donald Trump has consistently said that he wants to uphold the rule of law and deport people who entered the country illegally. I am especially glad that he mentioned how unfair amnesty is to people who are waiting in line and following the rules to enter this country. This is a point that I have made, as my family followed the law when entering America. Carla’s parents were irresponsible to put their family in jeopardy by entering the country illegally. Carla is also an anchor-baby, by Hillary’s own admission. Her family is probably signed up for many, many government services, especially on Carla’s behalf. Illegal immigrants are a huge net drain on the country in spite of all the taxes that Hillary says that they pay. Carla’s parents are concerned that the gravy train is coming to an end. I have no sympathy for this.

Where is Hillary’s sympathy for all the families in the Middle East that have been destroyed by her foreign policy decisions? What about the families in Iraq and Libya who destroyed in the wars that she supported? Is she sad about the children affected by the migrant crisis? I cannot believe her when she says she has sympathy for families after seeing her record as Secretary of State.

On the issue of taxes, I find it shocking how economists are able to predict what the national debt with accuracy. How will they know what the tax receipts will be? How will they know the demographics of the country? How can they predict the exact of effects of deporting or giving amnesty to illegal immigrants? If they are so good at predicting the future, why don’t they predict stock prices in the future? If they could do that, they would become fabulously wealthy. Donald Trump mentioned how his policies could potentially create economic growth, which is what our country needs to help pay down the debt. Hillary Clinton wants to enact more of same policies that Obama enacted, in terms of increasing government spending. Everyone who is productive in this country will see more of their money being wasted on ineffective programs.

When Hillary was asked about a speech she gave where she said she was in favor of open borders, she pivoted to Russia. There is no conclusive evidence that Russia was involved in hacking those emails. Wikileaks has actually released information in the past that is not complimentary of Russia. She wanted to deflect from the fact that she is favor of open borders. Trump has advocated for negotiations with Russia to improve our relationship with them. This would be practical given that the Cold War ended and Russia is no longer the Soviet Union. Russia is preparing for war with America in the event that Hillary gets elected. What is worse, Trump’s words about Putin or the possibility of war with Russia? Even Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate, said that Hillary’s election will lead to war with Russia. Hillary has advocated for a no-fly zone in Syria. Russia has aircraft in the area. Russian airplanes will have to be shot down in order to enforce the no-fly zone. That is an act of war, and it will escalate very quickly. Stein went on to say that Trump is the peace candidate. To all military age men in this country, take this into consideration when voting. If a war starts with Russia, you will be drafted to fight. Not the women who vote for Clinton.

As expected, Chris Wallace eventually brought up the sexual assault allegations made against Donald Trump. The allegations have been debunked. Stefan Molyneux has done a video on the accusers and demonstrates how their stories did not make sense and that the people around them said that they were not true. I was glad that Trump then mentioned the Project Veritas video that showed how Hillary Clinton’s campaign coordinated with Democratic operatives to incite violence at Trump rallies. Hillary did not even deny this when Trump brought it up at the debate. She just went on with how Trump supposedly insulted those accusers at his rallies. Have any news channels had sit down interviews with Bill Clinton’s accusers?

I was very happy that Donald Trump had the courage to call the Clinton Foundation a criminal enterprise on the debate stage. He also repeatedly pointed out how foolishly our government has acted under Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Trump pointed out the Hillary voted in favor of the war in Iraq (and he did not). She also took part in removing our forces in a way that allowed for a power vacuum that let ISIS thrive. As Trump said, she has had a lot of “bad experience.”

After the debate, everyone was astonished with how Donald Trump said that he would “keep you suspense” about accepting the results of the election. CNN analysts said that it was the most shocking moment in presidential debate history and it destroyed his candidacy. That was supposed to be a gotcha question. I don’t see the gotcha. Do they honestly expect Trump to organize a coup d’etat? Is he going to get his supporters to cause civil unrest? He has the right to say that he does not like the results of the election, or even reject the results. There will still be a peaceful transition of power. Donald Trump does not have the guns of the state at his disposal  to disrupt that. It is funny that the CNN analysts had no problem with Al Gore not accepting the results of the 2000 presidential election. Gore took a case to the Supreme Court and held things up for a month. The CNN analysts even mentioned how Gore won the popular vote, which goes to show that they are still bitter about that election. However, Donald Trump cannot question or say anything about the results.

It is also hard for Trump to say he accepts the results when Project Veritas videos show high level democrats conspiring to commit massive voter fraud. How about getting the 4 million dead people who are registered to vote off the registry? Furthermore, the DNC also worked actively to stop Bernie Sanders from becoming the nominee. Trump would have to evaluate the circumstances of the election to say whether or not he accepts the result.

I think Donald Trump won last night’s debate handily. He showed the country how disciplined and restrained he could be. He also made better arguments on policy and had Hillary on the defensive for most of the debate. CNN’s analysts was scrambling afterwards to paint his performance in a negative light, which only goes to show how good it was. I think Trump’s performance would have helped him amongst undecided voters who may not have been exposed to his ideas without the media’s filter. I think we will see Trump’s support rise again as we head towards election day.

Saving the Republic: Why Hillary Must Be Defeated

As we come within one month of election day, I thought it would be appropriate to make another plea to the American electorate. I did a post earlier this year about why I support Donald Trump. I consider this a sister post, only in this post I am making the case against Hillary Clinton. It is for the good of the Republic that Hillary Clinton loses this election. She has a history of corruption that dates back to her time as first lady of the United States. Clinton is the confluence of all of the worst aspects of the status quo: a corrupt party establishment, media bias, shady financing and a long history of immoral behavior.

The corruption in the Democratic National Convention was put on full display thanks to Wikileaks. In a leak of 20,000 DNC emails, it was found that the DNC worked against Bernie Sanders in order to ensure Clinton received the nomination. The Observer article notes that “the party’s rules, including the use of super delegates—who disproportionately endorsed Clinton before the primaries began—are intended to provide the Democratic Party leverage over the election process. Throughout the primaries, decisions were made by DNC officials to help Clinton build and maintain a lead over Sanders.” Clinton used the Democratic establishment to her advantage in order to drown out the voices of disenfranchised voters, who were hopeful of a Sanders candidacy. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the former chair of the DNC, was hired by Clinton after resigning in light of the subterfuge. It is worth mentioning that Clinton’s running mate, Tim Kaine, was the former chair of the DNC before Wasserman Schultz. When Donald Trump confronted Clinton in the second presidential debate on “not winning fair in square” in the primaries, he was speaking the truth. In spite of this, Clinton was vindictively smiling as Trump attacked her. She was smiling because she knows that she does not have to care. The whole world knowing that she was the beneficiary of a conspiracy within her own party will not affect her campaign. It is clear that Clinton has the Democratic establishment in the palm of her hands and is willing to unethically use its power and influence to her own personal benefit. Should she become president, one can only imagine what she would do with the IRS and the Department of Justice at her disposal.

With regards to media bias, it is clear that her associations with the media are more than just cordial. She is very chummy with reporters. Only look at how she welcomes reporters on her private plane to see how sycophantic the media is to her. She treats them like house guests, not journalists who have come for information. The press are embedded in Clinton’s campaign, given treats and goodies on board of her private plane. How can we expect the press to be objective in this environment?

Wikileaks also revealed that the Washington Post and the DNC actually hosted a fundraising event for Hillary Clinton. The Washington Post was having a party, and the DNC took the opportunity to see tickets to the event to donors. It would be illegal for them to hold a joint event, so they did not publish ticket prices as to avoid leaving a paper trail. Clinton has both the DNC and a major news outlet colluding to support her, yet another sad example of corruption in the media.

Bill O’Reilly of Fox News also claimed that news organizations have pressured their employees not to support Trump. Media organizations have threatened to terminate employees who support Trump. I don’t see why O’Reilly would fabricate that, given how bizarrely specific it is. It is not surprising given that Trump threatens the status quo and the interests of major news outlets.

Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that Google has been subverting search results to favor Hillary Clinton. Google’s Eric Schmidt has publicly backed Hillary Clinton, and the bias in the search engine itself is obvious. Roger Epstein found that the search engine’s autocomplete function was showing positive results for Clinton while at the same time displaying negative terms for Trump and Sanders. For example, when the words “Hillary Clinton is…” are put in the search bar, the only results Google shows are “Hillary Clinton is winning” and “Hillary Clinton is awesome,” even though they were not the most popular searches for Clinton. Bing and Yahoo showed much more derogatory suggestions. Google claimed that its policy filtered not negative suggestions, but autocomplete showed “Donald Trump is dead” when the words “Donald Trump is…” was entered on the search bar. This tactic was also used to cover up Clinton’s recent health problems. Epstein says showing negative search results for one candidate and only positive results for another, you can direct people’s searches and alter their views on candidates. This is a subtle way that Clinton is using her allies to influence the way the electorate perceives her.

James O’Keefe’s recent video documents violence at Trump rallies that is traced to the Clinton campaign and the DNC through a process called birddogging. Birddogging refers to creating a sense of “anarchy” around Donald Trump that would undermine his political support. Scott Foval, the National Field Director at Americans United for Change said that “it doesn’t matter what the friggin’ legal and ethics people say, we need to win this motherfucker.” Foval and Clinton are certainly a match made in heaven. Or hell. Foval claims that he was participating in “conflict engagement” and that he is “starting anarchy here.” By “conflict engagement,” he means that he “pays mentally ill people to do shit. Make no mistake.” However, it is more efficient for him to call his union friends, because “they do whatever you want.” Foval said that “if you’re there and you’re protesting and you do these actions, you will be attacked at Trump rallies. That’s what we want.” Foval hired thugs to disrupt Trump rallies and provoke violence. The media would then play its part by branding Trump and his supporters as violent, saying that they needlessly provoked hostilities with their hateful rhetoric. “The media will cover it, no matter what happens,” Foval said. He gives the agitators “a script of engagement” in the hopes that “the crazies bite.” He said that there is a “central agitator training” which prepares the volunteers to start confrontations. He then sends them to wherever Donald Trump and Mike Pence have events.

In addition to this, Foval said that he was contracted to both the DNC and the Clinton campaign. He openly admitted to a conspiracy between the Clinton campaign and the DNC to incite violence at Trump rallies. Foval gave away the whole chain of command, “the campaign (Hillary Clinton) pays DNC, DNC pays Democracy Partners, Democracy Partners pays the Foval Group (Foval’s company), the Foval Group goes and executes the shit on the ground.” Foval is acting with the approval of the Clinton campaign. He also admitted to being an intermediary between the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Campaign laws do not allow for those two entities to interact with each other. Foval said that it is important to have a “double blind between the actual campaign and the actual DNC” so that “they can plausibly deny that they knew anything about it.”

At the Trump rally in Chicago, which was cancelled due to security concerns, the DNC clandestinely organized violent protests outside the event. Aaron Black, the DNC rapid response coordinator, said that “the Chicago protest where they shut all that, that was us.” A DNC operative has admitted on camera that the violent protests in Chicago were his doing. “None of this is supposed to come back to us…we don’t want it to come from the party,” added Black, whose actual name is Aaron Minter. It is unfortunate that the mainstream media won’t cover this story. James O’Keefe’s video is a smoking gun revealing how the Clinton campaign conspired with the DNC to rig the election by fomenting violence at Trump’s events. This was intended to give good footage to reporters in the media who favor Clinton. I find this unbelievably reprehensible and everyone who plans to vote should learn about this.

In addition to these despicable acts, Hillary Clinton’s financial backing reveals the degree to which she is in bed with special interests, particularly the large banks. Hillary and Bill Clinton made $153 million in speaking engagement between 2001 and 2015. The two made 729 speeches for an average payday of $210,795. The two also made at least $7.7 million for at least 39 speeches to big banks, including Goldman Sachs and UBS, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America/Merill Lynch, Deutsche Bank and Citigroup. Hillary Clinton, the Democratic 2016 front-runner, collected at least $1.8 million for at least eight speeches to big banks. Moreover, she refused to release the transcripts of her speeches. Wikileaks obtained excerpts of her speeches from John Podesta’s compromised email account.

When Clinton was asked about having “public and private positions” in the second presidential debate, she used Abraham Lincoln as an excuse for her dishonesty. An example of her being two-faced are her public and private positions on the Syrian refugees. She said in a speech to the Jewish United Fund of Metropolitan Chicago Vanguard Luncheon on October 28th, 2013, that Jordan “has hundreds of thousands of refugees and they can’t possibly vet all of those refugees, so they don’t know if, you know, jihadists are coming in along with legitimate refugees.” This is the same woman who wants a 550% increase in the number of Syrian refugees brought to the United States. Another example of her deception is with regards to her position on changing the tax code. She said in a speech to ECGR Grand Rapids on June 17th, 2013 that “we can become same money and become more competitive with a simpler tax code” and that the corporate tax code is “kind of a dinosaur waiting to be changed.” It seems that paying Hillary Clinton a quarter of a million dollars for a speech is enough to make her adopt Donald Trump’s position on an issue. She did not mention making the rich “pay their fair share” when speaking to special interests in private. I guess that is just her “public” position. This is why Trump confronted Clinton on not doing away with the carried interest provision in the tax code in spite of being a Senator for decades. “The reason you didn’t is because your friends take the same advantage that I do,” said Trump. It was her “private” position to keep the provision in place. Based on the excerpts from her speeches, Clinton will certainly take care of her donors when elected.

In addition to her speaking engagements, 59% of her campaign contributions are large individual contributions. If you do not make a large contribution to her campaign, she does not care what you have to say. Not listening to you will not cost her money. However, not listening to the big banks will cost her. Donald Trump does not have this albatross on his shoulder.

Hillary Clinton’s unethical behavior could use its own post. However, I will boil down the most important instances in recent memory.

The email scandal revealed Clinton’s criminal arrogance and the contempt with which she holds the rule of law. U.S. Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 101, Section 2071 states the following:

(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.
Hillary Clinton used her own private email server as Secretary of State. She willfully concealed and removed her emails from the archives of the US government. By not turning over the entire server to the government, she violated the law. She is therefore disqualified from holding office in the United, which means that she should not even be running for president. The Podesta emails showed one email from Erika Rottenberg, a lawyer with ties to the Clinton campaign. She said that “while we all know of the occasional use of personal email addresses for business, none of my friends circle can understand how it was viewed as ok/secure/appropriate to use a private server for secure documents AND why further Hillary took it upon herself to review them and delete documents without providing anyone outside her circle a chance to weigh in. It smacks of acting above the law and it smacks of the type of thing I’ve either gotten discovery sanctions for, fired people for, etc.” Anyone else who did what Hillary did would have gone to prison. Hillary was very aware of this double standard. Bill Clinton must have also been very persuasive in his meeting with the Attorney General on an airstrip as the investigation neared its end.

The Podesta emails also revealed that Clinton campaign knew that the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia are funding ISIS. The reason why they do not say or do anything about this is because both of those government have donated to the Clinton Foundation. The Saudi Arabian government has donated between $10 and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation through June 2016. The State of Qatar donated between $1 and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation. How can we believe that she will fight ISIS when her foundation receives donations from their benefactors?

To conclude, a vote for Hillary Clinton would be a vote for the current system of cronyism, false promises, an inordinately powerful party establishment and a corrupt media. The reason the media in particular has gone all in for Clinton is because Donald Trump is going against all of parties that have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. The lobbyists, corporations, big banks and media have created the current system to benefit themselves at the expense of the American people at large. If you really want to see the current system destroyed, then you would have to vote for Donald Trump. Trump was not a politician before this election cycle. He never made promises to constituents that turned out to be false, unlike Hillary. Trump will not be beholden to special interests when he is in office. He is largely self-funding his campaign and has not received millions from Wall Street, also unlike Hillary. Regardless of what you think of Trump, he is not a crook. If Clinton is elected, it will be the end of the rule of law in America. If she can get away with all of her crimes and become President of the United States, we cannot reasonably convict anyone else of the crime in our country. Furthermore, Hillary Clinton has threatened to start a war with Russia. The Russian government has started placing missiles near Alaska and has also asked that Russians living in America should fly back home. Donald Trump is the peace candidate, and hopes to make a deal with Putin. Trump has never taken part in destroying a country. He never conducted air strikes in the Middle East. He also never giggled about killing Muammar Gaddafi. I think these reasons are enough to inspire any American who loves his or her country to come out and vote to save the Republic.


Tim Kaine vs. Mike Pence: Vice Presidential Debate Analysis

I have just finished watching the vice presidential debate and am going to give my opinions on all the points that stuck out at me. I will go through those points as a stream of consciousness.

Stylistically, Mike Pence appeared far more polished and controlled than Tim Kaine. Senator Kaine interrupted Pence far more and was on the attack for the first half of the debate. Kaine did a good job of cornering Pence by characterizing Trump’s positions and indefensible. Pence was not very assertive in terms of attacking Kaine in return. He was trying to act polite by not interrupting or retaliating. As a result, Pence was on the defense for the first half of the debate and only started to push back in the second half. Pence showed that he was far less bombastic than Trump. He showed that he is a good foil for Trump’s more assertive personality. Perhaps the American people will be surprised to see that Trump has chosen such a dignified and eloquent man as his running mate.

With regards to trustworthiness, Tim Kaine’s point on Clinton having a passion was irrelevant. He did not address the email scandal or her record of corruption. In fact, he hurt his own credibility when he misrepresented Trump’s words and business practices. Trump did not say that all Mexicans are rapists and criminals. He was talking specifically about certain illegal immigrants from Mexico, not all Mexicans in general. Also, it is worth noting that when we are talking about illegal immigrants, we are talking about a group that is composed entirely of criminals, given that they entered the country illegally. Trump went on to say, “some I assume… are good people.” Kaine conveniently left that part of the quote out, which Pence later criticized him for. He also mentioned Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who was presiding over the Trump University case. Trump did not say that he could not judge the case because he is Mexican. He said that the judge is a member of organizations that are pro-Mexico and illegal immigrants. This is true, Curiel is a member of the Hispanic National Bar Association, which has spoken out against Trump’s positions. The HNBA released a statement on July 2nd, 2015, saying that they “cannot remain silent and allow Trump to promote such racist and discriminatory behavior.” It also called for a boycott on all of Trump’s businesses. Curiel was also a member of the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association 2014 Scholarship Selection Committee, which awarded scholarships to illegal immigrants. These are clear conflicts of interest when trying a case involving Donald Trump.

Kaine also characterized Trump as benefitting himself at the expense of the American people. In order to make money as a capitalist, you need to provide value to other people. They must be willing to voluntarily give you their money in exchange for what Trump has to offer. Trump’s wealth and success are a testament to the value that he has provided to others. No transaction in the free market occurs without both parties benefitting. Therefore, Trump did not enrich himself at the expense of America.

When it came to the topic of the economy, I think both candidates did a good of articulating their plans. The Clinton-Kaine economic plan was essentially more of the same policies that Obama implemented. Kaine wants the government to invest more money in infrastructure and clean energy jobs. Both of those investments have proven to be lousy. After the billions of dollars spent on infrastructure after the stimulus bill, our nation’s roads and bridges are still in poor condition. According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, America’s GPA for its infrastructure is a D+. The government has also failed in creating clean energy jobs. Only look at Solyndra as the perfect example, which failed after receiving $529 million in subsidies. Since 1973, the US government spent $154.7 billion on renewable energy with little to show for it. There is a laundry list of renewable energy companies that have received subsidies and later failed. Solar power only makes 0.2% of the electricity in America after all of that investment.

Kaine also said that he and Clinton would make tuition-free and debt-free college. Even though he used the word free, it really means that the tax payer is going to foot the bill. The students and families will still pay for college in the form of taxes and national debt. It will not be “free” by any means.

Raising the minimum wage would work to increasing the unemployment rate by pricing low-skilled workers out of the market. The workers who are retained will benefit, but many others will be fired on not be hired in the first place. Many jobs may become automated all together if the minimum wage is set too high.

Kaine then brought out the shopworn policy of having women receive equal pay. While it is true that women earn less than men, it is not due to discrimination on the part of employers. It is already illegal for employers to do so. Stefan Molyneux does a good job of debunking this myth in his video on the gender pay gap. Men are more likely to go into higher paying STEM fields than women are, which can account for the pay gap. Men are also more likely to work overtime than women are. It is also worth noting that women who have never been married earn about the same as men who have never married. More legislation to even out the pay gap is not necessary. The pay gap exists as a result of the choices than men and women make.

The fifth point on taxing the rich is also a tired proposition. The wealthy pay a disproportionate amount of the income tax revenue. The top 1% pays almost half the income tax in 2014. The top 20% of earners paid 84% of the income tax. The bottom 60% of income earners in America actually received more money from the government than they paid in taxes. The idea that the rich need to pay more in taxes is ludicrous.

By contrast, Pence and Trump are proposing a different path than the one that has already been tried over the last seven and a half years. They want to cut back on regulation and decrease the tax burden on the American people. Trump’s tax plan will simplify our tax code to four brackets (0%, 10%, 20% and 25%), instead of the seven that we have now. They are cuts across the board, not just for the wealthy. This will are capital for private investment instead of the government taking it squandering it. The plan also includes cutting the corporate tax from 39% down to 15% to incentivize American companies to bring their money back to America. The amount of money those corporations have overseas is approximated at $2.5 trillion.

With regards to Trump’s tax returns, he said that he will release his tax return only after an IRS audit is complete. His lawyer advised against releasing the tax returns while under an audit. The New York Times illegally published Trump’s 1995 tax returns. The reporter said that he would be willing to go to jail for publishing them. The tax returns showed that he lost a billion dollars in a single year. It also shows that he had a billion dollars to lose in the first place, which means he is really rich and successful. He is on record of saying that he lost hundreds of millions of dollars when Atlantic city tanked. Trump used his losses to reduce his tax burden in future years, which is in complete compliance with the law. The law is made that way so that people can be encouraged to take risks. If he is not legally required to pay a tax, it does not mean that he is dodging the tax. Trump has a fiduciary responsibility to his family, his company and his employees to pay no more tax than is legally required. His fiduciary responsibility is a binding agreement to act in the best interest of the company. He is obligated to maximize the resources available to his company. As far as the claim of Trump not paying taxes for 20 years, he has actually paid enormous sums of money in taxes. Even if it was not through the income tax, it was through property taxes, sales taxes, corporate taxes, city taxes, state taxes, and federal taxes. Trump did pay for the schools and the military through those means.

One entity that did not pay taxes in 2014 was in fact the New York Times. This is not to say that they broke the law, but it is hypocritical of them to accuse Trump of not paying his taxes.

As someone who supports Trump, I can tell you that I did not support him because of what may be in his tax returns. I support him because of his policies and ideas. That is what his supporters are judging him on. His tax returns were brought up as a distraction from the issues that Trump has brought to the forefront of the political discussion.

On the topic of social security, I do not see any way that we can keep the program solvent in the future. With $20 trillion in national debt and another $128 trillion in unfunded liabilities, the program will collapse under its own weight. I think privatizing it would be a good solution to this problem. I am disappointed that neither Pence nor Kaine were willing to lead the way in entitlement reform.

When discussing law enforcement, I was impressed with Pence’s response on how the police should not be maligned for implicit bias or institutional racism. While there may be some bad cops in the country, we cannot paint with a broad brush. Hillary Clinton said that everyone in the country was guilty of implicit bias. The relationship between the community and the police has been destroyed by the black lives matter activists. They have promoted the lie that cops are killing unarmed black men for sport and getting paid for it. They have driven a wedge between communities and law enforcement which must be healed. I am glad that both candidates wanted to work on that healing process.

On the issue of immigration, I have written about this at length on my post about why I support Donald Trump. He plans to build a wall, increase border patrol, deny federal funds to sanctuary cities, and deport all illegal immigrants in the country. I think all of these steps would work to solve the problem of illegal immigration. Both Pence and Kaine agreed on deporting illegal immigrants who commit crimes and strengthening border control. However, Kaine proposed that families of illegal aliens can remain together in the country through amnesty. He also wanted to grant amnesty to those “who work hard, pay taxes, play by the rules, and take criminal background record checks.” Illegal immigrants are by definition not playing by the rules. Every moment they spend in this country is a violation of the law. My parents and I followed the immigration laws of the country to the letter. We entered and gained citizenship legally. Is it not unfair to me and my family to grant amnesty to immigrants who broke the law? I cannot reconcile this injustice.

With regards to terrorism, I am glad that Mike Pence pointed out that Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama left a power vacuum in the Middle East when they chose to withdraw soldiers from Iraq. ISIS filled the void that we left. In light of the terrorists attacks in Europe and America, it can be objectively said that we are less safe now than we were eight years ago. I was also impressed with how Pence mentioned that we squandered the sacrifices made by our servicemen in Iraq when we withdrew. That argument would certainly resonate emotionally with many Americans.

The turmoil in Syria was also discussed at length, in which both candidates were in favor of creating safe zones in Syria. This is a policy that I agree with as well. It would be much better than bringing the migrants into Europe. I think the migrant crisis that is plaguing Europe right now can actually be traced back to Hillary Clinton’s decisions of withdrawing from Iraq and overthrowing Gaddafi in Libya. Her foreign policy destabilized the region and displaced millions of people. I think it would be wise for us to stop immigration from the Middle East for the time being.

The most interesting question of the night for me was the one regarding faith. I was actually impressed with Tim Kaine’s answer regarding executions. Although he was personally opposed to the death penalty due to his faith, he still upheld the law. Pence inevitably directed the discussion towards abortion. The practice of partial birth abortions is sickening to me and I too cannot understand a party that supports it. Kaine responded by saying that he supports Roe v. Wade. The proponents of Roe v. Wade have never set time for when the pregnancy can no longer be terminated. Presumably, they would be alright with late term abortions, just as Pence said.  Kaine also said that the government should punish women for making reproductive choices. While I agree with that, the trouble is whether or not they are murdering a child when they make that choice. Roe v. Wade did say that a woman has a right to choose, but does not specify at what point she can no longer make that choice. We do not know when human life really begins in the womb. Why should we take the risk of committing a murder by supporting abortion?

To conclude, I think Senator Kaine came off as more assertive but not as strong on policy as Governor Pence. I think that Pence won the debate on his ideas and for showing his respectable demeanor as Donald Trump’s running mate.

These are all my thoughts on the debate. I hope my rambling did not test your patience too much.


Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton: First Presidential Debate Analysis

With my head still throbbing from watching Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton, I will attempt to give my thoughts on the debate. This just a stream of consciousness from what I remember.

Let’s begin with some stylistic points. Hillary Clinton seemed far more rehearsed and polished in last night’s debate that Donald Trump. That is not to say that Trump was not prepared, but he seemed to be speaking his mind more than giving sound bites. He also seemed to be a little scattered to me, going off topic on a few occasions. He spoke at length on questions that had nothing to do with the real issues. Hillary, on the other hand, did come off as just another politician with her rehearsed lines. She did not do anything to distance herself from the political class. Her objective in these debates should be to give people more reason to trust her and vote for her, which I did not think she did last night. She did not succeed in humiliating Trump either.

With regards to the moderation, I think it can be objectively said that Lester Holt was favoring Hillary Clinton. Donald Trump was asked questions about his tax returns, bankruptcies, birtherism, sexism and racism during the debate. He hit every single Democratic party talking point with his questions. Trump was never asked about immigration or building the wall, healthcare or his tax plan. Holt never questioned Hillary Clinton on her emails. He did not even question her support of the war in Iraq, though he went out of his way to nail Trump on an interview he gave with Howard Stern in 2002. Holt even argued with Trump saying that he was in favor of the war when he never did. The moderator should not be arguing with one of the candidates! It is important to remember, that Trump was not a politician before this election cycle. When he says he is in favor of something or not, it is in a totally different context than a politician expressing the same sentiment. Trump never made any promises to constituents which turned out to be false. It was Hillary Clinton who actually voted in favor of the Iraq War as a senator.

If I were Trump, my answer to the question on tax returns would be the following: What is in my tax returns does not matter. The American people are going to judge me on my policies. Can we please start talking about immigration, the wall or the economy? Do you have a substantive question Mr. Holt?

While we are on the subject of taxes, Hillary Clinton brought out the shopworn leftist argument that the rich need to pay their fair share in taxes. First of all, there is no way to determine what their “fair share” is. The top fifth of earners in the United States paid 83.9% of the income taxes in 2014. The three million people in the top 1% of earners paid nearly half the income tax. The bottom 40% of income earners actually paid a negative percentage of the income taxes. This means that they are receiving more in government benefits than they are paying in taxes. The rich are not just paying their share, they are paying almost everyone’s share.

Trump was also asked to defend his tax plan. Holt asked him to defend tax cuts for the wealthy. Well, Trump is actually cutting taxes across the board and even taxing married couples who earn less than $50,000 at 0%. He went on to say that he would also cut the corporate tax from 39.6% to 15%. This will bring back about $2.5 trillion (maybe more) that is currently overseas. It will lead to more job creation in America in addition to allowing corporations to keep more of their money and use it to pay its workers and drive up demand. The government can help grow the economy by simply taking less of the people’s money. Clinton said that Trump’s tax plan would add $5 trillion to the national debt. This would only be true if government spending isn’t cut and there is not economic growth resulting from the tax cuts. It also does not take into account the effect of deporting millions of illegal immigrants who are consuming welfare on the budget.

Clinton also proposed government enforced revenue-sharing in businesses. Companies do share revenue with their workers, in the form of their paychecks. The revenue that the business makes goes to paying the workers. If the people who run the company want to make an agreement with their workers to share profits, that is fine. The trouble comes when the government forces it. It may work in some companies, but it could be a disaster in many others. The matter should really be left to the market to decide.

Clinton also attacked Trump for his business practices. She claimed that he did not pay many people over the years that he has done business. She did not cite any specific examples of people who were not paid. If Trump really had swindled all of those people, why did people continue to do business with him? You do not make billions of dollars by dissatisfying all of the people that you work with. It is also rich for Hillary Clinton to complain about people not getting paid when she left four people to die in Benghazi as Secretary of State. She also mentioned the law suit that Trump settled without admission to guilt. When you are renting property out to people, you want tenants who can pay their rent. Unfortunately, New York City is expensive and blacks and hispanics have lower incomes that whites and asians. Instead of normalizing by race, we should really be normalizing by income. Trump was not found guilty of discrimination and settled the lawsuit because he only looked at the income of his tenants, not their race.

On the topic of race relations, Trump made the point about how people in the inner cities are being used for votes by the Democrat party. I have made this point in earlier posts. I think it is hard to the Democrats to argue that they are the ones who can improve the lot of black Americans after decades of not producing positive change. Clinton went on to say that everyone in the country is biased against black people and that the police need to be trained differently. I believe that she sent a very harmful message to black Americans, because she is telling them that the country is working against them. Why would blacks want to better themselves when they are told that racism is keeping them down? Speaking of racists, Hillary Clinton’s late mentor Robert Byrd was a member of the KKK and was against the civil rights act. I am glad the Trump brought up Clinton’s comment about black youths being “superpredators.” I think that would have come as a surprise to most people. Clinton also complained about mandatory minimums, which is something that her own husband put into effect when he was in office.

Trump mentioned how stop and frisk laws helped bring down crime in New York City under Mayor Rudy Giuliani. The number of murders did indeed go down from 2,605 in 1990 to 952 in 2001, Giuliani’s last year in office. Stop and frisk encounters in NYC are set to plunge by 42% this year. Violent crime is up citywide — 109 murders this year, 10 more than last year. There have been 404 people shot this year, a 9% spike compared with the 371 shot during the same period last year. While libertarians may disagree with it, I think it is a good measure to ensure that criminals do not carry guns.

Clinton has a remarkable ability of criticizing others for things that either she has done herself. The birther issue is an example, Hillary’s associates are on record saying that she was the one who brought it up first. I don’t think that Trump explained it well, as Americans do not care for the names of all the associates. Also, it is not racist for either Clinton or Trump to ask whether or not Obama was born in America. They did not bring up the issue because Obama is black, but simply to assess if he is eligible to run. Ted Cruz faced similar questions when he was running in the primaries and nobody said that it was because of racism.

When the subject of cybersecurity came up, I relished the prospect of Trump nailing Hillary Clinton on her illegal private server and emails. Clinton was the one who put national security at risk when she left classified information on an insecure server. The Director of the FBI James Comey said that Clinton and her colleagues “were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.” Trump had the perfect ammunition to nail Clinton on cybersecurity and instead pulled his punches. I was disappointed that he did not pounce on that opportunity.

To conclude, we will go over Donald Trump’s overwhelming sexism. Hillary Clinton brought up Alicia Machado, who was Miss Universe in 1996. She claims that Trump called her “Miss Piggy” and “Miss Housekeeping.” There is no way to confirm any of this, we only have her word, which is shaky. One of the terms of her contract as Miss Universe is that she must maintain her image. She had gained too much weight too quickly. Companies were withdrawing her endorsements, one of which was Kellogg USA. Trump said that it was “a big problem.” Clinton brought it up during the debate as a way to shame Trump. I think it may have backfired. In turns out that Machado was accused of driving a getaway car in a murder and then threatened the life of a judge in Venezuela in 1998. The judge, Maximiliano Fuenmayor traced her identity through her cell phone. She called him after he indicted her boyfriend, who is currently in a federal penitentiary in Mexico for drug charges. Machado claimed that she had called him to thank him for “his unbiased pursuit of justice.” When she was questioned on this by Anderson Cooper, she said that “Everybody has a past. I’m not a saint girl…That happened 20 years ago.” Notice how she doesn’t deny what happened. It’s funny how she is going on television blasting Trump for what he allegedly said in the past when she is willing to gloss over what she did 20 years ago. It is suspicious that Machado got her citizenship given that she was associated with a drug kingpin. This was just an orchestrated PR campaign that is meant to appeal to single women and latinos. It is disturbing how the media just ran with this narrative without vetting Miss Venezuela. If Hillary Clinton can’t even vet a former Miss Universe she is using to help her campaign, how is she going to vet the Syrian refugees that she wants to bring to America? I think all of this shows that Trump is doing quite well.

I believe that this debate did not change the prospects for either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton very much. I think this will work to Trump’s advantage as he had the momentum leading up to the debate. Furthermore, he came off as more genuine in his speaking style that Clinton, who was very rehearsed. We will see how things pan out in the last two debates, and whether or not they sway the American electorate.





Disease and Lies: The End of Hillary Clinton’s Campaign

Yesterday, we received news from a law enforcement source that Hillary Clinton had a “medical episode” at a 9/11 commemoration ceremony. She was reported to have staggered and tripped on a curb as three other people helped her into her car. NBC reported that the NYPD was sent to retrieve her shoe. We also know from her doctor that she was diagnosed with pneumonia on Friday. After more than an hour of silence, the Clinton’s campaign said that she felt “overheated.” She went from the event to Chelsea Clinton’s apartment and later emerged to tell reporters that she is “feeling great.” After Clinton left the ceremony, the reporters that were following her were prevented from leaving the media area for a period of time.

This has got to be the end of Hillary’s campaign. I cannot see how she can continue to run with any semblance of credibility. Clinton herself denied any concerns people may have about her health, saying that they were a part of a “wacky strategy” cooked up by rival Donald Trump as he embraced an “alternative reality.” The video of her going on Jimmy Kimmel’s show and opening an already opened pickle jar is sure to go down in infamy. All of the people in the media who participated in attacking those who questioned her health or played any part in covering it up are finished. This latest episode has exposed how partisan and corrupt the media is. This bias towards Hillary’s campaign has existed for years, with CNN morning anchor Chris Cuomo saying in 2014, “We’ll see. We couldn’t help her any more than we have. She’s got just a free ride, so far, from the media. We’re the biggest ones promoting her campaign. So, it better happen.” This was regards to the media urging her to announce her bid for the presidency. They were already set to support her even before she started her campaign. Rachel Maddow of MSNBC also said that “this whole fever dream has percolated up through so much of the right-wing media and onto Fox News.” Both of them, along with everyone else who tried to dismiss Clinton’s health issues as a conspiracy theory have egg on their faces.

The ramifications of this new information are truly astounding.

This election is perhaps the most high stakes election in American history. After this election, only one of the two parties in this country will remain standing. Should Hillary Clinton win, she will continue to allow illegal immigration to continue and perhaps even pass amnesty for them. The demographics of the nation will continue to shift to allow more reliable democrat voters to come in from Mexico and the Third World. This will sink the chances of Republicans ever winning a national election ever again. Should Donald Trump win, he will most likely build the wall and change the demographics in the other direction with deportations and a tightening of immigration, removing millions from the Democratic base. He is also breaking up the traditional Democratic coalition. His support amongst gay Americans has been bolstered due to his libertarian stance on the issue and his support for the gay community after the Orlando shooting. His recent speeches to the black community have also increased his support amongst black Americans. If he does win, he could destroy the Democratic base and sink their party’s election chances forever. Furthermore, he could appoint originalist Supreme Court justices and block any chance of liberal legislation from being upheld.

Hillary’s supporters in the media understand all of the implications of a Trump or Hillary victory. This is why they went all in for Clinton. This is why they told lies about her health and smeared Donald Trump with as many ridiculous allegations as they could muster. From this point, I think there are three possibilities of what will happen going forward: the Democrats look for a replacement for Clinton, Donald Trump is assassinated, or Clinton continues her campaign.

If there is a replacement for Hillary, I think it will be Joe Biden. If Trump was beating Hillary badly earlier in the race, Biden would have entered. Biden may very well have had a chance of beating Trump if he ran. He would come off as much more personable and kind to the American people than Trump would, even though Trump may have better policy prescriptions. However, it is too late to replace Clinton at this point. There are less than two months to go and adding a new candidate two weeks before the first presidential debate would be chaotic. I do not think the Democrats will take this course of action, but this crazy election cycle has proven that anything is possible.

With regards to Donald Trump, I would increase his security and maintain tight surveillance on him if I were a member of his campaign. With this news, I think the only way the Democrats may win the election is if Trump is assassinated. I am not insinuating that the Democrat party itself will organize the attempt. I believe that there will be an enormous amount of vitriol put out by the Democrats and their lackeys in the media to anger someone with a mental illness or a propensity for violence enough to assassinate Trump. The media has tried to agitate people to harm Trump as well as start riots as Trump rallies. We have already seen one case in which a British man tried to steal an police officer’s gun at a Trump rally in an attempt to assassinate the Republican candidate. He plead not guilty to the charges. I also fear that the people who are invested in the current system continuing, like lobbyists and special interests, may try to organize an assassination attempt themselves. I think that calls for Trump’s assassination will probably increase in the future. If there is a successful assassination attempt, it will most certainly lead to Hillary being elected president.

If Clinton continues her moribund campaign, she will have to face the wrath of Donald Trump during the debates as well as contend with questions about her health. Clinton and her supporters in the media have already been discredited on this issue. Since the “wacky theory” about her health has been proven true, I think the American people will question everything that comes out of her mouth. Clinton herself may not have the physical strength to continue the campaign. This will become obvious over the next two months. If she continues, Clinton will not only lose the election, but also take the Democrat party and the mainstream media down with her. Such a collapse will profoundly change the political landscape in America, and perhaps allow for the formation of a more honest and less corrupt system.

As things stand now, Trump clearly has the upper hand going into November. However, this election cycle has been anything but predictable.  One thing is for certain, the Democratic party has acted with clear disregard for the welfare of the country by nominating someone they did not vet properly. Vetting is not just to assess someone’s character, but also to assess their physical health. It is not an act of compassion for the country to continue to allow someone with significant health issues to run for such a high-stress position. Could you imagine her passing out or needing long naps when negotiating with hostile foreign leaders? What if she does not have the physical stamina to handle domestic affairs? These are questions that all Americans should ask themselves before they go out to vote. I believe the answers are already apparent.

Why I Support Donald Trump: An Immigrant’s Case

As the Republican National Convention drew to a close I thought it would be appropriate to lay out the case for why I support Donald Trump for president. Being an immigrant from India, many people are surprised that I would be willing to support the candidate who is perceived as anti-immigration. I support him because I believe that his policies are what will preserve the America that my family came to enjoy, as I mentioned in my first post. The issues that are most important to me are immigration, the economy, and national security. I will go through all of these issues in detail in this post and explain how Trump’s policies provide the best solutions. I will also explain how the media has misled the American people on what Trump actually believes.

Let us begin with the most controversial of Trump’s proposals: immigration reform. He began his campaign by talking about the troubles the United States has with its border with Mexico. He was condemned as a racist for saying that Mexicans are “rapists.” He in fact did not say that. He was talking specifically about certain illegal immigrants from Mexico, not all Mexicans in general. Also, it is worth noting that when we are talking about illegal immigrants, we are talking about a group that is composed entirely of criminals, given that they entered the country illegally. Trump went on to say, “some I assume… are good people.” Is that not a kind thing to say about a group of criminals? The Mexican government has actually published pamphlets giving its citizens advice on how to enter the United States illegally. It speaks about what clothes to wear while fording a river, namely the Rio Grande, and how not to get dehydrated when walking through a desert. It also informs them of their rights when they are detained. Trump was right when he said that Mexico was “sending” its people to America.

He has also said in the debates and on his official website, that he wants to stop immigration to preserve the rule of law. On the immigration reform page of his website it says, “a nation without laws is not a nation.” He is correct. My family followed the immigration laws perfectly when we entered the country and when we got our citizenship. We had to wait for over a decade for the latter. I think it is entirely unfair to people like my parents and I who followed the law to grant illegal immigrants amnesty. The reason the Democrats fight so hard for amnesty is because they know that illegal immigrants favor them 54% to 19% over Republicans. The Washington Post article also says,”among Hispanic legal permanent residents (legal status but not citizens), Democrats led 67-13 percent. And among Hispanics who immigrated to the United States and became citizens, they led 69-17.” Amnesty would grant citizenship to millions more hispanic illegal immigrants. I will not stand for the constitutional structure that created this great nation being torn asunder for the sake of the Democrats’ miserable careers.

Trump’s proposal to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it is actually very viable and also a sensible step. The cost to the Mexican government is projected to be between $5-10 billion. Mexican nationals send approximately $24 billion in remittances back to Mexico to help their families. Trump proposes that aliens may not wire money out of the United States without first verifying their lawful presence in the United States. If Mexico does not make the one time payment of $5-10 billion for the wall, the regulation will go into effect. It would be a good deal for Mexico to make the one-time payment to ensure that the remittances keep entering their country.

Welfare usage by both legal and illegal immigrants is also a major concern for me given that America has a national debt of over $19 trillion. The Center for Immigration Studies did a study that shows that 73% of households headed by immigrants from Central America and Mexico consume welfare. Households from the Caribbean are at 51% and those from Africa use welfare at 48%. Only 26% of households from Europe consume welfare. The group with the lowest welfare consumption is the one I belong to, South Asians, at 17%. The reason I mention these numbers is because we need to start having an immigration policy that benefits America. We do not need to be an alms house for all of the poor immigrants of the world. We need to be bringing people into this country who will not be a burden for the taxpayer and will add value to our nation’s economy. Immigrants from Europe and South Asia consume welfare at the lowest rates. Furthermore, immigrants from India have the highest levels of educational attainment out of any ethnic group. This is perhaps the reason why Indians as a group have the highest median income in America at $101,591.

In addition to productivity, immigrants should also assimilate to the American culture and adopt the values of our nation. In the early 1900s, assimilation in America came out of economic necessity. There was no welfare state to provide from immigrants at that time. Therefore, they had to learn English, interact with Americans and adopt their values in order to be employed or run a business. As I mentioned in my earlier post, the immigrants to America before 1965 were mostly from Europe. Integration was much easier since they shared western traditions and were largely Christian. However, assimilation is not taking place to the same degree today due to both the presence of the welfare state and the influx of immigrants from the 3rd world. When a welfare state is in place, immigrants will not have to assimilate out of economic necessity because the government is there to provide for them. In many cases they do not have to learn English and simply stay within their own communities, isolating themselves from the rest of the country. They therefore keep their 3rd world values and turn the areas they go to into versions of their home countries. For example, the age of consent in Mexico is 12. In many states in Mexico, a rapist can avoid punishment if he marries his victim. Approximately 80% of the women from Central America who cross the border illegally are raped along the way according to the Huffington Post. This is the culture that is being imported into the United States without assimilation as a result of our porous border.

About 62% of illegal immigrants use welfare. This is a huge burden on the American taxpayer. It is also very unjust given that they should not be in the country in the first place. Trump has proposed that we end welfare abuse by immigrants by having applicants for entry to the United States certify that they can pay for their own housing, healthcare and other needs. By having this requirement, we will be bringing the immigrants who are productive and able to provide for themselves when they enter the United States. They will assimilate in the same way that my family did as a result of their economic value.

With regards to the economy, I think that Trump’s tax plan will help boost economic growth and stop the growth of the national debt. He has proposed that we simplify our tax code to four brackets (0%, 10%, 20% and 25%), instead of the seven that we have now. Married couples that earn less than $50,000 will have a rate of 0%. The 25% rate only applies for single filers at $150,001 and up and for married filers at $300,001 and up. By lowering the tax rate, it will make people save more money and also boost consumer spending.

With regards to the corporate tax, the United States has the highest corporate tax rate of the 34 countries in the OECD at 39.1%. It is important to remember that when we tax a corporation, we are really taxing people. It is not the entity on paper that pays the tax, it is the people who work for the corporation that pay it. Corporations have to pay their employees less or increase their prices in order to compensate. To stay competitive, many companies have left America. Trump therefore plans to cut the corporate tax down to 15% to incentivize corporations to come to America. This will result in an increase in GDP and an increase in job creation. It will also help bring back about $2.5 trillion that corporations are keeping overseas back to America to drive investment.

I believe that a revival of the U.S. economy is the best way that we can balance the budget in addition to spending cuts. Trump’s plan seems to be best poised to energize our economy with strategic tax cuts.

National security has become a very high priority for me, given the terrorist attacks in Paris, Brussels, Orlando, Nice and now Munich. I think that Islam is an existential threat to the West and it is tearing Europe apart. Trump has proposed that we put a moratorium on Muslim immigration on account of our inability to vet immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa. An official from the Department of Homeland Security has said that there is no way to vet the 10,000 Syrian refugees that have recently entered America. Europe faces the same problem, which has manifested itself in a huge spike in terrorism and sexual violence. The muslims in Europe also hold many values that are antithetical to Western values.

For example, Europe and North America recognize the separation of church and state. Islam does not make the distinction between the two. In fact, they are one and the same under Shariah law. There is no freedom to disbelieve in Islam like there is in Christianity. The punishment for apostates in Islam is death. Large numbers of muslims in Europe are also against people criticizing their religion publicly. Terrorists have killed those who have done so, like in the Charlie Hebdo attack. All of these positions are antithetical to secular western democracies. I think a temporary ban on muslim immigration would be appropriate to prevent these values from being imported into the United States. In America, 51% of muslims are in favor of Shariah law. The Pew research data also shows that 25% of muslims in America think violence against Americans is justified as part of the global jihad. Trump has said that he would examine the mosques in America to find the radicals that are peddling extremism, which I think is important since the muslims in America have not helped law enforcement at all in this area. He has also emphasized the need to promote and preserve Western values in the face of this threat, which I think is absolutely essential if we are to protect ourselves.

Donald Trump’s foreign policy speech outlined his strategy for providing for the national security of the United States. He mentioned that the United States paying a disproportionate amount of the cost of defending Europe in NATO. Only 4 of 28 other member countries besides America are spending the required 2% of GDP on defense. Given how high the United States national debt is, we would do well to have our allies pay more for their defense. Trump said that if they refuse, “the United States must be prepared to let these countries defend themselves.” I admire his assertion of American interests in this alliance. I also think it would make the world safer if European nations did more to defend themselves and abstain from involvement in the Middle East.

Trump also spoke about how the Middle East is in turmoil as a result of U.S. interventions over the last 15 years. Trump said at the RNC, “after fifteen years of wars in the Middle East, after trillions of dollars spent and thousands of lives lost, the situation is worse than it has ever been before. This is the legacy of Hillary Clinton: death, destruction and weakness.” As a nation we tried to turn countries in the Middle East into Western democracies, when they had no experience or desire to become a Western democracy. We destroyed the institutions they had and ISIS filled the void.

I am glad that Trump has derided the Obama-Clinton foreign policy and has rejected the idea of nation building. I think we should move in the new direction that he outlined with rebuilding our military, which has been depleted under Obama, and not intervening in foreign countries to the extent that we have. I am especially glad that he acknowledges that we are at war with radical Islam. We cannot hope to fight back against this evil unless we accept that we are at war. The Europeans do not understand this yet, but I hope they do before it is too late. Perhaps Trump can lead the way on this as president, just like he has led his business organization.

I have outlined here the three most important issues to me and how Donald Trump’s policies will help solve these problems. I will talk about Trump himself to conclude.

Donald Trump has been hugely successful in a wide variety of fields in his illustrious career. He is an international real estate mogul, and more importantly the only one that people can recognize. His name is synonymous with excellence. He is also a best-selling author, with The Art of the Deal being one the best selling business books of all time. He also produced The Apprentice, an enormously popular reality show that others have tried to emulate, but were not able to do so. Trump’s presence on the show was the deciding factor. His success can be attributed not only to his executive experience but to how media savvy he is. Trump has been in the public eye for more than three decades and knows how to handle them better than anyone in the business. The success of his presidential campaign is a testament to that.

I cannot think of anyone who is more qualified in terms of executive experience and knowledge of the media than Donald Trump. Coupled with his policy prescriptions, he is a truly outstanding candidate. I hope that this rather long post will help spread useful information to voters during this election and will also help explain why an immigrant would support Donald Trump for president.