We have been patiently gaming out what little we understand about the plans of the left who hope Monday to steal the election away from Donald Trump.
Schematically, the process maps something like this:
For a discussion of “Media Stunts” see the Coping Section which follows.
A Google News search (here) reveals that both sides are accused of death threats. And hopefully, the Charlotte Observer is correct when they opine “Don’t look to the Electoral College to upend Trump victory.”
The problem, in strategic terms, is that while the odds of a massive change are small, that is no doubt what the Tsarists in Russia were thinking in 1917. That’s when the Revolution happened.
Given that we have so many “neighborhood organizer types” and Saul Alinsky students floating about, I think estimates of a “less than one percent chance” are wildly understating the problem. Personally, I would put the odds much higher – perhaps 10% – but that’s only because I’ve seen up close and personal how totally desperate the swollen egos of politicians rebel when faced with voter rejection, or in this case, defeat at the hands of process.
It is axiomatic in business that in order to run a business, you need to first process map it. Once you “own the process” you own everything else. If a stubborn employee, or department, is not playing the game the way a manager sees fit, owning process allows the functional aspects of the rebel’s jobs to be “re-mapped” into other (usually better run but certainly more compliant) departments.
Once the remap is done, then it is a simple matter to declare the “rebel stronghold” excess to the needs of the Organization and prune it off, keeping only the healthy team players.
The reason for this management-level discussion is that you don’t have to look very far to see that the pres. Elect has exactly this kind of game plan rolling around in his head.
“Donald Trump threatens ‘political reprisal’ against rebel Republican Electoral College voters,” says the UK Independent. Sometimes, the clearest views are from far away.
Media Still Biased?
While the Electoral College (and the sorry-ass coup attempt) is pending, we have become rather fond of hitting the www.nytimes.com website where almost every morning, we can find the liberal anti-Trump views being espoused.
This morning, their left-hand (which is somehow interesting in itself) column offers this kind of story: “Available to the Highest Bidder: Coffee With Ivanka Trump.”
We take it all with a grain of salt however; It sells newspapers and the market is New York, not East Texas.
Nor is it Moscow. There, Vlad Putin is quoted as saying words to the effect “Prove it was our hacking or shut up.”
We know a few people who read 2600 who can make a hack look like anyone you choose, too. So if online people can “leave whatever fingerprints” you don’t think government agencies and NGOs can’t hire equal talent – that is if they are not already onboard?
You do know I once might have had .KY and .IS addy’s, right?
Trumps Relations With Russia
We do expect big changes for two reasons.
The first is that T. Rex (Rex Tillerson, pick for SecState) had – as one of his main jobs at ExxonMobile – to get along with Russian oil interests.
The second is that what we’ve termed the Nasty Nest of Neocons at the State Department (who blew up five countries with their arrogant approach to “regime change”) will likely be at long last, thrown out.
The simple facts are you can’t have ‘regime changers’ passing out Cookies in Kiev to bolster the failing EU and have Brusselcrats talking of pressing the EU as far east as Russian Vladivostok without Russia noticing and responding. Good-bye Crimea, good going Neocons, huh?
A note from our former oak leaf cluster pal Warhammer picks things up from there:
“There’s been a lot of heat regarding Russia’s apparent love for Donald Trump. Putin is all about reestablishing and securing the Motherland, but the complete lack of a viable ‘military-to-military’ dialog, let alone a routine exercising of the old Cold War hotline, leads some to worry that the Obama administration in all likelihood increased the prospects of accidents and misunderstandings leading to a nuclear end game.
Now I’m not insinuating that Trump is single-handedly going to prevent nuclear war. There are too many wild-card players in today’s game of deterrence. Besides the permanent, sitting members of the UN Security Council (U.S., Russia, China, France and the U.K.), Pakistan, India, N. Korea, Israel and ‘perhaps’ Iran have nuke strike capability. Plus, the Saudi’s have expressed keen interest in either building their own nuke arsenal or ‘renting’ nukes from Pakistan, primarily as a regional deterrent to the rise of Iran.
What I do find interesting is that the former WWII allies, who defeated Fascism with the help of the U.K. and then turned into each other’s worst nightmare during the Cold War, are now approaching the same value set regarding the control of nuclear proliferation and the regional conflict which might result in radioactive warfare.
Chief among the concerns of both powers is the rise of extremism and anti-nationalism, i.e. the Islamic State’s intent to form a religious Caliphate encompassing numerous states in the Middle East and S. Eurasia. Extremism is a threat to good international order, fair trade and diverse educational exchange leading to new technology development. In essence, ISIS is bad for modern living and freedom of literally everything.
Sure, China is still a giant pain in the posterior in the S. China Sea area. Odds are, with all the other regional chaos percolating around the globe, China will eventually get what it wants – control of the S. China Sea, an alliance with Indonesia and Singapore, and the peaceful annexation of Taiwan (all of which were prognosticated back in 1995’s Air Force 2025 research study).
But China does not want to annex any territory abutting Russia. China does not want to blow up Wall Street or the Pentagon (unless it feels it has to). China is not swarming the Russia or America’s border will illegal immigrants.
Sound, proven nuclear deterrence doctrine worked in the 1950s through the 1980s, and it can work still with any rational nation willing to come to the negotiating table. Russia’s history has proven it is one such nation. Putin understands the U.S. arsenal can obliterate 80% of Russia’s populated area. America, likewise, knows the terrible cost of waging a nuclear war with a nuclear superpower. China is no dummy on this matter either.
There’s an old saying: “Keep your friends close. Keep your enemies closer.” So it should be with Russia. Both nations are faced with extremist attacks and economic uncertainty. Limiting the chaos thru stated or silent alliances is not the worst thing the two former Cold War opponents could do.
Since we’re coming up on the holiday period and some “down time” you might also want to look on Youtube for the Phenomena Archives report on how when the Soviet system failed, their space and missile technology was “Up for Sale.” (Episode 12 in the series)
The West made the decision to waste billions upon billions to keep unemployed Russia experts from selling their skills to Iran and other players looking for lift and offering big bucks. As outline in the report this was yet-another bad idea cobbled up by the US State Department and it cost us an effective International Space Station which turned into a bureaucratic disaster rather than a first step into space-faring.
A better decision would have been to hand out the IQ tests and buy the best and brightest Russia had to offer. And have no restrictions on sending money home to the Motherland.
No, instead State dictated space policy through its desire to control the market for weapons and missile system talent – which is springing up all over, anyway.
Silicon Valley has successfully turned much of India into a “farm club” for outfits like Cisco and so forth, and when called up “to the majors” a world class brain is up to the challenge.
Why State couldn’t see the template and apply it to missile and warhead technology with a much higher payoff is one of the reasons we are ready for Big Changes in the overall management of US space, military, education, and economic policies.
And if you follow the stock market’s rise since the Trumpdency, you’ll see financial sector agreement.
Facebook as the Truth Police
We would note that it’s kind of ironic that one of the biggest time-sinks in American businesses is now going to root out “fake news.”
There’s a tendency to ignore (or conveniently fail to remember) stories like NBC’s report earlier this year about how “Time Wasted on Facebook Could Be Costing Us Trillions in Lost Productivity.”
We tend to think of it more along the lines of “Icon-pressing primates consuming sugary content.”
I wouldn’t be comfortable with Zark Muckerberg being on a jury should I ever break the law. And I’m no more comfortable with him going off to lynch “fake news.”
The risk is that an inconvenient arrangement of facts is not FAKERY. It’s a different viewpoint.
Do Housing Starts Forecast PopGrowth?
Here’s the press release just out from Census…
Privately-owned housing units authorized by building permits in November were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,201,000. This is 4.7 percent (±1.1%) below the revised October rate of 1,260,000 and is 6.6 percent (±2.6%) below the November 2015 estimate of 1,286,000.
Single-family authorizations in November were at a rate of 778,000; this is 0.5 percent (±1.4%)* above the revised October figure of 774,000. Authorizations of units in buildings with five units or more were at a rate of 384,000 in November.
HOUSING STARTS Privately-owned housing starts in November were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,090,000. This is 18.7 percent (±6.7%) below the revised October estimate of 1,340,000 and is 6.9 percent (±7.3%)* below the November 2015 rate of 1,171,000.
Single-family housing starts in November were at a rate of 828,000; this is 4.1 percent (±7.5%)* below the revised October figure of 863,000. The November rate for units in buildings with five units or more was 259,000.
HOUSING COMPLETIONS Privately-owned housing completions in November were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,216,000. This is 15.4 percent (±13.5%) above the revised October estimate of 1,054,000 and is 25.0 percent (±15.0%) above the November 2015 rate of 973,000…”
And 45-min to the ding-ding the Dow futures were up 40. Look for a chill near the close.
No, not global warming. Small worries about Monday, maybe?
Moscow Mules for breakfast Monday?