Firstly, Trump would not be 2nd on the ticket.  Sanders would never win so it would be futile.  Not enough communist indoctrination yet...give it 4 more years though...

There may not be as much difference between Trump and Sanders as some people think.  Consider:

 - Trump once suggested paying off the national debt by a one-time tax on the super-rich (e.g., himself.)

 - Trump has said in no uncertain terms that nobody will go without health care no matter what.

 - Less than 10 years ago Sanders was anti-immigration to the point where he didn't even welcome guest-workers, much less illegals.  That is to the right of Trump's supposedly outrageous stance on the subject and says something about his basic preference for American citizens.

 - Most pinko's of today are empowered by the one-worlders (e.g., Soros) who are jacking them off for political convenience.  (Edit: Their end goal is a corporate owned one-world Technocracy.)  Sanders was a pinko before that dynamic was strong.  Thus, he might well be a 'real' socialist which is not mutually exclusive with being an American.

What the globalists are trying to do is to 'synchronize' all regions of the world so that they will mesh.  This means transferring middle-class American wealth to the developing world.  This achieves three goals:

 - Bringing the US mean down

 - Bringing the desperately poor in other areas up.

 - Bringing society to a state of hive-mind worker bees who are happy in their 'mega-region' honeycomb with a few controllers at the top.  Middle-class is empowered by their wealth and thus threaten the hive structure and must go.

Obama has been focused on the above agenda and quite successful.  'free trade' is the biggest tool in the toolbox.  I believe that Trump understands this dynamic and the statements he makes reflect this.  Sanders may be able to see the trap before it's to late and may not be on-board if he does.  As I say, his 'socialist' views would probably be better served under Trump's plan than under the one-worlder's thumb.  I would not know of course.

So, Ohio goes to Kasich.  Trump gets Florida which is no surprise.  The non-winner-takes-all states look mostly ho-hum for Trump.

The big news to me is that the Replublican establishment is thinking about a third-party.  The goal would be to split the vote and get Hillary in.  The options from here seem to be that Trump wins the primaries outright and the Republicans cut his legs out, or they do a brokered where both Trump and Cruz get hosed.

On the Democrat side, Bernie 'felt the burn' again by having the Soros funded hooligans who broke up Trump's rally blamed on him while Clinton smiles all the way to a blow-out in most or all of the states on the block today.

It should be abundantly clear that 2016 is Establishment Globalists vs. Americans.  Here is the strategy I would suggest to overcome the odds.

 - Trump tells the Repubican party to fuck themselves whether he wins the nomination outright or not.

 - Forms a third-party himself.

 - Enlists both Sanders and Cruz if possible.  They are both going to have establishment tire-tracks on their carcasses anyway.  And both are probably closer to Americans than they are to Globalists.

Funny interview with a Dutch domination expert who, like most, was unaware of the existance of WTC 7,

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6D4dla17aA

Sadly (for some), he is longer among the living.  One of those single vehicle crash things.

Back to the thead title, what the professionals apparently call 'earned media', I call 'trolling'.



The image is 'bought' vs 'earned' by candidate.  Is generated so it doesn't clip and I'm too lazy to do the screencap thing, but one gets a sense of what I'm talking about.  Story:  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/16/upshot/measuring-donald-trumps-mammoth-advantage-in-free-media.html?_r=0

Depends a lot on the country and on how much Bitcoin ends up being used.  I would expect that in some cases for a period of time getting caught using Bitcoin (or precious metals) as a currency will get you summarily executed.  A global collapse of debt-based fiat monetary systems and the implantation of a replacement solution will result in tensions and 'quality of life' changes which few can imagine.  Or at least they have that distinct potential.

I would expect the global internet to switch over to an 'enhanced' protocol whereby another layer is added at the packet level.  This layer will add various kinds of metadata including personally identifiable information and license authorization.  That would provide backward compatibility and very straightforward filtering.  I only say this because it is the design which strikes me as a no-brainer and one which I would suggest if I were retained to produce a design for the so-called new world order.  To my surprise I have seen no suggestion of such a 'solution'.  Anyway, Bitcoin would have some adapting to do to overcome such a challenge.

There seems to be a distinct correlation between Westerns who see much to like about:

 - The nicety of China's political system and the control it makes possible relative to democracy.

 - The desirability of globalization and of a 'one world' system of control...normally manifested as the U.N. at this point.

 - 'concern' over global climate change, overpopulation, etc.  Things that need a guiding hand...usually their own.

Clearly the Pentagon also fit that criteria (went down without a plane hitting it.)  Unless one considers a cruise missile to be a plane:



edit:  Another fun vid:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZRFvavH_vk

I saw footage of the planes hit and based on my understanding of structural engineering did not expect there to be any problems.  When I heard later that they collapsed I thought to myself that I mis-estimated and didn't know structures and demolition as well as I thought.

My 'Oh, wow!' moment came a few days/weeks later when I saw some French web-site which showed some early shots of the hole in the Pentagon.  From that point on I knew considered it very probable that it was a false flag.  Such things were not nearly so common back then so it was a much more tough pill to swallow.

edit:

I would have estimated that you knew what differential scanning calorimetry was, or be readily able to deduce it.

I've just read through a bit of the the paper for the first time in a few years.  On page 27 the question of ordinary paint is addressed.  Here's a different phraseology of the point I was making:


If you are up to the challenge, or know of someone who is has been, let me know.  So far I've not discovered anyone who has done so, but seeking out such an effort is hardly my life's work.

I called it out as an operation to help Hillary from when I first saw it.  For a time I thought that Trump was making a mistake to point his fire hose at Sanders for this.  My rational was that Sanders is the walking dead and pointing out the real deal would help him if/when he faces Hillary (and I re-iterate my prediction is that she'll vanish before she goes up against him.)

Now I disagree with my earlier strategy assessment.  Bernie had got to be butt-hurt (and, of course, hurt in the polls) by having the MoveOn hooliganism pinned on him.  Maybe to the extent that he'll either not support Hillary when he drops out, and I would not rule out the possibility that he endorses Trump!(*)

Here's an uncharacteristically informative bit out of the quasi-mainstream:

  https://youtu.be/G8nncT0R9S4?t=3m21s

I'm glad to see that the old Nixon guy a) easily see's the score, and b) is consulting with the Trump campaign which has got to help them quickly grok the dirty tricks as they are employed against them.

---

* There is a fair chance that the actual people of the United States will ultimately realize more 'socialism' under Trump than they would under any of the establishment-acceptable one-worldee candidates, and that certainly includes Clinton.  Trump is, after all, the Republican candidate who argued straight-up that he would not be letting sick people die in the streets under his presidency be that 'socialist' or not.

PS:  Thank God Kerry lost.  He is one of the few people who might even be worse than Obama.  If you take the worst traits of Obama and GW and GHW and shake them around a bit you come up with something closely resembling John Kerry.

Don't forget the media which is huge.  It is really is truly amazing.  About all that Trump has are his supporters, the money he himself made, and his experience making that money which involved playing the game of buying politicians.  If Trump pulls this off it will be one of the most amazing things I've ever seen in politics.  Probably the biggest.

Today's 'environmentalists' are the single biggest threat to the environment.

Remember what I said when you find that the resources are exploited all the same but for the benefit of a different group of owners than would have been the case without their 'environmentalism'.  And probably with less concern for the environment than under the current ownership structures.  If you are young, you will probably have an opportunity to see what I'm talking about in your lifetime.  (I'm making this statement/prediction from a U.S. perspective, BTW, but it stands for many 'developed' countries.)

Time will tell whether Trump is 'fighting for his country and freedom'...it's what they all say..., but it is pretty clear that he is in a fight for his life (literally or close to it) and that he volunteered.

As Trump obviously knows, there are certainly easier ways to make a buck than running for president of the U.S. against the establishment with their two entrenched political parties, the media, and a fair number of pretty twisted people in the general public.

I've got some respect for the guy due to the above observation alone among other things.  Enough to where I am at the point of supporting him with some reservations as would be the case for anyone.  Thus, I guess I would be a 'Trumper'.  So I know for sure that there is at least one 'Trumper' who is completely against 'wanting to kill anyone not believing the same thing' that I do.  That would make the world a boring place.

If you only believe the propaganda about who believes what without researching it for yourself you will have a very poor and unbalanced understanding of reality and will be chronically surprised as events unfold.

Some 78 year old dude sucker punched a protester/disrupter at a Trump rally a few days ago.  I think it fair to call a person who sneaks in then times a disruption to be a disrupter where people who show up and display their stuff in an up-front manner would be 'protesters'. 

Anyway, what the old dude did was wrong and he should be prosecuted as I see it.  What he said about it was even more wrong.  Trump has made some statement that he is thinking about paying the guy's court costs.  I think that this is politically unwise, and given the nature of the incident, possibly unjustified...except that Trump made the mistake earlier in his campaign of endorsing such actions. 

Here is my suggestion for Trump to recover:

 - State that he sees a lot of violence from people disrupting his events.

 - States that he thinks it is unfair when such people face no actions while his supporters do.

 - States that his people are being cheated out of enjoying a peaceful rally which they took the time and energy to attend.

 - States that it is unfair that more is not known about any organizations which are supporting systematic disruptions of his events.  And especially that the information is not reported in the media.

 - States that until these injustices are addressed he cannot stand by and see his supporters treated differently under the law than others so he will go ahead and help the old guy in his legal defense, even if the old guy's actions were stupid, until such time as some of the problem which are engineered against him and his supporters are dealt with fairly.

He also had a Nicaraguan woman say some pretty nice things about him.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCMYdRB6HJk

And the black dude who introduced him in one of the recent events gave one of the most compelling speeches I've heard in a while.

I'm enough of a skeptic to consider it very possible that all of these things are staged and fraudulent.  OTOH, I've listened to the guy enough to believe that there could be plenty of genuine support and optimism from these same people who he is, if one listens only to the media, supposed to be alienating.

I wasn't around back in the 1930's, but the surviving footage of Hitler's rise to power doesn't suggest that he spent a lot of time hugging Jewish people and telling them what great people they were in his rallies.  Nor does his Art of the Deal book probably have a lot of similarity to Mein Kampf I wold not suspect (though I've not actually read either for comparison.)  Forgive me for failing to see the stark parallels between Trump and Hitler that are so obvious to others.

A lot of thinking people care a good deal about immigration.  It's been a part of our country since we were founded.  World dynamics have changed a lot since then and it is important for our country to evolve with these changes.

Over the past several weeks I've listened carefully to some of the candidates and especially to Trump.  I have not heard one thing which is even close to what his detractors are saying that he said, and nothing which would indicate that he has any racist tendencies at all to be honest.  Basically the left fucked up with people like me with their desperate nonsense.  Not that it makes me think anything more of Trump, but it makes me think a hell of a lot less of your type.  Actually, if the best you can do against the guy is invent nonsense, that tells me that there may not be a lot of legitimate problems with him.  And it tells me that there is very little positive to talk about when it comes to his alternatives.

Oh, BTW, back in the day Pink Floyd was one of my favorite groups, and I have seen The Wall at least several times.  Maybe even when I was not stoned, but I don't recall.  Anyway, it has no particular relation to Trump that I can see (though he does display a few authoritarian tendencies that I would keep an eye on.)  If anything we are vastly more likely to experience a nightmarish totalitarian dictatorship by following the path that the left wishes to take us, and that includes people like Bernie (although he is probably to much of a doof to see it before it's to late.)

I didn't bother with the vid which, considering the nature of the poster, is probably a waste of time.  To the descriptive text, however:

I've been thinking about the illegal immigration thing a bit lately.  Both how I used to think about the issue in the past and how my feelings on it have taken a roller coaster ride, and what I think makes sense today.  Here, for critique, are my thoughts.

I would 'get them up against the wall' and lined up for the 'big beautiful door' that Trump talks about.  I would have a large quota because there are plenty if illegals who are great for our country.  Re-entrance would be on a points system.

 - Leave involuntarily -> not applicable for re-entrance.

 - Entered illegally and got into trouble with crime -> very negative points.

 - Entered illegally and took benefits -> negative points

 - Entered illegally and paid taxes, had no legal problems, and took no benefits -> positive points

An off-hand guess would be that we could set the quota at such a point where every illegal who is a benefit to our country could come right back in.  If not on a path to naturalization then at the very least on a work visa.

(For the dopes among us, I don't necessarily mean 'wall', 'door', 'leave', 'enter', etc in a literal sense.)

You can watch the 'beheading' vid in safety.  'ISIS' was kind and gentle and didn't show the actual act.  They didn't want to have to clean up any blood off the green-screen I suppose.  Then watch the interview with Foley's 'siblings'.  I certainly hope that my sister can avoid giggling if she is interviewed a few days after I am beheaded.  I hope my pictures don't jump off the wall either.  A critical element of these hoaxes is to make it so obvious that other media knows to stay away from it.  They jumped the shark with Foley.

I'd rate Trump as a 9 (because I almost never give a 10.)  Politicians are professional con artists and he leaves even the best of them who have made it to the highest office in probably the world in the dust.

In order to be good at developing confidence in an audience, it helps a lot for there to be some actual real-world basis for confidence.  As best I can tell, there is a decent amount of evidence that this is the case with Trump.  Of course with the package we get a large dose of showmanship.  I'm cool with that in part because it is what it takes to win these days and in part because it is kind of fun.

Millions of people 'know' with pretty high precision what 9/11 was all about and how it went down.  Many millions more know that the official story is false to one degree or another.

If your metric for gauging who 'knows what for sure' is based on what Snopes says, you will be forever behind in understanding the world.

Put another way, 'consensus' is an extremely poor substitute for knowledge, and that has probably never been more true than today.  Humans are by nature closer to herd animals than they are to solitary hunters.  People who are competent at social engineering understand this and leverage it to their advantage.

That is not true.  To the extent that I 'believe' anything, I believe that Trump is a con-artist.  That is to say, he has taken the art of building confidence to a high level.  That says nothing about whether the confidence is deserved.  I am as hopeful about Trump as I have been about any candidate who has a realistic chance of winning.  Of course that is a fairly low bar to clear at this point in time.

I will say that Trump did himself no favors with me when he brought of the Foley beheading thing.  That was one of the most absurd and obvious hoaxes ever.  If he actually got conned on that one I have some serious questions about his capabilities.  If he did not, then it speaks genuine scam artist to me.  I call 'em like I see 'em.  Always have.