Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
What If Dems Succeed in Keeping Trump Off the 2024 Ballot?
One theory about the J6 Committee is that its goal is to render President Trump ineligible for the 2024 ballot. Like the lawsuits brought against Republican Congressional Representatives Marjory Taylor Green, Madison Cawthorn, Tom Tiffany and Scott Fitzgerald, and Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, the objective is to disqualify Donald John Trump under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution:
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Although this is laughable on its face (no “insurrection” took place much less was there any action on the part of any Republican officer accused to engage in such) let’s just imagine that the Democrats put on their “show trial” and create a record to be presented to a court. Let us further suppose that said court actually issues a decision, upheld on appeal, that President Trump is disqualified from running for President in 2024. Will this be a victory for the Democrats?
I would argue that this is the last thing they should want. Why? Because President Trump was a reaction to the Progressive takeover of the Democratic Party, not the cause of Progressive setbacks in 2016-2020. President Trump personified and articulated the concern of millions of patriotic Americans who felt abandoned by politicians of both parties. So when GOPe candidates in 2016 brought out all the bromides that had brought in campaign funds but never stopped and hardly slowed the progressive march through our institutions and government it is unsurprising to the “uninformed” and ordinary folks that Trump got the nomination. Since I was “informed” and expected him to fail in the electoral contest and was reluctant for his candidacy since I was so well “informed” I didn’t think he could win.
But I was delighted he did. His policies delighted me. His pre-pandemic economic moves were masterful. The country, even with the drag of the Russia hoax, was regaining its footing as a democratic republic. And then came the pandemic and the vultures swooped in and took away a slam-dunk reelection. The V-shaped economic dip was such that in November it was not all that surprising that the election day returns before the voting “pauses” were definitely favoring President Trump. And then things went south under what remain murky conditions. GOPe had their revenge and it was time to move on.
Just as the voters who supported President Trump did so for their own reasons distinct from his posturing and personality, so too did they (mostly) wander into the Capitol on January 6, 2021, for their own reasons and not at the command of President Trump. But suppose the Democrats succeed with the courts in their bit of theatre?
The people who voted for Trump will not change their minds or their political inclinations. They have watched as the levers of power have been turned against citizens. They will not come “home”, although it remains to be seen whether they can be tamed. They are ready to rally another politician who will champion their cause.
If he is no longer in the way, the problem doesn’t go away for the Democrats. It only becomes more obvious that it was never about Trump.
Published in General
Well it doesn’t seem out of line to have property taxes for paying for property/people-related services such as police, fire, even schools really. And if you were living in a small town without local stores etc, how could any of those be paid for from LOCAL sales taxes?
But I can see how it would be appropriate to make it so that property – especially owner-occupied homes – cannot be foreclosed/sold for property taxes. At least not until the owner’s death, and maybe not even then. Maybe if the property is sold, but not if it is inherited. It could lead to “a pickle” at some point if NOBODY pays property taxes in a community, but I haven’t figured out a good compromise on that.
On a different topic, regarding the 2024 election and such, this is a rather shocking the beginning of an article from American Thinker. Those who see assassination of politicians destructive to America as worthwhile are Democrat men under age 50. Whom do they hate? The King of MAGA. (And Justice Kavanaugh.)
Disturbing poll suggests ‘government by assassination’ could lie ahead for America
By Thomas Lifson
A poll taken by the left wing Southern Poverty Law Center shows very disturbing levels of support among younger Americans for “assassinating a politician who is harming the country or our democracy.” In particular, those under age 50, labeled as “younger” by the poll, approached half supporting assassination. Among younger women, 40% of self-identified Republicans expressed approval, compared to 32% of Democrats.
Among males – the group far more likely to engage in assassinations (as in the case of the recently arrested attacker at Justice Kavanaugh’s house) – 44% of younger Democrats expressed approval, compared to 34% of Republicans.
That video is very good, but every single word means something. It’s not easy stuff.
Fiat money is valuable because they force you to pay taxes with it and the United States has rule of law and a big military. Gold is basically stored energy. I think energy is ultimately what money is about. You need food and fuel to survive.
Then they screw up everything by central planning with fiat money.
This stuff is really complicated but I think that video is quite valuable.
Silver rounds. Ammo. Dehydrated food. That is what you need. lol
I don’t think that holds up. Sharks have to swim constantly, not just 9 to 5 or whatever. If people can’t “store value” via money for the work they do from 9 to 5, how do they survive when they’re “off?”
The government owns you. They don’t want you to have private property or wealth. Communism.
If you watch enough Yuri N. Maltsev videos, you would realize everybody should be very judicious about how much Socialism you are going to tolerate. It should stop with Medicare and Social Security. But that’s not what we do.
Well I wouldn’t have a problem with people opting out of property taxes, as long as they understand that means they get NOTHING from the police, fire dept, etc. Roads to their home don’t get maintained – heck, maybe the city/county should REMOVE existing roads just to make the point – and so forth. If they’re up for that, fine. But I suspect you’d get a lot of “but that’s not FAIR!” or something.
Actual public goods are not socialism. Those are ignorant Democrat talking points.
I really meant something closer to living hand to mouth.
I think your point highlights the difference between a welfare state and true socialism. The former is simply a redistribution of wealth program which only affects economic activity when taxes are too high on productive workers. The latter is central management of all economic activity which inevitably screws everything up between both the intended and unintended consequences. When you kill markets, people die in greater numbers than those who die simply because they do not have the capacity to provide for themselves.
This is a good discussion of welfare capitalism as practiced in the Nordics. The president of Denmark got very angry when Bernie Sanders said they practiced Socialism.
https://freemanbeyondthewall.libsyn.com/episode-215
No, but my point was about the ability to OWN property without losing it because of not paying taxes, whether they provide for public goods or not.
I agree with this, If I was a democrat strategist I would be voting for trump in the primary. I find him hilarious and think the federal government deserves every second of him but he may be the only republican who can lose.
Time does go by, and I’m not here to settle old scores (nothing to do with you), but MAN O MAN have we heard that before. Popular topic in 2015/2016, just how Trump was the only Republican who could PAWSIBLY lose to INEVITABULL Hillary.
So I’ll just lean back and smirk a little.
The context of the thread is the video, not property taxes, specifically.
Folks don’t seem to understand the extent of the fraud we will have nor what a Democrat win will mean. Ordinary Democrats and some Republicans want to blame our political confusion on Trump. The far left knows what it’s doing and we have millions of Republicans and middle of the road folks who simply do not understand what will happen if Democrats win. There is only one question they need to answer. Which top down country in the history of the world did not collapse and die? Name just one. Which one changed course and decentralized and spread power around? Any? No. So where are we headed if we allow the Democrats to steal the next election? What kind of idiot would stay home if Trump isn’t the candidate, or stays home or votes Democrat if he is?
Stupid voter: “What is top down?”
If a majority refuse to vote for Trump and let the Democrats win or vote for Democrats, I hope they have to pay $10 a gallon for gas and can’t afford bacon. I am tired of the belittling and attacks. He deserves better for all he did.
Bingo
I only watch gutfeld on fox.
Try “The Five” too. Not as much of a fan of “Outnumbered” but it can be good.
The next civil war will be brutal.
Don’t care for the lefties. They have nothing to say that I want to hear.
A effin’ men.
Because we won’t be shooting across state lines. We’ll be shooting at our neighbors.
Hmm well as far as I know, The Five only has one at a time, and it’s entertaining to see their arguments being dismantled before their eyes.
One is too many.
The previous civil war had neighbors shooting (at) neighbors too. I found out years ago that the small-ish city where I lived after being born in a nearby city, and stayed close to until High School, was actually partitioned during the previous civil war.
Fair enough. I remember the old clichés about brother-against-brother and father-against-son that they taught us in elementary school, but I also remember that there were 13(?) Confederate States. It’ll be different this time. If there is a this time.
Okay, but Gutfeld is really good on The Five too, and you’re missing it.
This time seems far more likely to be big-cities-against-the-rest-of-the-country, but yeah.
Although if it does go that way, it shouldn’t be all that difficult to “siege” the cities by stopping their supplies of food, electricity, etc, that comes from outside the cities.