Tag: SMOD

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Not Quite SMOD, But…?

 

In a comment on a post addressing the priorities of the moron-Mayor of Portland, Oregon, I brought up the Big One. Or the Really Big One.

Back in 2015, a fascinating, if alarming, essay was published in the New Yorker. Its author described a terrifying and inevitable cataclysm centered on the Cascadian Subduction Zone off the west coast and affecting a huge area stretching from northern California to British Columbia. A BBC documentary on the same subject summarized the topic thus: “One day, the people of the Pacific Northwest will face a megathrust earthquake of a magnitude up to 9.2 on the Richter Scale.” Following which, there will be a gigantic tsunami.

Member Post

 

One Joseph Nuth, an award-winning, but it should be said, a renegade and upstart scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center is warning the people of Earth of a possible “extinction-level” event or ELE (pronounced “Ellie” as President Morgan Freeman pronounced it to courageous, investigative MSNBC reporter Tia Leoni in the smash hit movie Deep […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Member Post

 

Seriously? From Politico: Ben Carson on Tuesday diagnosed what went wrong Monday when Donald Trump seemed to imply that military veterans battling post-traumatic stress disorder aren’t strong because they “can’t handle” what they saw in combat: He didn’t explain it correctly. Preview Open

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Member Post

 

I have a Facebook page devoted to the candidacy of the Sweet Meteor of Death for president in 2016. I was asked why some 13% of the population would prefer an Extinction Level Event to the presidency of either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton (or Gary Johnson or Jill Stein, who are also terrible.) I […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Promoted from the Ricochet Member Feed by Editors Created with Sketch. Ulysses S … Trump?

 

US-TrumpGeneral George McClellan was beloved by his troops. McClellan returned the affection, earning a reputation as a well organized and meticulous commander. Giving credit where due, McClellan turned the Army of the Potomac into a cohesive unit and kept it together, even in the face of defeat. He is also credited with fortifying Washington, DC and securing the Union frontier, all through his skills in logistics. But after some early victories, defeats became all too common. It is a common theme of biographies of McClellan that, when it came to actual battle, the general was overly cautious, unable (or unwilling) to gamble, and failed to take advantage of Confederate mistakes that might have turned stalemates into victories, or victories into routs. According to some, McClellan consistently overestimated his opponents’ strength and, thus, refused to advance or attack for fear of losing. Lincoln came to distrust the general and, when sufficiently frustrated with McClellan’s hesitations and caution, fired him.

The Army of the Potomac then went through a series of generals (Burnside, Meade, Hooker), all of whom were blamed for similar failures of leadership, chiefly the inability or unwillingness to advance against the Confederacy. Then came Ulysses Grant. In the western states, Grant had fought hard against the Confederacy. Unlike the other generals, he was willing to risk casualties to achieve strategic advantages and would try unproven tactics if he thought some advantage could be gained. With the full aid of superior Union industry and a far larger Union population — advantages his predecessors shared but failed to exploit — he was relentless in his advances, racking up casualty numbers that earned him criticism as a butcher of his own troops. But he won battles.

The years since 2008 have reminded me greatly of our Civil War. The Obama administration has effectively declared a cultural war on middle America through an expanded regulatory state, lawsuits in retribution of political appointments, collaboration with far-left activist groups, the stirring-up of racial animosities, attacks on religious institutions, the opening of borders, assaults on the Second Amendment and the attempts to gut the First Amendment, and scores of petty and vindictive skirmishes against small businesses, churches, and private citizens. Our president has pitted half of America against the rest, claiming — like some restless dictator — that his advances and occupations are really defensive in nature, while wielding powers no prior president would have dared try.

Promoted from the Ricochet Member Feed by Editors Created with Sketch. Party Like It’s 1824

 

Screen Shot 2016-05-06 at 7.28.51 AMThere were four candidates for president in 1824: Secretary of Treasury William H. Crawford, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, Tennessee Senator Andrew Jackson, and House Speaker Henry Clay (L-R, above). Since none of them received a majority of votes in the Electoral College, the decision fell to the House of Representatives. According to the 12th Amendment, the House elects the president “… by states, the representation from each state having one vote.” Even though Jackson had won twelve states in the College as well as a plurality of the popular vote, thirteen states in the House — the slimmest possible majority at the time — selected Adams, who subsequently became our sixth president.

Flash forward to the present day and the near future. Say one of the Republican dropouts (or perhaps more than one) runs as a third-party candidate. Senator Bernie Sanders can run, too, to cannibalize the Hillary vote. None receives a majority when the Electoral College meets in December, so the House elects the president. According to the blessed 12th, the House must choose from among the top three Electoral College vote-getters, one of which could be a third-party ex-Republican.

Republican-controlled state delegations are a clear majority in the House now, and this would likely remain true even if the Republicans lost the House majority and the House vote didn’t occur until after the 115th Congress is sworn-in on January 3rd. Most Republican House members prefer someone other than Trump — and won’t even consider Hillary Clinton — so they would elect the other guy.