hypothesis:
‘ a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation.’
The following is an hypothesis of events, potential, to the outcome of the United States Mid-term elections: November 6, 2018:
As portrayed in the first part of this essay titled: November Seven-th , the global situation is tenuous at best as several nations elect, to government, political parties with right-leaning, conservative, and ultra-conservative, platforms and agenda. The scope and breadth of reason for this current trend are too complicated to clearly express their detail, in just a few lines. One need only be attentive to daily news broadcast to have a reasonable understanding to grasp the validity of general statements made henceforth in this essay.
Leading up to election day, November 6, much is occurring in the United States congressional, senate, and gubernatorial state, election campaigns to amplify, even louder, the differences between democrat, republican, and independent member camps, since the inauguration of President Trump, January, 2017.
White, republican candidates becoming increasing embolden to dog-whistle the race card against their Black-American opponents especially in the Florida and Georgia gubernatorial races. The president’s insistent rallying of his political base with incendiary, contradicting and abusive rhetoric pointed to his political, and mainstream media opponents. To the level as to incite one of his supporters to mail pipe bombs to senior members, past president, news organizations, and business icons associated with the Democratic party or deemed to support a liberal agenda.
Compounding this increasingly flammable and volatile situation, across the United States, is the matter of illegal immigration, security of the southern border, and most recently, a Caravan of Latin American migrants purportedly seven thousand, plus, strong making its way through Mexico, to the United States. The republican party candidates, assisted by FOX NEWS, FOX and Friends, FOX Business, and other editorial programs of FOX, have unanimously, seized upon this issue, inflating the matter to a state of hysteria in the minds of constituents, and viewing audience, respectively; and whom of course, are the same demographic that elected Trump to Office and fill his rally stadiums.
The crescendo to all this bellicose, from all sides of the political spectrum, and those factions that support them, is to be heard most stridently November 7th, with the finality of the voting process sheds light on what comes next.
It can be reasonable to suggest: no matter the final distribution of Republicans to Democrats seats for either the House of Congress, or Senate: there will be significant upset and accusations of wrong doing that renders an outcome of the casting of votes, by they who are dissatisfied with the outcome.
With the mainstream media doing the reporting of the election, their reputation for impartiality already tainted, preceding the election, they will be deemed bias if the Democrats take any majority in the race.
If the Republicans hold to their pre-election majority; Trump given a clear mandate and all to be expected second term at 2020; a conservative majority bench in the Supreme Court; Democrats will essential be rendered non-existent and impudent to rule by Trump for the foreseeable future.
So either scenario will likely call for recounts, accusations of vote tampering, voter suppression, etc.; and not to forget mention of Russian influence.
No matter: there will definitely be violence of varying order of magnitude.
If violence escalates to an extreme level resulting in high death counts, and damage and loss of property; Trump may be obliged/willing/tempted to institute measures for Marshall Law to be put into effect, possibly, even before newly elected members can be sworn into Office.
This would provide him the perfect opportunity to suspend habeas corpus, rendering him free of constitutional limits. Trump could execute a coupe of the United States, rendering it a dictatorship with little to no resistance by members of his Cabinet, Department of Justice, Congress, Senate, and most critically: the Supreme Court! It would be a pivotal moment in United States history, and degree to which democratic patriotism truly exists. But, most assuredly, a major civil battle would ensue.
In conclusion, only time’s passage will render a path to history’s making; it can only be hoped that civil disorder, and potential for chaos are condition of last resort.
It was meant to reflect his mastery of satirical yet, poetic, right-wing political punditry to rival the rhetorical eloquence of Shakespeare. It certainly seemed relevant for the time.
naykdpoet 
ENIGMA: ‘a person or thing that is mysterious, puzzling, or difficult to understand’
Tags: administration, commentary, domestic policy, environment, foreign policy, Internet, media, News, policy, politicly correctness, politics, Trump, truth
Could this definition not be applied to the 45th President of the United States: Donald J. Trump?
Even long before Trump pronounced his candidacy, he was portrayed as one whose achievements in business, finance, and personal life, bellied all sense of reason, justification, and rationality in light of the norms most professionals, and the general public of all strata, have been accustomed to believe.
Since his official inauguration, he has successfully pursued the implementation of a significant portion of his electoral platform promises, be it through executive orders, to the more recent contentious matter: with the support of a Republican Congress and Senate, to nominate and approve Brat Kavanaugh as the ninth Supreme Court Judge solidifying a conservative weighted Court Bench for decades to come. All this with no seemingly clear and comprehensive plan or strategy, or so it is thought.
Again, since his official inauguration, the focus of the official, Democrat opposition in both the House, the Senate, and the broader mainstream media, with the exception of FOX News Channel, have set their ambitions to find means to impeach Trump on a variety of charges stemming from influence of Russian meddling and collusion by senior members of his 2016 campaign team; tax evasion and avoidance hallmarked by his reluctance to release his personal and business prior year tax returns; and personal sex scandal with a porn-star and other women. Their collective goal, at minimum, being to conjure enough suspicion and negative accusation on these contentious issues, unresolved though they may be prior to the Mid-term election of November 6, 2018, will embolden Democrats, independents and non-affiliate members of the public to take back either or both, the Senate and House of Congress, to enable the pursuance of impeachment and, ideally, repealing of legislation of regulations enacted through executive orders.
Is it possible those of all stripes who have voiced their concern, and opposition, over the measures taken, to date, by the Trump Administration, domestically, and possibly more critically, on matters of foreign policy and national security, are being measurably, and strategically, mislead?
An eye-opening encounter with a talk given to a predominately white, middle to upper class, right-leaning audience of elderly, men and women by Victor Davis Hanson, the Wayne and Marcia Buske Distinguished Fellow in History at Hillsdale College, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor of classics emeritus at California State University, Fresno [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoAz6o4bUIA&feature=share], wherein he details the conditions that led to the electing of a president, unlike any of his predecessors, as is Donald J. Trump. But, possibly more importantly, the identifying and detailing of the strategy to be employed by his Administration to intentionally respond to those conditions on both the domestic and international stage.
The title to this strategy: Principled Realism.
Principled Realism is a national security paper authored by H. R. McMaster, former National Security Adviser, recently replaced by John Bolton, published in December, 2017.
The symbolism of a change to a policy that now embraces our values was richly expressed by U.S. Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart: “We will no longer have to witness the embarrassing spectacle of an American president doing the wave at a baseball game with a ruthless dictator.”
[http://sfppr.org/2017/07/trumps-new-foreign-policy-of-principled-realism/]
“Idealism holds that the purpose of U.S. foreign policy is to advance American values by fomenting freedom and democracy throughout the world. The ultimate goal of Idealism is to bring about a just and peaceful world by ending tyrannies. In the idealist view, the United States should engage in humanitarian missions, military interventions, and nation building, to advance this goal. Idealists believe that U.S. foreign policy should not be determined by what is best for the United States, but by what is, morally, the right thing to do.
In contrast, Realism holds that the purpose of U.S. foreign policy is to secure America’s national interest. Realists believe that moral principles are incompatible with the protection of our national interest. Interests come before values, and U.S. foreign policy should set aside moral considerations, and focus on whatever works.”[http://sfppr.org/2017/07/trumps-new-foreign-policy-of-principled-realism/]
Trump’s Administration strategy as detailed in McMaster’s published policy paper is neither of these two, previously held foreign policy objectives.. No longer will the United States foreign policies and/or interventions be premised, or measured, on the historic strategy of being the global watchdog and purveyor of democratic tendencies, but rather, on the practical approach to international developments focusing on their direct impact on the economic and national security interests and concerns of the American Peoples, solely.
“Principled realism opens up diplomatic possibilities anchored on the intersection of our values and our interests. President Trump’s foreign policy will not be one that puts fear in the minds of oppressive regimes as some had hoped. Dictatorships offend our values, but not necessarily our national interests.” [http://sfppr.org/2017/07/trumps-new-foreign-policy-of-principled-realism/]
So it would seem, with `eyes wide shut’, while the Democrat establishment incumbents and supporters, the liberal-leaning on-screen mainstream media and entertainment industry, and political pundits exhaust their efforts to bring down the man: Donald J. Trump; through his folly, embarrassing tweets, and public rally displays as a bombastic idiot, his Cabinet team is stealthfully implementing the doctrines, through legislative policy, of measured principled realism.
To appreciate, and possibly decide the what, where, why, and how this strategy just might have a foresight beyond most to currently understand, view this informative, video conference presentation given by Peter Zeihan, a geopolitical strategist who specializes in global energy, demographics and security in February, 2018: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0eJK4Avk2M
Share this:
Like this: