“Show me the incentive and I will show you the outcome.” Charlie Munger
In amongst all the sound and fury, the mandates, the disasters that are currently befalling the US, there is one factor that is not sufficiently addressed, because some rather large assumptions have been made. Without political power, none of the Left's agenda can be pursued and while they might have the Presidency until 2025, they need to retain the House and the Senate next year, too. Overwhelmingly, Republicans see the mid terms as a certain triumph when they regain control of both houses; in fact, one of them would be enough. There is no significant discussion of any other outcome or any other possibilities. In any other year, this would be understandable. But now, not so much. Allow me explain why.
Background
Figure 1
You may or may not have seen that graphic. It's actually a little worse because, of the 22 House seats that were allegedly toss ups, Trump and the Republicans won them all. So, without knowing anything more, there are some serious anomalies right there that are worthy of further scrutiny, you might think. How about this one, of Pennsylvania?
Figure 2
There are examples everywhere, in at least half the states in the union, including some that the Republicans still managed to win, despite widespread Democrat vote fraud. I don't propose to go further down that path, evidentially, as that is not the purpose of this article. But it's safe to say that 2020 wasn't the first presidential election to suffer in this way, exclusively from the Democrat side. So much so, that's it difficult if not impossible to establish a true baseline of Democrat support. How far back would we have to go?
Any attempt to quantify the actual number of genuine Democrat votes for the 2020 election will, in the absence of full forensic audits, have to be an educated guess taking in population growth, party registration and consequential trends. Using these techniques, a figure of just over 8 million excess votes is probable. Bear in mind that this does not include any algorithmic trickery, which may have added millions more. Nor does it include the practice of vote swapping, which was seen to occur on several occasions during live coverage. The point is that the Democrat machine cheats on a massive scale. They are willing and they are able.
The problem is that, this time, they are being subjected to prolonged scrutiny. Arizona has gone the audit route and the results are due in the next few days. Initial findings, including a canvassing effort which went door to door checking who voted for whom, are deeply problematic for the Democrats. It is highly likely that the official audit report will only increase that burden.
And it's not just Arizona. There are moves afoot to audit the election in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Georgia, among others. All those states had unusual voting patterns and unprecedented overnight pauses in vote counting, a condition that only afflicted the so-called battleground states, the ones that traditionally decide elections. So, the pressure is on and, wouldn't you know it, the mid-terms are just around the corner. This is somewhat inconvenient for the regime, as mid-terms are rarely kind to the incumbent.
In fact, since 1865, there have only been three occasions when the mid-term House elections went the way of the sitting President; 1934, 1998 and 2002. There are exceptional reasons for at least two of these results. 1934 was the New Deal era under FRD and George W Bush experienced a bounce following the commencement of the War on Terror. But on the other 35 occasions, the President's party lost, sometimes heavily.
In Senate mid-terms, the picture isn't much rosier, as the ruling party has lost 19 of 26. Presidents nearly always fall behind in the polls once they are elected and start to make policy choices that alienate blocks of voters. This phenomenon even has a name – the Presidential Penalty, a preference for supporting the opposition during mid-terms.
Further, voter enthusiasm is usually much diminished. This makes some sense as, although every House seat, a proportion of Senate seats and other local positions are up for grabs, the Presidency isn't. Thus, traditionally, presidential elections attract a voter turnout of around 60%, whereas the mid terms only manage to accrue around 40%. There has been a recent exception to that rule in 2018, when 53% of the electorate roused themselves and trooped to the polls. Or, to be more accurate, sent in a mail-in ballot. That election has all the trappings of a dry run. Additionally, one only needs to pay cursory attention to current events to see that there are other factors which are certain to further depress the likely vote for Biden.
Ending the war in Afghanistan has bipartisan support, despite the fact that the war was scaled back into a mere mission a while back, the mission being to provide air support to the Afghan military, with no American casualties for well over a year. Clearly, the unbroken nature of the military presence in the country precludes any attempt to re-categorize the conflict as anything but a war; after all, that's how it started and the US is still there. Nonetheless, a military mission comprised of 2,500 troops doesn't feel a lot like a war any more.
So, no more boots on the ground. However, nature abhors a vacuum. It was obvious to all involved (no matter how much they may deny it now) that the government would collapse if the US pulled out. Even the apologists within the US administration are only arguing about the timing. That speculation speaks to the tactics of evacuation, the when and the how, more than it does to the issue of continuing influence in the area. We've heard a lot about how intelligence suggested that the regime could hang on for six months or so, rather than less than six days. That's a question of when, not if.
Bagram air base is 400 miles from the Chinese border; it would necessarily have had a deterrent effect on a country that openly seeks to usurp the superpower status of the US. The effect is no longer there. But, despite the fact that the Taliban, Daesh and ISIS are interchangeable entities in terms of personnel (if you talk to people who know the country, rather than the politicians), discounting all that has been lost in terms of prestige and billions of dollars of materiel, the withdrawal itself was still a textbook example of how not to do it; the ongoing fallout, hinting strongly at incompetence, will continue to impact Democrat credibility at the polls.
There are other self inflicted wounds. Inflation is over 5%, up sharply since the regime took command in January, with construction materials, gas and meat particularly affected. That is, if you can get hold of those consumables in the quantity you need and at a time of your choosing, as supply chain problems bedevil the economy. These problems can be traced back to decisions made by the President, some of them on day one. Executive Orders halting pipeline construction and banning fracking on federal land plus more lock-downs and vaccine mandates have had a combined effect, decimating sectors of the economy, and have resulted in workers choosing to take the government's welfare coin, rather than report for duty and face a compulsory jab. Less workers means higher wages, which translates into more cost being passed onto the customer, which leads to higher prices. None of this is a vote winner, either.
Then we have the disaster at the southern border. Even some Democrats, who hated Orange Man Bad and voted for Biden on that basis only, are not on board with unrestricted illegal immigration, with aliens crossing the border with impunity; particularly when they are released into the interior of the US (with no Covid test), never to be seen again.
And finally, the government has run out of money. September 30th and October 15th are key dates. The federal government will close down at the end of September and default on its bond payments in mid October, unless a new debt ceiling is agreed or a continuity notice is cobbled together. The Democrats believe they can face down the Republicans and force them to co-operate (collaborate might be a better choice of word), to agree a new debt ceiling that will enable the administration to squander more trillions on the Green New Deal (infrastructure bills, by another name), putting the nation's grandchildren further into debt, merely because the alternative is too awful to contemplate.
This fiscal irresponsibility has already had one impact that has, so far, slipped under the radar, due to the other colossal snafus. The Saudis and the Russians have already agreed to stop trading in the petrodollar; this is likely the first step in a process that will eliminate the dollar as the world's reserve currency, an eventuality that will be hastened by the vast spending plans of the present regime. These problems can also be traced back to decisions made by Biden and, despite the fact that the administration and the Fourth Estate will do their best to memory hole any adverse publicity, the effects will be felt in pay packets across the nation. And people generally don't vote for parties that make them poorer.
All of the above creates a crisis for the Democrats. If they cheated on an industrial scale in 2020, there are a huge number of illegitimate votes already in the totals. If we add in the traditional mid-term blues, enhanced scrutiny of elections and recent state voter integrity laws as other encumbrances and then sprinkle these policy debacles into the mix, prospects look exceedingly dim.
Especially when one considers that the Senate is split 50-50 and Republicans would only need to flip 5 seats out of 435 to gain control of the lower house. Of the Senate seats, four Democrats are defending majorities of less than 3%, as against two Republicans. It would only take one Senate seat and/or five House seats. It wouldn't even be necessary to win both Houses. Winning one would gum up the works sufficiently, even if the President would still be a Democrat.
You would think, therefore, that the administration might be inclined to tread a little more warily; to clean up their act, make an effort to appeal to voters. And yet, the next big announcement has been to mandate vaccines and alienate the voting public still further, even if the calculation is that these are largely people that were already unimpressed. Still, they are not trying to woo anyone. It's the same pattern that was discernible during Basement Joe's presidential campaign. It looks like they just don't care about votes.
Ordinarily then, when a regime demonstrates incompetence and contempt for the voting public, one would assume that an implosion of their Congressional quota is just over the horizon. It is, of course, probable that some of them are incompetent and it's certainly likely that the zealots among them will be seduced by the heady mix of ideology and power and pay little or no attention to cause and effect. And the administration is certainly in a huge hurry to get legislation passed, to have their Leftist agenda encoded in perpetuity.
Perhaps they are in such a hurry because they know they'll lose in 2022. But if that were to happen, the momentum would dissipate entirely. They are only able to pursue some of their control-freakery because of emergency powers. They are only able to ride roughshod over the Constitution because their opponents have calculated that they will lose too much political capital if they oppose the government and, in doing so, offer themselves up to accusations that they allowed more Americans to die from the virus.
Without that manufactured sense of urgency and panic, it would be much more difficult to proceed at such breakneck speed and people would have more time to reflect on administrative excesses. Plus, of course, they are on record as saying that the pandemic offers a perfect opportunity to reset, to Build Back Better. They are in power and they have shown no inclination to accommodate or unite. They are on a mission and they are not going to stop until they complete it. For all of those reasons, it doesn't seem likely that they are planning to go quietly in a little over a year.
Smart people have plans. So, what's theirs? How are they going to prevail in the mid-terms? As far as I can see, there are two main options available. Neither of them involves selling themselves to the voting public, but one is likely a backup, in case the other option doesn't work out.
Plan A: Replacement theory
Southern border
This is a conspiracy theory grounded in white supremacy; that must be true, because Wikipedia says so. If, however, we were to venture into the real world, we might be able to see that a process that is provable, that has been ongoing for decades and which is still continuing (in greater numbers than ever before) cannot be referred to as a theory. It is, however, a conspiracy; the Left is conspiring to neuter the conservative vote and, in doing so, to guarantee a blue America from here on in. There are several workings parts to this plan and, as a longer term strategy, it is sound. In the context of this article, it is the short term ability to weaponize it that is of interest.
This is how it works. Cheating in elections is hard work and risky, as evidenced by the number of prosecutions brought. It involves labor intensive activities such as ballot harvesting, it requires the right people in the right positions to control who gets a ballot, who doesn't and how many extra will need to be completed to ensure the right result. Electronic trickery can leave a trace, the whole process is vulnerable to discovery and co-ordination of such a vast effort across an entire country is difficult, at least in quick time. Hence, the need for some rather obvious shenanigans and delays in November 2020, which only increased the likelihood of exposure.
Wouldn't it better to reduce risk? To replace numerous scams with one simple process? Indeed it would. The long term Plan A is to flood the country with illegal immigrants and allow them to vote; for the Democrats, naturally, as they are the party that facilitates the influx and which votes to pay for the vast costs that ensue. Turkeys tend not to vote for Christmas. It's a good plan, especially if combined with an aggressive promotion of abortion among the existing population. Whilst it is true that both Democrats and Republicans have abortions, it's still a net gain for the left if you lose half a vote for each abortion and gain a whole vote for each illegal alien. That may be callous, but it doesn't change the math.
It's why the messaging from Biden and co has been so welcoming and it's also why so much hatred was directed at Trump, who was doubly sinful in building a wall and advocating pro life policies. It's not because they genuinely care about refugees, per se. Look at how they have treated Cubans who have made the treacherous journey across the Caribbean on open boats. They get sent back from whence they came, because the Cuban community in the US tends to vote much more conservatively. This is unsurprising as they are fleeing from a Communist regime; it seems likely that they would be something other than Leftists.
But the administration has gone out of its way to encourage illegal immigration at the southern border. It has provided signage and welcoming border guards, good treatment, accommodation, transportation and the promise of welfare. Word has got back to the next waves and they no longer seek to avoid the border patrols, but rather seek them out. This is important; if they don't try to evade capture, the federal government retains the ability to place the aliens in the state of the administration's choosing.
The plan depends on having a lot of illegals. Can you see why the border is now open? If they are to triumph in 2022, they are going to need millions of extra voters. And, whilst it's true that extra immigrants doesn't translate into extra voters a year down the line, that's only the case in the here and now. More on that shortly.
There is no point, however, in leaving all the aliens in California or Texas. That isn't going to have the necessary effect, although they are definitely targeting Texas. These immigrants need to be carted off to the swing states and other blue states that are hemorrhaging voters if they are to have maximum efficacy and they need to be able to vote as soon as 2022. First things first.
It's worth remembering, at this juncture, that there are already more than 20 million illegal immigrants in the US, with more arriving by the day; over one million already, in 2021. While the existing immigrants are scattered all over, new arrivals have been bused and flown to particular states. Most have gone to one of Florida, Tennessee, Texas, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Indiana, Michigan, North Carolina, Georgia and Kentucky.
That select list includes five out of ten possible swing states and, given that there are another forty states in which to resettle illegals, it provides a clear pointer as to motive. Non citizens and illegal aliens are also counted when it comes to apportioning congressional seats and the Census data isn't going the Democrats way, either. As an aside, nobody seems to note the obvious dissonance between blue to red state osmosis and a President who allegedly got the most presidential votes in history.
It's all well and good for the Left to demonize anyone who mentions the Great Replacement. Perhaps this process bears that moniker in honor of its place in the Great Reset; another conspiracy theory, you understand. It doesn't really matter what it's called; it only matters that it's happened and is still happening. And it is. However, something more is also required.
Even if the Democrats have managed to place these people in strategic locations, the received wisdom is that they still can’t vote and there still isn't a speedy enough process that could possibly change that scenario. That's not entirely true. There are two main avenues to registering to vote illegally. One already exists and has done for nearly thirty years. The other relies on the implementation of one or both of the two bills that have been passed by the House already, but which are languishing in the Senate.
Motor Voter Act
Otherwise known as the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, President Clinton's brainchild. In typical fashion, what it purports to do is not what it actually does. In theory, it helps expand the voter base, allowing citizens who have not previously voted to register. It does this by automatically adding them to the rolls any time they apply to renew their driving licence. This sounds like a good thing; unfortunately, whether by accident or design (almost certainly the latter), the part of the process which would allow it to remain a good thing is routinely omitted. That's the part where the authorities check to see whether the person applying for a driving licence is actually a citizen, as they have asserted on their application form.
The net result is that, not only does receiving a driving licence begin to regularize a person's status, it also puts illegal immigrants on the voter rolls, with the ability to vote in federal and state elections. It's still against the law to actually vote, but nobody is checking, so the risk is minimal. California, naturally, goes even further. Their version of the Motor Voter law also legalizes ballot harvesting, thus enabling a dedicated election fraudster to canvas any number of illegal aliens to register for a licence, ensure that they then vote for the desired candidate and then collect the ballots up afterwards so that they may then be submitted.
In this way, it can be seen that even states that wish to tighten voting laws to include the production of an ID at the voting station (or similar for mail-in ballots) are not going to eliminate this type of fraud. Nonetheless, this is relatively labor intensive and limited to those people who can actually drive, or who wish to apply for a provisional. It's not possible to know, ahead of time, how many at the southern border are also drivers. It's probable that the answer is 'not many' and, whilst over the longer term, this law may be gradually exploited, the administration needs more bang for its buck and it needs it much more quickly. Which brings us to:
HR1
This is the euphemistically named For the People Act, which would only be true if it's referring to non American people; particularly, illegally present non Americans. If this Act were to pass, there would likely never be another Republican president or congressional majority again.
This act, among other equally damaging provisions, requires states and cities to register people to vote when they apply for government benefits and services, regardless of their citizenship status. It wouldn’t just be drivers anymore. It allows for same day registration, meaning that a person may turn up at a polling booth, register to vote and then vote immediately. As it also makes it illegal for the election officials to ask for ID, the voter must be taken at their word. They must be believed. Presumably, they'll also be believed at the next polling station and the one after that. The only limits on the number of votes they will be able to cast on election day will be physical fitness and commitment to the cause.
Drop boxes, the voting post boxes which were introduced as a temporary measure during the 'pandemic', will become a permanent feature, a phenomenon familiar to anyone who understands what the word 'temporary' actually means in politics. Ballot harvesting will be legalized. The illegal alien on benefits will fill a ballot in (having received the appropriate political advice, no doubt), the party operative will come around and collect them. There are further provisions for consolidated, centralized polling stations.
This will make it even easier to cheat, as local knowledge will be lost, it will be more impersonal in general and it's likely that, on balance, elderly voters will use the mail more, which they will now be legally entitled to do. Another one of those temporary, 'pandemic' measures that will turn into a permanent feature. And as, on average, elderly voters tend to lean Republican, the less that turn up in person, the better. It's far more difficult to cheat if the citizen votes in person, because they retain more control of the process.
HR1 would weaponize the southern border crisis. Open the border, welcome illegals with open arms, dump them in swing states, pass HR1 which removes all election safeguards, register them to vote the moment they contact a government agency, allow for ballot harvesting and reap the rewards. If, theoretically, both parties should be able to gain from this blatant attempt to game the system, in practice it will only be the Democrats who benefit. They are the ones who advocate for these policies and laws, not the Republicans, and they are clearly more motivated to win at all costs.
The Supreme Court already has data showing that around 24 million voter registrations are significantly flawed. Coincidentally, this figure is almost identical to the number of illegal aliens estimated to be currently residing in the US. If another 2 million cross the border this year and are resettled in the swing states, if HR1 is then enacted, the game would be up. The last election, corrupt though it was, was only decided by around 80,000 votes. Two million extra ought to be enough.(1)
As previously mentioned, the logistical difficulties of using the Motor Voter law on a massive scale may be prohibitive, but automatically registering illegals as soon as they apply for benefits represents an opportunity for a much better percentage gain. For this plan to come to fruition, HR1 must be passed and soon. And for that to happen Machiavellian tactics are required. Even then, it should still come up short. There are two paths:
a) The Bill makes it out of committee and goes to a vote in the Senate. It musters the 60 votes required and is passed. It needs 60 votes, rather than a simple majority, as it is legislation and therefore requires a super majority.
b) The Democrats eliminate the filibuster and pass the bill on a simple majority.
The Democrats will never get 60 votes. This would require 10 Republicans to cross the floor and commit political hari kari. And, at the present time, the Left doesn’t even have the 50 votes required for Option B to be viable, because one of their own is saying that he won't vote for it. Neither will he vote to abolish the filibuster, which would need to come first. If he changes his mind on both positions, then it could happen. If a rogue Republican votes with the opposition, then it could happen. Alternatively, Joe Manchin (the Democrat senator in question) could be primaried by Progressives and replaced by a Leftist.
(The filibuster is a procedure which prevents a vote coming to the floor. If it were to be abolished, which it could be by a simple majority vote, the road would be open to passing legislation 51-50, the Vice President casting the vote that breaks the tie.)
West Virginian Democrats are, in fact, planning to take the primary route and replace him as the candidate, but the seat doesn't come up for re-election until 2024 and, even then, it's more likely to go Republican than Progressive; as things stand. It has the feel of a precarious situation, though. Potentially only one vote away from one party rule, in perpetuity. And one party rule always results in totalitarianism.
HR1 isn't the only voting rights act before the Senate, though.
John Lewis Voting Rights Act (HR4)
This is the more likely threat, as it isn't attracting the same level of opprobrium as HR1. It offers weak Republicans a compromise, if they are concerned about being accused of 'blocking voting rights.' However, HR4 is just another attempt by the federal government to take over the state election apparatus, in direct contravention of the Constitution and it would explicitly prevent states from strengthening election law.
It would also give federal bureaucrats the right to veto any state election law that they didn't like, under the guise of preventing 'voter suppression' by way of discrimination. And, once again, it seeks to take power away from elected officials and put it in the hands of the unelected. At present, any election law that is believed to be unconstitutional can be challenged in the courts, all the way up to the Supreme Court. This law would, instead, enable lawyers at the Civil Rights Division – the experts – to review state law; it would be one more erosion of democratic accountability.
The chances of this act proceeding are also slim; while it is quite likely that a republican renegade or two may vote with the Democrats, ten traitors is very unlikely. This would leave the administration short of the 60 votes required and we would be back to square one with the potential filibuster vote.
This is Plan A. Pass a law that enables legal cheating on an monumental scale, to add to the epic cheating taking place already. The Democrats have no shame so, if they could get the votes in Congress, it is entirely possible that they would ignore the criticism, ignore the Constitution, get Big Media to run cover for them and ram through an obviously corrupt mid-term election without so much as a blush. The alternatives seem scanty. But there is one.
Plan B: Invoke martial law
There must be a backup plan, given the unlikelihood of legislation passing in time to have an impact in 2022. Remember, these are not the type of people who plan on losing, who have any desire to miss the opportunity to bring forward the Promised Land while the stars are aligned. Their agenda would be buried for years, longer than it might otherwise have been because they have committed fully to the totalitarian process this time and enough of us have seen its face to make sure that we never see it again. That being the case, postponing the election is the only other alternative and the only way to do that is by invoking martial law.
It won't be enough to lock-down and blame the pandemic. They've already done that and, according to their narrative, it was a resounding success, with more votes 'cast' than ever before, so it will be difficult to backtrack on that position now. Whilst a lock-down will enhance their ability to cheat by upping the ratio of mail-in votes compared to in-person voting, they may well calculate that they still won't have enough legitimate votes. A number of states have already passed laws strengthening election integrity (since 2020) and the scrutiny will be intense this time.
According to the Supreme Court, there are two legal theories as to how martial law may be declared The first holds that there is no precedent in common law and that it has to arise out of necessity and then be arbitrated by the courts, if challenged. This is known as the law of paramount necessity. The other theory is that martial law can be constitutionally established by the supreme political authority (the President), but only in times of war; allegedly.
A 'war against the virus' does not qualify. It has to be an actual war against another nation. Ordinarily, at this stage it would be apposite to delve into the intricacies as to whether the Constitution allowed martial law even if a war was distant from home shores. It hasn't been invoked since World War II; in time of war, anyway. I believe any such investigation would be a waste of valuable time, as this administration has no respect for the Constitution or the law. How can it if HR1 has passed the House? It wants to do what it wants to do and that's all she wrote. The finer points of the law are, therefore, irrelevant.
In any event, it's clear that both interpretations are vulnerable to manipulation by bad actors, especially so as, of the nine times a state has declared martial law since 1945, five of them were in order to fight the federal government in its drive to ban segregation. This doesn't inspire confidence in the sanctity of the legal definition; no war was ongoing at any point, so the interpretation of paramount necessity is clearly malleable and subjective.
It doesn't seem as though a minor war would be enough and I can't see how a 'war on the virus' would survive the obsession with optics; it wouldn't look right, provided they were still bothered by what things looked like. But we have come a long way very quickly. Language has been continually manipulated, misrepresented and reframed. Who knows where we will be by Christmas? Once again, the only thing that matters to the Democrats is that they win. That's it. And they are quite capable of defining a necessity in ways that do not meet the meaning if it allows them to get what they want.
Martial law would involve the suspension of all existing laws, as well as civil authority and the usual administration of justice. There is not a need for a formal proclamation – the President and state governors have the power. It might not even have to be a nationwide invocation. If a few states did it, would it not mean that any election that was allowed to proceed in the other states would be necessarily unrepresentative of the whole? Could an argument be made to postpone the election? It's not as if Democrat governors need much encouragement to overstep their powers; it's been a constant refrain for the past eighteen months.
Conclusion
Neither plan is going to be easy to implement, although that judgement is being made with eyes attuned to 2021. It's also possible that martial law might follow a contested election. Democrats would have the means in their own hands. Ironically, the more egregiously they cheated, the more likely it would draw a reaction. They've laid the groundwork, as well. All the talk of right wing extremists and domestic terrorism has a purpose beyond simply trashing the opposition in order to distract from their own excesses.
And what would happen if they put the word out to their shock troops in BLM and Antifa and we endured another summer of riots, a la 2020, but with the Democrats in the White House this time? Plan B takes the ballot box out of the equation. It's easier and less effort. Curfews? Martial law? It doesn't seem like the remote possibility that it should be.
It feels like we're moving quickly. It doesn't feel like normal service will be resumed; it doesn't feel like a temporary aberration. We already know the lengths they will go to in order to win. And now that they gained power, by fair means or foul, they're going to surrender it at the ballot box and dissipate all the momentum they gained? Trust in the same process for which they have so much contempt? It doesn't seem even slightly likely.
And remember, they don't care about the Constitution. HR1 is unconstitutional, the moratorium on evictions was unconstitutional. They even admitted that, but they did it anyway and the law was an ass for about a month. Federal mandates are also unconstitutional. They don't care. So there is little point in saying that they can't (or won't) institute martial law because the Constitution forbids it. To the Democrats, that is not a limiting factor.
Lock-downs were martial law 'lite'. There were no troops enforcing it because, at the time there wasn't the will to oppose the measures. Nobody wanted to expend political capital in that way, in advocating a loosening of measures, because it would leave them vulnerable to being lambasted for 'costing lives'. That mindset no longer holds sway in a sizeable minority of the population. Lock-downs this winter will be resisted. People don't have the same faith in the narrative and more are waking up to the realization that government heavy-handedness is tyrannical, not forcibly benevolent.
Lock-downs served four purposes in 2020. They kept people out of the polling booths, thus facilitating voter fraud. They trashed President Trump's economy. They led directly to a vast transfer of wealth from the middle and working class to the elites. And they softened up the population, made people fearful and compliant, dependent on the federal government and its handouts.
Obviously, a rinse and repeat is appealing to the regime. That's part of the technique. Put the squeeze on, ease off a bit (but not enough to return to normal), squeeze again and so forth. And the money transfers come in handy. There will have to be more lock-downs in 2022, even if the habit of voting from home has become sufficiently embedded and the fraud mechanism remains viable. They'll do it because they can. And if there's going to be a lock-down next year, there'll have to be one this year as well. It'll look odd otherwise and some momentum will be lost. It's about inducing compliance, inculcating new habits, new normals.
They can buy themselves a little time by removing Biden, but only if they don't replace him with Harris. Using him as the figurehead is a master-stroke. What better way to establish plausible deniability than to use someone who is clearly cognitively impaired as the head man. In addition, he's infinitely malleable, he's in a hurry because he's old, he's probably easier to control than Hillary and he can be discarded as soon as his usefulness wears out. Inevitably, the voters will pause and see what comes next, but the effect on their plummeting population with be more of a semi colon than an arresting full stop. It's not just Biden that’s the problem; it's the political agenda.
The Democrats will pursue Plan A for as long as it is feasible. There is a time limit and HR1 or HR4 would need to be passed by Christmas, in all probability. There is redistricting to be done, as well. If it looks like they won't be able to ram one of those bills through, there is a faint possibility that they will content themselves with passing giant spending bills on a majority vote, via budget resolution and attempt the impossible by cheating even more than last time, but whilst under the microscope this time.
I don't think it likely but, if they chose this route, it would be inflammatory in the extreme. It wouldn't be difficult to envisage a scenario where one or more states, or the federal government itself, invoked martial law. Another possibility, of course, is that we don't make it as far as elections before the Antifa goons run rampage and give the federal government the excuse they need. Another false flag operation could also be on the cards. Ironically, the tighter state election law is, the less ability there is to cheat, the more likely it is that Plan B will be green lit.
Or, they somehow manage to pass a voting rights bill. Because the illegal would then be legal and the steal would be in, it would probably take the powder keg longer to explode. Some rule followers on the right will be reluctant to break any law, no matter how illegitimate. But civil unrest would still come in the end and, once again, martial law could be the answer.
In the final analysis, subjugated masses ruled by an elite is what Nirvana looks like for the Left. The imposition of martial law would bring that end state nearer and quickly. Don't think it likely? Look at Australia, right now. They already have the army on the streets and helicopters in the sky. It's a possibility here and we'd be doing ourselves a favor if we acknowledged it and planned for it. If conservatives fortify themselves with the certain knowledge that 2022 will be a Republican triumph and keep their powder dry in the meantime, it could be a fatal mistake. In fact, given the Left's track record, I'm certain it would be.
Citations
Figure 1.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/
Figure 2.
https://electionfraud20.org/seth-keshel-reports/pennsylvania/