Sunday, October 27, 2024

Are Intelligence Agencies Planning to Make Voters Obsolete?


Here’s something for you to contemplate as you consider concerns about election integrity: Do the algorithms that Andrew Paquette, Ph.D., has found surreptitiously embedded in current state board of election voter rolls suggest intelligence agents have decided to bypass voters to vote election simulations?

As documented on GodsFiveStones.com, Paquette has found secret algorithms in the board of election voter registration databases in New York, New Jersey, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Hawaii, and Texas, with ongoing examinations underway in Arizona and Georgia.

The algorithms appear designed to hide critical voter attribute information, allowing the people who developed the scheme to create and hide “non-existent voters” capable of being assigned legitimate state voter IDs. Once created, the algorithms can vote certifiable mail-in ballots for enough “non-existent voters” to steal an election from an opponent who won through legitimate votes.

In his analysis of the algorithm found in the New York State Board of Election voter registration database, Paquette detailed how the algorithm could be used in a mail-in ballot scheme to steal an election.

The data uncovered by NYCA’s (New York Citizens Audit) research suggests systemic election fraud is built into New York’s electoral process. The current working hypothesis is that:

1.    False voters were introduced into the voter rolls.

2.    The algorithm covertly tagged these records for easy retrieval when needed.

3.    False registrants requested absentee ballots.

4.    Ballots and ballot envelopes were gathered at central collection points.

5.    Fraudulently generated ballots were cast in fraudulently obtained ballot envelopes.

6.    False voter records were updated to reflect false votes.

7.    After certification, false voter records were manipulated to disguise their purpose and history.

In that paper, Paquette estimated there were approximately 338,000 illegally generated registrations in the New York State Board of Election voter registration database active for the 2020 General Election.

With tens of thousands of nonexistent voter registrations thanks to the algorithm, the criminals accessing the Board of Election computers could easily ask how to structure an election. “Should our Candidate X (the algorithm-chosen winner) win by 1 percent, 3 percent, or more? Should our Candidate X lead throughout election day, surge late in the voting, or require a stoppage of vote counting to produce enough ‘non-existent voters’ to cast mail-in ballots to steal the election?”

The point is that these hidden “non-existent voters” could be activated to cast a certifiable mail-in vote as needed, provided the algorithm assigned legitimate state voter ID numbers to the “non-existent voters.”

The problem with the algorithmic mail-in ballot election fraud scheme is that if you know about the algorithm, the patterns become apparent. In mail-in ballot fraud, we see candidates who are losing the in-person vote surge at the end of the election, when the mail-in ballots are counted. For example, if a candidate through legitimate, in-person voting has a larger lead than anticipated, vote counting stops overnight, followed by a surge of newly discovered mail-in ballots that heavily vote for Candidate X.

To succeed, the scheme requires that the certification process does not involve any forensic attempt to go into the community to investigate whether the mail-in ballots cast belong to legitimate voters. The scheme also depends on lax checking of the signatures on the outside cover of mail-in ballots to ensure they are matched for accuracy with the voter’s signature placed on file at the time of registration.

How close are we to intelligence agencies deciding that with advances in AI and the statistical analytic skills of modern political science, voters are obsolete? This is not a far-fetched question.

In an exchange preserved on video from a 2017 World Economic Forum meeting, Klaus Schwab suggested that voters have become obsolete given advances in computer technology. Schwab said, “But since the next step could be to go into prescriptive mode, which means you do not even have to have elections anymore because you can already predict what, predict, and afterwards you can say, ‘Why do we need the elections?’ Because we know what the result will be. Can you imagine such a world?”

The World Economic Forum quickly attempted to control the damage, issuing a corrective statement insisting that Schwab’s comments were not “a call for action” but a hypothetical musing based on the anticipated predictive capabilities of computer technology in the future.

The academic modeling of presidential elections has advanced to the point where a group of scientists in Peru and Brazil have developed a predictive mathematical model that utilizes machine learning (ML) and an Artificial Neural Network (ANN) to predict presidential election results (PER) with 100 percent agreement with actual elections in Brazil, Uruguay, and Peru. Conceivably, a computer model could run a simulation of a presidential election that would model a victory for the preferred candidate X. But for the computer simulation to be substituted for the actual vote credibly requires that the simulation matched reasonable anticipations of voter preferences.

That conclusion that intelligence agencies are involved in placing algorithms in the state boards of election databases is supported by the complexity of the cryptographic mathematics and cipher intricacy that Dr. Paquette has demonstrated to be characteristic of the voter registration databases that he has discovered. Developing and placing the algorithms into the computer systems of the state boards of elections would require either confederate actors within the state board elections or a covert intelligence operation to penetrate the various state boards.

However, stealing elections to be credible also involves successfully implementing a psychological operation involving control over mainstream media narratives. For example, consider that Joe Biden, after a disastrous debate with Donald Trump, demonstrated diminished mental functioning that disqualified him from being a credible contender. Vice President Kamala Harris was a more credible challenger, provided intelligence agencies could get the mainstream media to report questionable “surveys” that showed her challenging President Trump neck-to-neck despite her history of unpopularity and failure to advance in previous presidential attempts.

That Schwab was engaged in paving the way for a planned elite dystopian future is a reasonable conclusion given the arguments Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò advanced in an essay entitled “The Technocratic Dystopia: Are novels of Huxley and Orwell an unheeded warning or an example of predictive programming?”* Archbishop Viganò explained: “What Brave New World and 1984 describe corresponds to the same processes of predictive programming that we find in numerous movies having as their theme pandemics, dictatorial regimes after climate crises, and plots by pharmaceutical companies, high finance, and secret societies—that is, to the use of the fictional literary genre as a tool for mass mental processing in order to make the population more willing to accept planned future events.”

Archbishop Viganò defined predictive programming, i.e., the use of a hypothetical comment “as a tool for mass mental programming in order to make the population more willing to accept future planned events.” If the algorithms Paquette has discovered are the handiwork of U.S. intelligence agencies, the New World Order to make voters obsolete has already begun.



My Prediction: Trump Will Win The Election And, Maybe, The Popular Vote


My prediction is that Donald Trump will win the election on November 5. I think he may actually win the popular vote as well. I’m referring to the actual votes of actual Americans, not the manipulated votes produced by computer tampering, illegals, and mail-in fraud.

That doesn’t mean that on the morning of the 6th, we’ll have a conclusive answer as to who the next president will be. No, sadly, given the Democrat propensity to cheat and the Swamp’s desire to defeat Trump, we’re likely looking at an adjudication clusterfark that could take weeks or even months.

So, despite polls currently telling us that the race is close or basically tied (currently, the NYT has Harris up by one while 538 gives Trump a 53% chance of victory), why do I believe Trump is going to clean the floor with Harris when it comes to real, actual votes? A plethora of reasons.

Yard signs. This is the most ambiguous measure, but it’s the one that resonates most viscerally because it reflects enthusiasm. I just spent three weeks in New York on business. I landed at JFK, drove 400 miles to Buffalo, and a week later drove back.

Over that entire trip, I didn’t see any random Harris signs on barns or sides of buildings, nor did I see flags seemingly bigger than the houses they were flying in front of, all things I saw for Trump. The ratio of Trump to Harris signs throughout was probably at least 10 to 1. And this is New York!

However, I did encounter three towns where Harris signs dominated: East Aurora and Williamsville near Buffalo and Hastings on Hudson, just north of New York City. All three are quaint, bucolic towns with coffee bars, art galleries, and lots of college-educated liberals. At the end of the day, in a hardcore blue state like New York, where Harris is projected to win by double digits, the dearth of enthusiastic support suggests that her support is tepid and the margin of victory may not be what’s predicted.

Right track, wrong track. Forty years ago, Ronald Reagan looked into the camera at the last debate with Jimmy Carter and asked, “Are you better off than you were four years ago? Is it easier for you to go and buy things in the store than it was four years ago?” Today, almost every single American understands that the answer to that question in 2024 is a resounding “No,” and regardless of what they think about Trump, they know that it was Biden, Harris, and the Democrats who created this disaster.

Two weeks out from the election, fully two-thirds of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track. People know they’re paying more for gasoline, housing, food, insurance, and practically everything else in the economy. In whatever way each of those two-thirds of Americans might define that wrong track, those are real, tangible pain points of daily life, and most citizens recognize Democrats as the source.

Americans, including some Democrats, are not crazy, and when given a choice between more of the same—or worse—when things are going badly, will choose to make a change towards a better direction—or at least the promise of one. In our basically two-party system, that means that they will turn towards Trump and the GOP.

Facetime: Not the iPhone kind of facetime, but the time candidate’s faces are showing up on various media. Trump, of course, is all over the media, from his Pennsylvania rallies to his interviews to, most recently, his McDonalds campaign stop/fry-shift/photo op.

Harris, not so much, and when she is on, even when sitting for outlets that support her, like CBS, the story ends up being a controversy about her answers rather than the typical hagiography. At the same time that Trump was generating enormous amounts of engaging press coverage serving fries out of a McDonald’s drive-through window and posing for selfies, Harris was making news for taking only pre-approved questions and telling Christians they were at the wrong rally.

Personal connection: When Trump talks, he talks a lot. Harris, not so much.

According to the New York Times, at three rallies, Trump averaged 98 minutes of speaking, while Harris averaged a mere 24 minutes. And while Trump talks about pretty much anything and everything, Harris seems to have a very limited catalog of ideas upon which to draw. Indeed, the GOP made a full four-minute video of her repeating, “Unburdened by what has been.”

Americans see that Donald Trump is a guy you could have a beer with, talk at length to, and feel like you would walk away having made a friend or at least met someone who understands your problems. Kamala Harris, on the other hand, is a mannequin or a robot that’s been programmed with minimal RAM. If you ask, “What’s up?” rather than “How are you doing today?” the system will overload, and smoke will start coming out of her ears. She’s not funny, smart, or insightful and has no convictions beyond basic communism. Most Americans see that.

Betting: Polls are notorious for being more propaganda than reflections of reality. That’s because they’re run by elite organizations with biases seeking to bolster support for one candidate or another.

Betting markets (aka prediction markets), on the other hand, represent anything but that. As of this writing, the leading platform, Polymarket, sees a 64% chance Trump wins vs Harris’s 36% chance. The over $2 billion that this international crypto market has bet on the American presidential election is largely made up of small bets, not elites seeking to influence the outcome. The proof of the market’s potential as a prediction tool can be seen in the fact that the Wall Street Journal ran a piece seeking to delegitimize it.

Quality of life: Vermont is America’s socialist Nirvana. Today, however, the state capital, Burlington, has become a dystopian nightmare.

By day, the city is the quintessential small New England town. At night, however, it transforms into a scene from The Walking Dead with drug addicts, homeless, and violent criminals taking over.

And it’s not just Burlington. It’s also New York, San Francisco, Seattle, and, of course Denver, where violent Venezuelan gangs have taken over whole apartment complexes while extorting and terrorizing residents and owners. From schools that don’t educate to influxes of illegals to increasing crime, leftists across the country are coming face to face with the reality of the failure of Democrat policies. While all complain, some are objective enough to understand the source and vote accordingly.

All of this to say that, while most blacks, gays, Jews, crazy cat ladies, and antidepressant-addled college-educated white women and their beta male boyfriends or husbands will vote for Harris without ever considering or even knowing her policies, a certain percentage of them will be making decisions based on the reality of life that’s staring them in the face. Those people will be voting for Trump.

Together with the rabid MAGA following Trump has inspired, he should win the actual vote handily. But as we all know, Stalin’s aphorism applies: “Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything.”



Rally coverage, And we Know, and more- Oct 27

 




Now We’ll Never Know Who The Washington Post Supports


Panties were added across the nation’s capital, as employees at the Washington Post learned Friday that their paper would not officially endorse Democrat Kamala Harris. I phrase it that way because you’d have to be drunk and dead not to know who the Post supports; there was less of a chance of columnist Jennifer Rubin winning a trivia contest against an aborted zygote than there was of Donald Trump getting a remotely honest story in the pages of DC’s favorite bird cage liner. But the left made it seem as though the idea of where the paper’s loyalty lies will be a mystery for the ages, with future historians left only to speculate wildly.

These people at the Post truly are horrible. What a spoiled group of pampered crybabies. 

They should be thanking God they have jobs, as untalented as they are. Amazon founder Jeff Bezos bought the rag for his pocket change - $250 million. Being owned by one of the three wealthiest people on the planet – where he falls on that list depends on how his stocks did that day – has its advantages. For example, you don’t really have to worry if your paycheck will clear. 

Also, the idea of accountability gets a little perverted. 

According to the Associated Press, the Post lost $77 million last year. I don’t even know how that’s possible, but it was nothing for the paper. Democracy may die in darkness, but a money-losing business can live forever off Daddy Primebucks’ stock portfolio. 

The paper has done nothing but lose money under Bezos, but he’s got the money to lose, right? But the funny thing about the rich is many of them are some of the tightest-fisted people I’ve ever met. Some are generous, don’t get me wrong, but while many of them cut checks the size of city budgets to charities, they will calculate 15 percent down to the penny for lunch.

I don’t know where Bezos falls, but I also don’t blame him for not enjoying losing money simply because people running his paper realize he’s got more. You don’t get wildly successful by being reckless with assets. 

The brain trust running the Post has increased its web traffic from 101 million per month to 50 million. I’m not sure I could have done that without trying, and even then, I doubt I could’ve failed that hard. Whatever they’re paid, it’s too much.

The reporters and editors aren’t any better. They produce garbage no one wants to read and very little related to anything that constitutes “news.” The opinion pages aren’t much better. They are the Bob’s Country Bunker of media. There, they have “both kinds” of thought, left-wing and ultra-left-wing (with a dash of holier-than-thou anti-Trumpism tossed in for good measure). 

Ultimately, they’re all guilty of being uninteresting and predictable, the only yardstick they should be measured. No one wants to read lightly edited Democratic Party press releases or warmed-over “hot takes” that constitute struggling with a thesaurus to find new, only semi-plagiarized ways of calling Trump “Hitler.” 

Jeff Bezos proves all the money in the world can’t buy relevance. 

The editors are responsible for the Post’s demise; it is their job to prevent the idiots who work for them from being discovered as idiots.

This brings us to the real reason journalism is dead: Watergate. It was not the story of Watergate, which was a legitimate news story, but Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. They became rich and famous from that story and even made a movie about them. While Robert Redford as Woodward might not have been a stretch, anyone but a bridge troll as Bernstein was a generous wet kiss. 

They became heroes to aspiring journalists, but worse, they became models. Ben Bradlee kept them in check, not letting them run a story unless they met certain standards. He’s gone, and the people who wanted to be Woodward and Bernstein are not the gatekeepers, the ones supposed to uphold standards, and they are not. They fear their subordinates being triggered by something they don’t like or understand being covered in the paper. Management has fired editors for upsetting protected class and special designation reporters, even when the only people expressing the upset were Karens. 

No ship will sail well when the captain lives in fear of the purser. 

Bezos can afford to piss them all off because Bezos can afford anything. If the Washington Post had a mass exodus over this (a few people have resigned, like someone with the title “editor-at-large,” which is a made-up title with little to no responsibilities), he could hire more, fill the paper with wire copy, or just laugh about losing something likely only worth $100 million today. He can then roll over on his $500 million super yacht, light a cigar with a $100 bill, and take comfort in the fact that he likely recouped that much in his net worth in the time it took to do it.

Bezos doesn’t need the Post, but the Post needs someone like Bezos. Only the super-rich have the money to throw away on a vanity project, and that’s what the paper has become; that’s what most of the media has become. To hell with them.

It’s no mystery who the Washington Post editorial board supports this election; it’s the Democrats. Right now, that person is Kamala Harris, but it doesn’t matter who that person is – the Post is an appendage of that party. I’ll leave you to decide which appendage to use. And if you can’t choose without being told what to think by a group of leftist editors in fear for the jobs, do the world a favor and don’t vote. 



🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 


Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 
man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 


New Bombshell Report Reveals Biden/Harris Granted Amnesty to Millions of Illegal Aliens

Sarah Arnold reporting for Townhall 

A new report from the House Judiciary Committee found that the Biden-Harris Administration granted “quiet amnesty” to millions of illegal immigrants whose immigration court cases have been closed. 

Throughout three and a half years, President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris have opened the floodgates of hell and allowed nearly eight million illegal aliens to enter the U.S.— and that number doesn’t include the ones who crossed the border undetected. The report noted that since Biden and Harris took office, the immigration court date backlog has increased, with nearly four million new cases since Fiscal Year 2021. Of the cases settled in FY 2023, just 14 percent of illegal immigrants were granted amnesty, leaving the remaining cases abandoned. 

The report accuses the Biden-Harris Administration of using the court date backlog to let an unprecedented number of illegal aliens into the country. It states that immigration judges have been ordered to “rubber stamp” case dismissals and case closures that result in unlawful immigrants remaining in the U.S. without prosecution or deportation. 

This sort of quiet amnesty has become a staple of the Biden-Harris administration’s immigration courts,” the report stated. 

Between FY 2017 and FY 2020, less than 13,000 asylum cases were documented as “not adjudicated,” which means those cases were completed but also were terminated. However, by FY 2024, under Biden and Harris, over 109,500 cases were reported as not completed. 

The Biden-Harris Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has “failed to prosecute at least 200,000 cases and only eventually issued a Notice to Appear, the charging document that begins an alien’s removal proceedings when filed with an immigration court, in a fraction of those cases.”

These numbers will only get worse under a Harris presidency. She has refused to take charge of the southern border and ridiculed anyone who questions her job handling it. Instead of campaigning at the border, one of the top issues voters are concerned with is Harris attending fancy fundraising dinners with elite Hollywood celebrities. The so-called “border czar” washed her hands off the southern border the first day Biden put it in her hands. 

In addition to the millions of “quiet amnesty” cases, Harris has let in at least 1.7 million potential national security threats since the beginning of 2021. 

The House Judiciary released a report stating that among unvetted illegal immigrants in the U.S., there are at least 382 illegal aliens on the U.S. government’s terrorist watchlist who Border Patrol agents have encountered since January 2021. So far, at least 100 are on the watchlist for alien encounters in fiscal year 2024. 



Here's When We'll Likely Know the Election Results From These Key Swing States


While it will "absolutely not" take a week to tabulate the results, Raffensperger assured Brennan, overseas ballots could still take time. "What we will be waiting for is the overseas ballots that come in no later than Friday. And so those will then be the final numbers. And we'll just see if that makes a difference in the total vote totals," he explained.

Raffensperger spoke later in the week with Fox News' Bret Baier and mentioned that 70 percent. He did also tell Baier that "we'll have the results for what happens on Election Day, it'll be done by that night."
A piece from NewsNation referenced Drew McCoy, the president of Decision Desk HQ, regarding when results could be counted. "By McCoy’s estimation, Georgia and North Carolina could be called sometime between 10 p.m. and midnight on election night, which could set the stage for what happens in the rest of the country," the piece noted. 

Arizona

This is another one of Trump's top states, where he leads by +1.5. It also looks to be the one with potentially the most consternation. 
As Sarah covered earlier this week, Maricopa County officials are asking for "patience" while the notoriously election scandal-prone county potentially takes days or even weeks to count the results. 
This month, 91.5 KJZZ put out an article on how "It could take 2 weeks to know election results in Arizona. Officials say that's normal," which really tried to downplay concerns:

It could take around two weeks to learn the results of some races in Arizona’s upcoming November elections, something election officials from around the state say is completely normal.

Maricopa County Supervisor Bill Gates said Arizona’s status as a swing state brings extra focus on how long it takes to count votes, even though many states take weeks to finalize election results.

Gates said he expects 95% of ballots in his county to be tabulated by the end of the week after the Nov. 5 election but said it takes an average of 10 to 13 days to finalize the count in Maricopa County, which became a hotbed of disproven voter fraud conspiracy theories in the wake of the 2020 election.

“It unfortunately does lead to people speculating about what might be going on,” Gates said. “But number one, I come back to this, I will 100 out of 100 times take accuracy over speed.”

Several factors can lead to those delays, including a rule in Arizona allowing voters to drop off early ballots on Election Day.

“That is a right that folks have in Arizona,” Gates said. “We anticipate anywhere from 300,000 to 500,000 of these mail in ballots will be dropped off on Election Day.”

Maybe people are "speculating" because the process is so convoluted, and when it seems most of the rest of the world can conduct elections more efficiently? Perhaps that "extra focus" could be the frustration from years past, especially if issues from 2022 aren't fixed?
Reuters and NewsNation referenced Arizona in their coverage on when we might know the results of the election, particularly when it comes to the state's use of mail-in ballots.
In 2022, the governor's race and Senate race took days to call, with the Democrats in both races — Katie Hobbs and Mark Kelly, respectively — emerging victorious. 

North Carolina

The next best performing state for Trump is North Carolina, where he's up by +0.8. Trump won the Tar Heel State in 2016 and 2020 and looks to be on track to win again in 2024. 

That NewsNation piece referenced McCoy's sentiment that North Carolina could be called between 10 pm on election night and midnight. 

Reuters mentioned the midnight timeline, but warned it could still take days. "If the election is as close as polls suggest, the outcome in North Carolina may remain unclear for a week or more. Absentee ballots that arrive on Nov. 5, as well as ballots from overseas and military voters, are tallied during the 10-day canvass period that follows Election Day," the piece mentioned. 

North Carolina, the home state of RNC Chairman Michael Whatley, has also been in the news for election integrity victories that the RNC has had over absentee ballots. 

Nevada

Then there's Nevada, where Trump leads Harris by +0.7. Just like Arizona, mail-in ballots could again be the culprit for slow returns. Even Reuters referenced "slow vote counting in 2020." 

Even more infuriating? The state accepts late-arriving mail ballots within four days, as Reuters mentioned. 

In hopeful news, when it comes to a signal for other states to follow, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Friday regarding a Mississippi law that federal law mandates ballots be received by Election Day to count. 

Pennsylvania

Speaking of Pennsylvania, the Keystone State is Trump's next best state, where he's up by +0.6 against Harris. If Harris had picked Gov. Josh Shapiro, the commonwealth's popular and moderate enough governor as her running mate, it likely wouldn't be as close.
But, with Shapiro not on the ticket, Pennsylvania is close. Not helping the anticipation is that in August, as Matt covered, the PA Department of State put out a post warning that the results might not be known that night due to mail-in ballots, and then added a lecturing tone to remind people it's not "'rigged.'"

As Matt pointed out about the thread above, it's "how conspiracy theories and questions about the election results begin[.]"

Michigan

This is a battleground state that could be one of the more challenging ones for Trump, though he still has an edge over Harris, by +0.2
Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, as Leah covered earlier this week, got into it on X with Elon Musk about ineligible voters being removed from the rolls in time. 

While on "Face the Nation," Benson shared how the race for her state had been called on the Wednesday after the election at 8:00 pm in 2020, and they're "tracking that again this year," though she's "optimistic" they may find out even earlier this year.

"I would estimate, end of the day on Wednesday, as the best guess on how we'll perform. But that said, we will always prioritize accuracy and security over efficiency," Benson shared. 

Brennan also brought up Musk, feeling the need to mention politics by reminding that Musk "is a big supporter of Donald Trump." She then opened the door for Benson to rant about threats to democracy, asking, "What do you believe his intention is here? And how concerned are you that he's misleading voters?"

"One, we know adversaries to democracy right now are trying to create chaos and confusion and sow seeds of distrust around our very clear and legitimate and accurate and secure processes of running elections, not just in Michigan but around the country," Benson said. "So it's incumbent upon all of us to look to trusted sources of information like your local election official and use data to evaluate questions, as opposed to people who are running social media companies with particular agendas and who have a history in amplifying conspiracy theories and false information," she continued.

Wisconsin

This is another potentially tricky but winnable state for Trump, where he also leads by +0.2 over Harris.

Reuters made note of delays with mail-in ballots, as is the case with Pennsylvania:

Like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin is among the few states that do not allow election officials to process or count mail ballots until the morning of the election, which means there can be a delay in reporting the results of those early votes.

In addition, many of the state's largest cities transport mail ballots to a centralized location for processing and tabulating. That can lead to significant batches of votes getting reported all at once in the early morning after polls close.

Not only is Trump up in the battleground states, but Harris' national lead is pretty much gone. It was +0.2 on Thursday after a poll from The Wall Street Journal came in. Then, she and Trump were tied on Friday thanks to the poll from The New York Times/Siena College, and now she's back with an edge of +0.1.

The Daily Signal's Tony Kinnett has been predicting that we may find out the results not so long after Election Day. After mentioning it on "The Tony Kinnett Cast" this week, he posted his theory of Wednesday at 1 pm, which also shows Trump winning 312 electoral votes to Harris' 226 votes. 



People Are Avoiding Travel During Election Week Out of Fears Over Violence, Unrest


Jeff Charles reporting for RedState 

Fears of election-related unrest are prompting many Americans to reconsider their travel plans in November. This development comes amid polling showing that most Americans believe there will be violence after the election.

Travelers like Emily Reeve and her husband, of Portland, Oregon, usually travel for Thanksgiving. But this year, they are staying home. “I’m worried about being in a potentially volatile situation,” Reeve told NBC News. Leaders in the airline industry have chimed in on the matter, affirming that many people are concerned about the possibility of unrest:

Anxiety around the 2024 vote is causing some consumers to rethink where, when and with whom to travel, industry experts and travel agents say. Federal authorities, meanwhile, say their security procedures are sound heading into Election Day, Nov. 5.

Delta Air Lines CEO Ed Bastian recently told CNBC he expected consumers to take “a little bit of a pause” in the weeks around the election, as the carrier has seen in the past. “People like to be home during the election period. They don’t want to be out traveling,” he said. “I don’t think they want to be spending money until they understand what’s going to happen.”

While the pandemic upended travel during the 2020 vote, Delta also saw demand flag in the run-up to the 2016 ballot before bookings rebounded in subsequent weeks. United Airlines executives said this month that they expect a similar pattern and “don’t think there’s anything to be surprised by.”

Still, 64% of U.S. adults said they would avoid traveling in the U.S. out of concerns about unrest, depending on who wins, according to a recent poll by the travel site the Vacationer. About a quarter said they’d stay home only if Vice President Kamala Harris is elected, while just 16% said they’d hold off only if former President Donald Trump wins; 24% said they’re staying put no matter the outcome, and nearly 36% said the outcome wouldn’t affect their plans.

Businesses are also on alert, said Kelly Soderlund, a spokesperson for the online business travel management company Navan. Its domestic flight bookings are down 19% for the week of the election compared with the same week last year. Bookings for the following week, though, are 42% higher than the preceding seven days and 82% higher than the equivalent week a year ago.

Heightened security at airports and polling places seems to confirm people’s fears about election-related violence. Jeffrey Price, an aviation security consultant, told NBC News that there would probably be increased airport security measures, with both uniformed and plainclothes officers being present to act if necessary.

A recent Scripps/Ipsos poll showed that Americans of all political stripes are worried about post-election unrest. About 62 percent of respondents said they believe violence is “somewhat” or “very likely” – especially among battleground state residents.

While most expect some form of violence after the election, respondents still indicated confidence that their votes will be counted accurately.

Economic uncertainty also adds another dimension to worries about violence. “The driving factor is the uncertainty around what the economy may be like after the election,” travel agent Sonia Bhagwan told NBC News.

These worries have translated into decreased bookings for flights. Domestic flight bookings for the week of the election have dropped by a whopping 19 percent compared to the same period last year. Bookings for the following week showed a strong rebound, however.

Further compounding fears about election-related violence is the likelihood that it will be a close race. The current Real Clear Polling average shows former President Donald Trump leading Vice President Kamala Harris by 0.1 percent.

If these numbers hold, it is likely that, regardless of who wins, the results will be contested in some fashion. This could further indicate the possibility of violence after the election’s outcome is determined. No matter who wins, there will be a sizeable chunk of the population that is dissatisfied with the results – which could inspire some to take violent action.



The Cultists Are Losing It. Prepare for the Tidal Wave of Hard and Soft Sell Nonsense Narratives to Stay.


Jim Thompson reporting for RedState 

With the election nine days away and October surprises (so far) surprising no one, media will continue a drumbeat of soft-sell and hard-self efforts to affect the election. Social media morons will have their conniptions. And, the Harris campaign will invent more ways to call Trump "Caligula."

A long-anticipated descent into “He’s a Fascist” rhetoric has moved front and center. Now that the joy is gone, Harris' campaign has pulled out the "Nazi" card. Trump is a FASCIST!! 

Teri Christoph discussed the reaction of voters to this nonsense. It didn't work. Voters are repulsed by the evidence-free claim. Harris' campaign is touting retired generals who have denounced Trump as a... "FASCIST!" General Eyebags, aka General Milley, claimed in a book that Trump is a... FASCIST! 

There will be more.  

 Kamala’s media leg-humpers and celebrity wailers will croak out warnings of a democracy in collapse. The apocalypse cometh. Trump they say, is a master manipulator, a genius evildoer who plans to take over the country; and at the same time, Trump is as dumb as a bag of rocks. 

Make it make sense. I can’t.   

I am honestly amazed at how shrill it has become. I take that back. I’m not amazed. They are apoplectic because Trump is, for the first time, leading in the polls. He’s now leading in most, if not all, swing states, and the theoretical has become the likely. Cultists are freaking out.    

A woman wore a “MAGA” hat at Game 1 of the World Series, and leftists watching the game on their TVs were pulling hamstrings in disgust. Some likely threw shoes at their screens.

Warning: coarse language.

You ok, bro? Nah, he's not. On Saturday, he's likely putting more pins into his Trump voodoo doll.    

How dare a Trump plant wear that racist hat! They ignored the blatantly false claims made in multiple Harris ads – ads that have been forced on the viewing public. I don’t know how many of those ads started with “Trump’s Project 2025.” Sure, it was irritating. But I didn’t throw a shoe at my TV, nor did I rush to “X” to go "WWWHhaaa!" like a 3-year-old. 

Here's a pro tip to the cultists:  You didn’t have to look at the MAGA hat lady. But they did. Incessantly. Apparently, they couldn’t take their eyes off the MAGA hat. My wife informed me of the MAGA hat lady. In the second inning, she had to point to her. I hadn’t noticed because I was watching ... a baseball game.    

Those people reminded me of petulant children. 

“MOM! Donny’s bothering me!!”   

“MOM! Donny’s staring at me!!”  

With a few days before the election, compliant media, like a used car salesman dropping hints, will be ramping up their soft sell pitches. This morning I saw a CNN video titled: "Kamala Harris, Her Life and Career Before She Was VP." Because I write for RedState, I had to watch it. You don’t. It was nothing more than a four-minute, “Harris for President” ad. It ended with Harris claiming that her favorite part of trial work was standing up and saying, 

“Your honor, Kamala Harris, for the people.”

Yeah, sure, Kams. As discussed previously by a retired trial attorney on staff here, I call "BS" on her claims of being "Johnny Cochran." 

And, this morning, I read a Reuters article titled:   

Sixty years after the unwinding of Jim Crow, a historic US election  

If it had been published after the election or a few months before, it would be interesting - but the timing is less than a coincidence.  

It begins with useless filler – obvious pablum to tie in the content to the two candidates, and their tenuous connection to Jim Crow and The Voting Rights Act of 1964:   

Both candidates have been touched by the legislation in their earlier lives.    

Democratic candidate Kamala Harris was bused to school as a young girl in California, as part of efforts across the country to bring children from largely Black areas to schools in largely white neighborhoods and vice versa.   

In 1973, the federal government sued Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s family-owned Trump Management Co. for discriminating against Black tenants under legislation that expanded on the original act.    

This is part of the soft sell. 

Harris is portrayed as a poor little schoolgirl. A black girl bussed to a racist, white school, or something. Trump is depicted as the evil landowner, probably wearing a white suit and straw hat. 

In the article, only one of the nine victims of racism mentioned the candidates.  

Nanella O’Neal Graham, 74, told the interviewer:   

[She] dismisses Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan as a call to go back when Black Americans were subjugated.  

“It’s not ‘make America great again.’ It’s ‘make America white again.’"  

But most of the article details how times have changed. Much like the black men interviewed in Matt Walsh’s documentary, “Am I Racist?” the author found people expressing a very different reality in 2024. It isn’t 1964:  

Paulyne Morgan White, 95, said:   

Though she uses a walker, she said she planned to vote in person, noting with a smile that because of her age she got special treatment at the polls.  

"I'm going to  vote on voting day," she said. "I like the activity. And I don't have to wait in line."  

She said voting can make a difference but the right politicians need to be elected.  

Note that Morgan is apparently treated with the deference and courtesy she deserves. It isn't 1964. 

The Reuters article ends with the story of Jonny Newson, 71. He lives in Clarksdale, Mississippi:   

A gifted tractor mechanic, Newson’s late father Charlie went into business on his own when he found out the white trainees he was instructing were earning more than he was.   

He opened Newson Auto Parts in 1971, a bail bond business in 1976, and added to his empire by buying buildings and renting space to a barbershop, a beauty parlor 

and a dry cleaners.  

Newson looked out on the block of buildings his family owns on Martin Luther King Avenue, the main street in the Black part of his Mississippi Delta town.    

“That’s my dad’s legacy,” Newson said. “And I don’t intend to let his legacy die.”    

It isn't 1964, but the timing and the lede of the article is the soft sell – the gratuitous contrast between “little, black Kamala and Trump’s family being sued 50 years ago, and the “Trump wants to take us back to Jim Crow,” is obvious nonsense. But it is prepping for more. media “soft sells,” which will be everywhere this coming week.    

The hard sells will be the Joy Reids of media screeching from the screen, warning the coming Trump presidency will be a meteor-like event striking the country and wiping out all minority life and rights, with only white people in white hoods surviving. Joe Scarborough and Keith Olbermann will blather loudly, maybe in unison, that Trump is Hitler and Harris is the French resistance.   

The hard sell pitch won’t end on Election Day. Unfortunately, it will continue. When Trump doesn’t “reign” - as Caligula or Hitler or Palpatine - expect the cult to continue with laminations and gnashing of teeth, even after Trump leaves office.