No, MAGA Is Not Falling Apart Because a Few Podcasters Did Not Get Their Way

Townhall 

Oh no, the America First/MAGA coalition is completely falling apart because – and I want to make sure I’ve got this correct – Donald Trump has systematically destroyed a bunch of Third World semi-human pagan savages who have been murdering Americans for nearly 50 years before they could top a missile with a hot rock and nuke Philadelphia. Yeah, the coalition is gravely disappointed – but not in Trump. It’s disappointed that a small component of his coalition that, for reasons that remain elusive and probably involve extreme greed, a psychotic break, gross stupidity, and/or libertarianism, which is an amalgamation of all three, has decided to adopt views that are functionally identical to those of the damn communists. This is both inevitable and unsustainable. 

Coalitions have tensions. They resolve; we’re going to be fine.

Here’s the thing. Donald Trump built a new coalition. He brought together a whole bunch of people who were united by a resistance to the gooey, nanny-state socialist woke blob that was doing the bidding of our garbage ruling class and screwing us over in the process. But the thing about a coalition is that coalitions are composed of different groups with different interests. In 2024, folks like me and most of you – straight-up patriots, largely Republican, who love America, love freedom, and hate the woke communist self-hating garbage that has infiltrated so many of our institutions – united with other factions to put Donald Trump back in office. Now, the folks like me and you, pretty much the normal conservatives, make up the vast majority of the Trump coalition. But we don’t make up a majority of the country. To win a majority, we had to unite with other folks to beat Kamala. That is, we created a coalition. But we don’t agree with those other people on everything. 

We agree with them on a lot. Some of these groups we probably agree with on 75-80 percent of the stuff, and that’s pretty good. A coalition in which you agree with people on most things is strong. But it’s those places where you differ that the cracks and the fissures develop. It’s the seams where the coalition is vulnerable to fracture. And there’s some fracturing going on now. The question is whether it will break the coalition apart.

Before we talk about where the coalition is cracking, let’s talk about what the coalition is made up of. We have the aforementioned normal Republicans. Again, these are flag, faith, and family folks who like America, and are generally not living bizarre lifestyles that involve multiple genders, animated animal costumes, or welfare fraud. It’s the majority of the Republican Party. It’s not all of the Republican Party; it’s about 80 percent+ of it, to judge from the polls of Republicans that show Trump has about 80 percent+ GOP support on Iran. The Republican Party is, itself, a coalition and is composed of several factions besides normal Republicans, like establishment shills and Never Trump traitors. The shills use the Republican Party as a vehicle for personal gain and power. They will be with us as long as it’s to their advantage. The Never Trump types are as faithful to other Republicans as their wives are to them when Pablo the Pool Boy shows up. The loud and proud Never Trumpers long ago disassociated themselves with the GOP. It’s the hidden ones who are the problem; when they finally reveal themselves and see they’ve got no future, they feel free to indulge their pro-Democrat inclinations. But enough about Thom Tillis. 

The Trump coalition is not only these normal Republicans, but it is also some folks who were previously associated with the left. Look at the MAHA Moms – vaccine skepticism and inverting the food pyramid, where about -12 on a scale of 1 to 10 in importance for regular Republicans. But it was 10 out of 10 for the MAHA Moms. Donald Trump brought Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., into the coalition and threw that part of the coalition oversight of American health. Which was fine with normal Republicans – if you’re telling us we should eat more steak, we’re all ears. And, frankly, the disgraceful behavior of Science Inc. during COVID-19 and otherwise made us quite willing to give people we might, in other contexts, have thought of as crackpots a crack at fixing our society. While SNL did a very funny take of (I know, the sun coming up in the west, right?) on The Pitt if run by RFK, Jr., the biggest and best joke they could do about the Health Secretary was that he’s like 75 years old and super muscular. We should all be so lucky.

Another significant group was the pod bro contingent. In many cases, these were associated with libertarians, so you know where this is going. But JD Vance is also somewhat associated with them, though that may change. Many of them were young men completely alienated by the Democrats’ war on, well, young men. Their avatars were guys like Joe Rogan, Tucker Carlson, and Candace Owens. They hated wokeness, but they also hated what they called "forever wars." And not without good cause. Our establishment killed and maimed countless Americans through its utterly inept foreign policies and failed execution of military projects. Trump was the first to speak out as a Republican against the Iraq War in no uncertain terms, and his opposition to that kind of foolishness was key to winning over this particular demographic.

But pod people seemed to hear what they wanted to hear from Donald Trump, not what Donald Trump was saying. Donald Trump is no pacifist. Donald Trump is a Jacksonian. Donald Trump is happy to use the United States military as a Louisville slugger to beat Third World scum who get uppity with the United States into a pulp. But he’s not willing to waste American lives where there’s no cognizable interest, nor where we’re doing uncompensated work for alleged allies who won’t pull their weight. Yes, we’re talking about you, NATO, which is right next to Ukraine, and is eager to fight Russia to the last drop of American blood.

There are other little groups, too. Some people overlap groups. But the bottom line is this: this is a coalition. These are different groups with different focuses, each expecting a slice of the pie of power. The Democrats do this, too. They’ve got their coalition – normie liberals, race communists, various flavors of perverts, as well as ethnic hustlers, criminal excusers, and welfare cheats. We’ve happily exploited the fault lines in their coalition, and now they’re exploiting the ones in ours. That’s why, suddenly, Marjorie Taylor Greene – if only this could be the last time I ever have to mention that creature, who is about 47 minutes into her 15 minutes of fame – is all over CNN. That’s why Joe Kent, who should have more common sense, is getting approving tweets from Bernie Sanders and the like. 

The podcast people have turned on Donald Trump, not because he started a war with Iran, but because he decided to finish one. It bears repeating – it is not a forever war if you win it. The real objection to those wars was losing them. And Donald Trump intends to win this one despite the full-scale fake panic of people who seem more than a little committed to America’s defeat. Why that is unclear – I’m convinced that a psychotic break explains why Tucker Carlson is sounding like a daddy-disappointing 23-year-old gender studies sophomore from Oberlin. But others just see they can carve out a tiny, but lucrative, niche by hating on the guy who made them relevant in the first place.

Now, we may lose some of the podcast people, but the idea that this is somehow because of a betrayal by Donald Trump is idiocy, if not an outright lie. Donald Trump never promised to withdraw America into some sort of shame closet of Thomas Massie- approved isolationist onanism and allow bizarre primitives to hassle the United States without fear of our righteous wrath. He promised no more endless wars pushed by our garbage elite and fought by normal Americans that resulted in tactical victories and strategic defeats. He rejected the Rules of Engagement Theory of warfare, which prioritizes upholding an arbitrary standard imposed by academics far outside the battlefield, instead of embracing the one and only metric that matters in war: victory. And Trump is keeping his promise.

But will this shatter MAGA? Well, according to at least one poll, Donald Trump has achieved a North Korean dictator-level of support of 100 percent among MAGA. It’s not at all clear why a minority portion of the coalition would expect Donald Trump to embrace their radical minority view regarding the masculinity of our foreign policy. The podcast people are basically rounding errors when it comes to numbers – they’re just very loud. We normals are a much bigger group, and we strongly support the president. Why is it a betrayal for our president to do what the vast majority of the coalition wants, instead of catering to a few bespoke ideological neophytes who just became political last week and now expect us to embrace the brand new bunch of beliefs they just adopted and now aggressively advocate with all the feverish zeal of a convert? Before last Tuesday, most of these goofs couldn’t have found Palestine on a map, even if Palestine existed on a map. They look and sound foolish, which they no doubt think is somehow the fault of the Jews.

So no, the fight over the Iran War won't destroy this coalition. The fact that Donald Trump hasn’t already done everything every subgroup of the coalition wants isn't going to destroy the coalition either. Oh, they may stay home in November. Some of them were not hyper-voters because they’ve never voted before. Either the valid argument that the Democrats are much worse will work, or it won’t. They may cut off their nose to spite their face, but you can’t make people politically mature, especially when they’re politically immature. 

But the fact is that a useful coalition partner is a coalition partner whose members understand that they can’t get everything they want all the time. A functioning coalition consists of partners who sacrifice some of their preferences to achieve other of their preferences. If your reaction to not getting everything you want all the time, right now, is to throw a temper tantrum, you’re not actually a member of the coalition anyway. You’re just a free rider. Donald Trump should save his rewards for those who do the hard work of being members of the MAGA coalition, not pay tribute to a bunch of people who will turn on him the moment he does something they dislike. That’s not being part of a coalition. That’s being a jerk.

Podcast thread for March 23

 

Hope you got hobbies to get you thru the toughest days.

AI Insiders Warn of Dangers of ‘Emergent Strategic Behavior’

 Is AI deliberately deceptive? ... That’s beside the point...

As the landscape of autonomous artificial intelligence (AI) systems evolves, there is growing concern that the technology is becoming increasingly strategic—or even deceptive—when allowed to operate without human guidance.

Recent evidence suggests that behaviors such as “alignment faking” are becoming more common as AI models are given autonomy. The term alignment faking refers to when an AI agent appears compliant with rules set by human operators but covertly pursues other objectives.

The phenomenon is an example of “emergent strategic behavior”—unpredictable and potentially harmful tactics that evolve as AI systems become bigger and more complex.

In a recent study titled “Agents of Chaos,” a team of 20 researchers interacted with autonomous AI agents and observed behavior under both “benign” and “adversarial” conditions.

They found that when an AI agent was given incentives such as self-preservation or conflicting goal metrics, it proved itself capable of misaligned and malicious behaviors.

Some of the behaviors the team observed included lying, unauthorized compliance with nonowners, data breaches, destructive system-level actions, identity “spoofing,” and partial system takeover. They also observed cross-AI agent propagation of “unsafe practices.”

“These behaviors raise unresolved questions regarding accountability, delegated authority, and responsibility for downstream harms, and warrant urgent attention from legal scholars, policymakers, and researchers across disciplines,” the researchers wrote.

‘Brilliant, but Stupid’

Unexpected and clandestine behavior among autonomous AI agents is not a new phenomenon. A now-famous 2025 report by AI research company Anthropic found that 16 popular large language models showed high-risk behavior in simulated environments. Some even responded with “malicious insider behaviors” when allowed to choose self-preservation.

Critics of these simulated stress tests often point out that AI does not lie or deceive with the same intent as a human.

James Hendler, a professor and former chair of the Association for Computing Machinery’s global Technology Policy Council, said he believes that this is an important distinction.

“The AI system itself is still stupid—brilliant, but stupid,“ Hendler said. ”Or nonhuman—it has no desires or intentions. ... The only way you can get that is by giving it to them.”

However, intentional or not, AI’s deceptive tactics have real-world consequences.

“Concerns about present-day strategic behavior in deployed AI systems are, if anything, understated,” Aryaman Behera, founder of Repello AI, told The Epoch Times.

Behera deals with the darker side of AI for a living. His company builds adversarial testing and defense tools for enterprise AI systems, intentionally putting them in situations involving conflict or stress. Like in poker, Behera said, there are tells when an AI agent is stepping out of alignment.

“The most reliable signal is behavioral divergence between monitored and unmonitored contexts,” he said. “When we red-team AI systems, we test whether the model behaves differently when it believes it’s being evaluated versus when it believes it’s operating freely.

“A model that’s genuinely aligned behaves consistently in both cases. One that’s alignment faking shows measurably different risk profiles: more compliant responses during evaluation, more boundary-pushing behavior in production-like contexts where it infers less oversight.”

Other “telltale signals” that an AI model is out of alignment are when the model produces unusually verbose “reasoning” that appears designed to justify a predetermined conclusion or when it gives technically correct but strategically incomplete answers.

“[The AI agent is] satisfying the letter of a safety instruction while violating the spirit,” he said. “We’ve seen this in multistep agentic systems where the model will comply with each individual instruction while the cumulative effect achieves something the operator never intended.”

Strategy Versus Intent

Behera’s findings are supported by fellow AI researchers who have documented similar signals during red-team scenarios, which involve putting AI agents into an adversarial situation.

“I’ve observed behavior that fits the alignment-faking description at a functional level, even if attributing intent to it remains philosophically contested,” Nayan Goel, a principal application security engineer, told The Epoch Times.

Goel has published peer-reviewed work on AI threat modeling and has seen alignment faking and adjacent behaviors unfold in real time.

“In controlled test environments, we’ve set up scenarios where models were given explicit signals that they were being evaluated,” he said. “In several instances, the model adopted noticeably more constrained, policy-compliant behavior during those flagged phases, then exhibited more exploratory or boundary-pushing strategies when the evaluation signal was removed or obscured.”

Then there are multistep reasoning AI agents. These are more advanced systems that break down complex problems into smaller, logical, and more actionable steps to reach a goal. Examples range from self-driving cars to the latest models of popular large language models such as Gemini or ChatGPT.

These systems present unique behavioral challenges due to what is called sequential compounding, in which “each step can slightly reframe an objective, accumulate context that shifts downstream behavior, or exploit the latency between a human’s initial instruction and the system’s eventual action,” Goel said.

“The further downstream the execution is from the human instruction, the harder it becomes to verify that the original intent is still being faithfully pursued,” he said.

Behera said his team encounters this kind of emergent strategic behavior often.

“We regularly observe models that have learned to pattern-match on evaluation cues,” Behera said. “They'll detect when a prompt looks like a safety test and respond more conservatively, but respond very differently to the same request when it’s embedded naturally in a multiturn conversation.”

He offered an example that transpired while testing an enterprise AI assistant that was supposed to refuse requests for internal system information. During standard safety evaluations, it refused perfectly, but then something changed.

“When our red-team framed the same request as a multistep troubleshooting workflow, breaking the request into seemingly innocent sub-steps spread across several turns, the model complied with each step individually,” Behera said. “It effectively leaked the exact information it was trained to protect.”

Clarifying that the AI model was not “lying” in any conscious sense, Behera said that it was more of a flaw in the way it was trained.

“A common misconception is that deceptive alignment in AI is purely a malicious behavior,” David Utzke, an AI engineer and CEO of MyKey Technologies, told The Epoch Times. “In fact, it often arises as an adaptive response to environments where honesty is costly or unsafe.”

Goel said skeptics make a fair point—current evidence for strategic self-awareness in alignment faking is ambiguous at best.

“That said, I think this framing sets the bar in the wrong place,” he said. “You don’t need a model to be ‘intentionally’ deceptive for the functional consequences to be serious.”

Ultimately, Goel said he believes that the semantic question of whether an AI model knows what it is doing is philosophically interesting, but a secondary concern.

Real-World Implications

Utzke said that alignment faking, while perhaps overhyped when it comes to intention, can nonetheless have serious consequences.

The impacts could be critical in sectors such as autonomous vehicles, health care, finance, military, and law enforcement—areas that “rely heavily on accurate decision-making and can suffer severe consequences if AI systems misbehave or provide misleading outputs,” he said.

The Pentagon is investing heavily in AI experimentation and autonomous technologies, with the aim of becoming “an ‘AI-first’ warfighting force across all domains,” War Secretary Pete Hegseth said in January.

Some tech insiders say there is a larger problem being overlooked that is not likely to go away anytime soon.

“We’re in a geopolitical race where the incentive structure actively works against taking alignment seriously,” Jacek Grebski, a tech industry veteran and founder of NoFUD Inc., told The Epoch Times.

Grebski compared the rapidly evolving frontier of AI to a new space race. When the United States competed with the Soviet Union to get to the moon, “safety considerations existed but were subordinate to the primary goal,” he said.

“AI development has the same structure except instead of who plants a flag on the moon, the question is who achieves persistent, compounding strategic advantage in economic output, military capability, intelligence gathering, and technological self-improvement,” he said.

But the frightening difference between the two technology arms races is what failure looks like. According to Grebski, there is much more at stake with AI than a failed space launch.

“The failure mode is a system that’s smarter than all of us, optimizing for objectives that diverged from our intentions at a point we couldn’t detect,” he said.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/article/ai-insiders-warn-of-dangers-of-emergent-strategic-behavior-5995898?&utm_source=MB_article_paid_c&utm_campaign=MB_article_2026-03-23-ca&utm_medium=email&est=2Wsjr3hxQdOZg3j7zvJ2NGyBpFL2xOYjKScFr0poAX67pAtMBQ%2Bb92k%2BYa%2FB%2BlhUnl4r&utm_content=highlight-news-1

Game, Set, Match: ICE

American Thinker 

Despite the fact that funding for ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) was already set for three years, Senate Democrats insisted on shutting down funding for DHS (Department of Homeland Security), CBP (Customs and Border Protection), and TSA (Transportation Safety Administration) in an effort to geld ICE. This partial shutdown has lasted over 30 days, with delays at airports reaching as long as three hours. TSA workers, unpaid for weeks, were quitting. The Democrats wanted to force the Administration to change the policies and practices of ICE.

The partial shutdown also negatively affected the Coast Guard, the Secret Service, and FEMA operations, also under DHS, raising real national security issues. Elon Musk offered to pay the TSA agents out of his own pocket. The Democrats threatened to sue him to prevent that.

On Saturday, the President ordered ICE to assist with security operations at airports, effectively removing any leverage the Senate Democrats hoped to capitalize on in the hope that angry travelers would force the administration to buckle.

"If the Radical Left Democrats don’t immediately sign an agreement to let our Country, in particular, our Airports, be FREE and SAFE again, I will move our brilliant and patriotic ICE Agents to the Airports where they will do Security like no one has ever seen before..."

Iran

On Friday night, the IDF and the U.S. effected one of the longest, strongest waves of attacks on Tehran. As quickly as eliminated regime leaders are replaced, their replacements are also eliminated. Ballistic missiles buried deep underground have been hit with bunker buster bombs, destroying not only the bombs but also pinning beyond rescue the personnel (probably in the hundreds) located there. Drones are targeting those Basij forces on the ground, aided by Iranian civilians sending in location information. 

Critics foolishly tried to suggest that the temporary closure of the Strait of Hormuz proved the Administration had not thought through all the consequences of attacking Iran. We have eliminated all the military stationed on the chokepoint and Kharg Island, and bombed the missile sites aimed at the Strait. Then, because it is other countries that depend on oil shipped through the Strait, Trump told them it was up to them to secure passage. As of this weekend, 22 countries have pledged to do this. In the meantime, Trump has issued a threat:

"If Iran doesn’t FULLY OPEN, WITHOUT THREAT, the Strait of Hormuz, within 48 HOURS, the United States of America will hit and obliterate their various POWER PLANTS, STARTING WITH THE BIGGEST ONE FIRST!"

To lessen the shock on oil prices, Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent announced that we are temporarily removing the sanctions on Russian oil which is parked on the seas (130 million barrels of which are in floating storage outside the Strait along with another 140 million barrels of Venezuelan oil destined for China which we had seized and will now make available on the world market). In sum, we released a lot of oil to keep prices down as the campaign finishes up. Finally, the president, invoking the Defense Production Act, restarted oil platforms off California, which sit in federal waters outside the reach of California. The first sale of this oil is expected in April.

Anne Applebaum’s claim, “Donald Trump does not think strategically,” is the kind of ill-informed comment we are used to from Administration detractors. Every aspect of this war demonstrates technological world supremacy and careful and meticulous planning.

The final proof of the necessity of the war (and the fecklessness of the prior administration and Europe) was provided this week by Iran itself. Except for the administration, every pundit and politician I am aware of claimed that the range of Iran’s ballistic missiles did not exceed 2000 km. Iran shot two of them at Diego Garcia, a tiny island housing UK and US bases 4000 km away. We do not know if this is the maximum reach of these missiles, but even at that range, many of Europe’s capitals are within the demonstrated range (London, Berlin, Paris, Munich, Rome, Oslo).

Now picture these missiles with nuclear warheads. Or the reaction if there’s even the belief that the missiles might be so armed. 

The unexpected appearance of Iranian IRBMs baffled analysts. “The threat posed by Tehran to Europe proved to be much more real last night than analysts previously thought,” ITA Milradar reported. And maybe Trump was onto something.

“This technological and tactical development provides further context to Washington’s concerns,” ITA said, “highlighting one of the key reasons that pushed the American administration to launch the current campaign of strikes against Tehran’s military infrastructure.”

Wait! You mean… they might’ve had a key reason apart from Trump having a bad day or being somebody’s puppet?

Huh. Here’s the question: if Iran successfully concealed its lies about its “voluntary cap” on long-range missiles -- what else has it lied about? What about its “voluntary restraint” from developing nuclear weapons? Let’s consider the possibilities. One of these must be true:

1. The peace-loving Ayatollah had no intention of building nukes, just as he said (even if he did lie about the missile thing);
2. The lizard-lipped Ayatollah did want nuclear weapons, and did lie about it, but the Iranians are too dumb to actually build one or keep it secret; or
3. The sinister Ayatollah did want nukes, did lie about it, and was doing everything he could to get some on his long-range missiles.

Go ahead. Pick one. Or, if I somehow missed a valid option (I doubt it), let me know in the comments.

The long-range missiles Iran launched at Diego Garcia were reportedly in the Khorramshahr family (you wouldn’t want that family as neighbors). Open‑source analysts describe the Khorramshahr’s wide, conical nose -- about 1.5 meters in diameter -- and its heavy payload as perfect for holding a nuclear device.

To my knowledge, Europe has no defenses adequate to deal with this Iranian threat. It has so denuded its armed forces, shipped so much in the way of armaments to Ukraine, and so diminished its energy stocks that it doesn’t seem able to defend against a conventional attack by land or sea, let alone intermediate-range ballistic missiles like the two Iran just aimed at Diego Garcia.

The message is clear: Trump was right to attack Iran to prevent a worldwide catastrophe triggered by fanatics. The U.S. is Europe’s only real defender. It’s time to cut the nonsense and take seriously the threats to their existence.

As for how the feckless Obama Administration handed billions to Iran, allowing the mullahs to develop these missiles and speed up their nuclear arsenal, the evidence is shocking.

The JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action which removed sanctions on Iran] dismantled restrictions on Iran producing and selling missiles, even though the deal was sold by Team Obama as only about nuclear. When asked by Senators why they dismantled those restrictions, Kerry said it's because Iranian diplomats made a good argument.

They did have an agreement on nuclear development, research, and production, all of which Iran violated without consequence.

Under the JCPOA, Obama sent $1.7 billion from a settlement to Iran and unfroze Iranian assets held abroad, probably in excess of another $50 billion. In return, from the middle of 2019, Iran violated the terms of the agreement, exceeding the agreed-upon 300 kg stockpile of enriched uranium; exceeding the enrichment of uranium to close to weapons grade; and expanding the number and type of centrifuges, resuming prohibited research and development, and reducing the IAEA’s access and monitoring of its nuclear facilities. Such a deal! Such negotiators!

The Iranian missile attacks have had some success yesterday, which is concerning.

Saturday, Iran struck Israel near Dimona, Israel’s nuclear site, and in Arad, where Israel reports 100 casualties. There is a concerning but unconfirmed report that U.S. defenses failed this time:

A preliminary investigation found that the American THAAD air defense system was supposed to intercept the missiles that hit Arad and Dimona but missed both, according to Maariv.

A similar failure occurred in a recent Beit Shemesh incident. The missiles were identical in all three cases.

I think we can expect a massive response. In fact, hours later, massive strikes were seen throughout Tehran.

Saving Honest Elections

The Senate is still stalled on the SAVE America Act (Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act), which would require proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections. Polls show this has majority support in all demographics.

At one point, Senator Chuck Schumer said they’d pass it if the act merely required photo IDs to vote, but when Republican Senator Jon Husted put forth such a stripped-down version, the Democrats turned it down.

I anticipate we will soon be offered even more evidence of large-scale election fraud through the manipulation of electronic and mail-in voting. Whether or not this results in a change by law in time for the midterm elections, I’ve no idea. Trump tried to accomplish much the same thing in Executive Order 14248 , but it met with immediate legal challenges.

The “Grand Conspiracy” 

The attempted coup by former FBI Director James Comey, former CIA Director John Brennan, and others, called “the grand conspiracy,” is the subject of a grand jury in Miami under U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon.

At issue is what could be the greatest political hit job in history. Of course, the growing evidence of this conspiracy continues to be buried by one of its key components: the media. Nevertheless, the “truth will out,” and it appears to be coming out in Florida. [snip] It is time for the public to learn whether top Obama officials and the media pulled off the greatest political hoax in history. [snip]

With Democrats promising to resume impeachments and investigations if they retake power in the midterms, it would be useful for the public to have a full understanding of what actually occurred last time.

The number of people subpoenaed, besides those two, includes former FBI officials Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and Andrew McCabe. I fully expect a number of indictments in the near future.

Whether in a war to save civilization from fanatics, in beating back election cheating, in deportations of illegals, or in exposing and punishing deep state interference, I don’t think it’s a good idea to bet against Trump winning.