Americans Abandon Voting - Barely 50% even participate - What democracy? What choices?

What the news media and political parties are not telling us about our $20 billion election next year?

Our media and politicians tend to portray the United States of America as the ultimate democracy in the world and have consistently presented us as the defenders of freedom and democracy.

Well I must be confused because nowhere is the word "democracy" mentioned in the Declaration of Independence or the U.S. Constitution. How could that be?  Come to think of it, no where are the words capitalism or political party mentioned either.

Our government is supposed to be a democracy!

What exactly is the definition of a democracy?

The Cambridge Dictionary - Definition of "democracy"

The belief in freedom and equality between people, or a system of government based on this belief, in which power is held by elected representatives or directly by the people themselves.

A country in which power is held by elected representatives.

The Cambridge Dictionary - Definition of "republic"

A country that is governed by elected representatives and an elected leader.

So in a pure democracy power is held by the people directly, while a republic elects representatives to look out for the public interest.  Well let us look at that in light of the current state of American participation in the election of our representatives and leader.

Pythagorean Analysis of Voter reality in America 2016 Presidential Election

Total USA Population 2016                323,127,513

Total Population under 18                  73,642,285
Total Population 18 and over          249,485,228

Total Eligible Voters 18+                 249,485,228

Total Registered Voters                    157,600,000

Percent                                                                     63%

Total Voter Turnout 2016                136,669,276

Percent of Registered Voters                         86%

Percent of Eligible Voters                                55%

Total Trump Votes 2016                    62,984,828

Percent of Registered Voters                        40%

Percent of Eligible Voters                              25.2%                                                                    

Total Clinton Voters 201                    65,853,514

Percent of Registered Voters                      41.7%

Percent of Eligible Voters                            26.3%                                    

Total Eligible Voters not Voting    112,816,048

Percent of Eligible Voters                            45.2%                                                

Total Leaning Independent                          39%

Total Leaning Democrat                               31%

                           Total Leaning Republican                            28%                           

Nothing can be more dramatic than the realization that not only do we not have a democracy we do not even have a functioning republic in this the citadel of world democracy.  We are nearing the point for perhaps the first time in our history, when more Americans refused to participate in the voting process by refusing to register to vote, a consequence of freedom or common sense I suspect.  Also note the foreboding 2018 party preference when the two parties continued to erode while the Independents continue to rise.

2018 Party Preference

Leaning Independent     42%

Leaning Democrat           30%

Leaning Republican        26%

Our political system has failed to support our constitutional requirements for a republic.  Wake up America!  Better yet, wake up news media and politicians who are ignorant of history and fail to understand the meaning of a republic.  As a last, gasp effort to steer them in the right direction, here is an explanation of the American system of government as envisioned by our founding fathers back before the concentration of power in our news media and political parties.

Is the United States a democracy?  Here is an explanation by ThisNation.com

The Pledge of Allegiance includes the phrase: "and to the republic for which it stands." Is the United States of America a republic? I always thought it was a democracy? What's the difference between the two?

The United States is, indeed, a republic, not a democracy. Accurately defined, a democracy is a form of government in which the people decide policy matters directly--through town hall meetings or by voting on ballot initiatives and referendums. A republic, on the other hand, is a system in which the people choose representatives who, in turn, make policy decisions on their behalf. 

The Framers of the Constitution were altogether fearful of pure democracy. Everything they read and studied taught them that pure democracies "have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths" (Federalist No. 10).

By popular usage, however, the word "democracy" come to mean a form of government in which the government derives its power from the people and is accountable to them for the use of that power. In this sense the United States might accurately be called a democracy. However, there are examples of "pure democracy" at work in the United States today that would probably trouble the Framers of the Constitution if they were still alive to see them. Many states allow for policy questions to be decided directly by the people by voting on ballot initiatives or referendums.

(Initiatives originate with, or are initiated by, the people while referendums originate with, or are referred to the people by, a state's legislative body.) That the Constitution does not provide for national ballot initiatives or referendums is indicative of the Framers' opposition to such mechanisms. They were not confident that the people had the time, wisdom or level-headedness to make complex decisions, such as those that are often presented on ballots on election day.

Writing of the merits of a republican or representative form of government, James Madison observed that one of the most important differences between a democracy and a republic is "the delegation of the government [in a republic] to a small number of citizens elected by the rest."

The primary effect of such a scheme, Madison continued, was to:

. . . refine and enlarge the public views by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the same purpose (Federalist No. 10).

Later, Madison elaborated on the importance of "refining and enlarging the public views" through a scheme of representation:

There are particular moments in public affairs when the people, stimulated by some irregular passion, or some illicit advantage, or misled by the artful misrepresentations of interested men, may call for measures which they themselves will afterwards be most ready to lament and condemn. In these critical moments, how salutary will be the interference of some temperate and respectable body of citizens, in order to check the misguided career and to suspend the blow meditated by the people against themselves, until reason, justice and truth can regain their authority over the public mind (Federalist No. 63).

In the strictest sense of the word, the system of government established by the Constitution was never intended to be a "democracy." This is evident not only in the wording of the Pledge of Allegiance but in the Constitution itself which declares that "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government" (Article IV, Section 4).  Moreover, the scheme of representation and the various mechanisms for selecting representatives established by the Constitution were clearly intended to produce a republic, not a democracy.

To the extent that the United States of America has moved away from its republican roots and become more "democratic," it has strayed from the intentions of the Constitution's authors. Whether or not the trend toward more direct democracy would be smiled upon by the Framers depends on the answer to another question. Are the American people today sufficiently better informed and otherwise equipped to be wise and prudent democratic citizens than were American citizens in the late 1700s? By all accounts, the answer to this second question is an emphatic "no."

Note Data Source for statistics: U.S. Bureau of the Census. 

Thank you for being part of the great American experience - by voting! Now it is time to heal!

One thing is clear and maybe we can all agree upon it, the election is over and we have now been a part of the greatest experiment in democracy in the history of the world if you are one of the 100 million plus who vote today, November 6.  Over 30 million early votes were cast, a new record, and the total votes cast could approach record levels.

This is how our Republic continues to be the strongest nation on earth after only 242 years of existence, when the Democrats, Republicans and Independents cast their votes throughout the nation.

Now, this could be one of the most contentious elections in our history as well, with the hatred, fake news, attempts by other nations to interfere, polarization, and all the other bitterness involved. However, we survived intact though rather scarred and bruised in the process.

Now the true test of American spirit comes, whether we can get over the craziness, tone down the rhetoric, stop the insults and lies, and act like mature Americans again.  Might be asking for a lot with the presidential election looming in the near distance.

Gracias por votar!

No matter what the outcome, now would be a nice time to patch up the differences between parties and candidates, respect the winners and losers, and start working together whoever is left standing for the good of all Americans, not just the special interest maybe of us have been supporting.

A great deal has been accomplished yet a lot remains to be done.  We must fix the broken health care system before people are broke and start dying because they cannot afford treatment or insurance premiums.  That is not a political problem but an American problem.  While we are at it we need to finally redirect health care from treating people to healing people to keeping them from ever getting sick in the first place.   Only then will we be on the right track.

We must address immigration reform and eliminate the barriers to getting into the country by enforcing the fixing and enforcing the laws on the books.  Comprehensive reform is needed to guide us through the twenty-first century.  This too is an American problem and one party cannot fix it a bipartisan solution is required.

Trade agreements must be negotiated with China and the rest of the world, containment of nations like North Korea and Iran must be fixed, peace must finally come to the middle east, and we must address the financial stability of our Social Security,  Medicare and retirement systems, so future generations of our offspring have the security and opportunity they deserve.

Once again no political party is going to achieve this, it must be a bipartisan effort and it will have to be heroic.  So thank you for taking part in the election, now it is time to share responsibility for the future of our great nation.

Come together.

     

The Presidential Election - Clinton or Trump - The World Watches in Fascination

.

As we countdown to the day of reckoning when half of the voters in America will be squealing for joy while the other half prepare to move to Canada, or perhaps Newfoundland, where will you be?

Down to forty-five days and counting and by anyone's measure once you toss out the radical right and radical left predictions, the election is still too close to call.  No matter how hard the desperate liberal media try to stack the polls and purloin the Trump, it matters not.

You may have noticed how NBC and other leading liberal networks are using the 2012 election results for the demographic distribution of the 2016 polls.  The conservatives have their own distorted results to offset the liberals, proof intellectual constipation is rampant.

For the record, there is no possible way the 2016 carnage will resemble the 2012 results.  Just the obvious would tell you so since no matter how hard they try to make us believe it, Hillary Clinton is not and never will be Barack Obama and she really is white.  For that matter, there is no way an entire generation of millennial who backed Bernie Sanders will transfer their vote to the Queen of the Establishment.

Barack Obama was off the charts with his support from Blacks and youth in 2008 and 2012, as much as 25-30% higher than Hillary's support.  Hello political pundits, that means, overall, there may well be a twenty-five percent lower turnout of Blacks and youth for Hillary.

Trump, on the other hand, has a huge advantage in enthusiasm.  Where Clinton is a practicing member of the establishment since she married Bill in 1975 and his election as state attorney general of Arkansas in 1976, Trump has never been involved in holding political office.

That makes her a card-carrying establishment leader for forty-one years, longer than the oldest millennial alive.  It makes Trump about the second oldest revolutionary in our history next to the ageless Benjamin Franklin.

As for her agenda, Hillary offers the most aggressive progressive liberal platform since George McGovern in 1972 and he lost 49 out of 50 states.  In world politics, the pendulum is swinging conservative so she must also buck the trends.

This year The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, reported the following.

"But any intelligent discussion of 2016 must begin with the fact that history is very strongly against the Democrats in 2016.  In the modern two-party era (beginning with the first Republican Party presidential campaign in 1856), there have been 16 elections following the re-election of an incumbent president; in 11 of those races, there was no incumbent on the ballot.  An analysis of those elections shows a startlingly uniform pattern over time: the incumbent party (i.e., the party that won the last election) consistently lost ground relative to the challenger party (the party out of power), especially when running without an incumbent on the ballot.  And in nearly every such election, that loss of popular support was evident in closely divided battleground states, rather than confined to uncompetitive states.  The trend has persisted in winning and losing elections, in elections with and without third-party challengers, in times of war and peace, booms and depressions.  It has become more, rather than less, pronounced in the years since World War II, and at all times has been more pronounced when the incumbent party is the Democrats."

Thus, Hillary is also battling history.

Trump, the political neophyte, has no history, no record of accomplishment, and no one really cares what he had to say back when he was a talk show host and not a political candidate.  To his supporters and right now he has the same level of support as Hillary, Trump is their champion.

He is the Chosen One to lead America out of the dark and out of the control of the dastardly establishment.  If it is determined if he is a billionaire, he will be the first to be president if elected.  If not he will rank among the richest ever.  Yet he is the voice of the silent majority, the Independent, the forgotten, the disappearing Middle Class, and the one trusted to bring about radical change to our system.

Hillary and her minions believe he is a Demon determined to undermine our way of life but a whole lot of voters believe he is the crusader to bring back the life our politicians sold out to the rich and powerful.

Has there ever been a more divisive election in our history, of course if you know history, which has seemed to escape the minds of most political reporters in America.  Reporters of today think the 1990's the most important decade the last century but our political history transcends not just decades, but centuries.

In 1788, George Washington became our first president in history.  That was 228 years ago not two decades ago.  This year marks the 58th quadrennial presidential election in America and we will be electing the 45th person to serve as president.  Of course, neither Blacks nor women could vote in George's election, very different from today.

Many times over the past two centuries the polarization was worse, the language was more vulgar, the animosity more intense, the attacks more personal, the deplorable nature more severe, the lies more extreme, yet somehow, our nation survived.

Therein lays the miracle of our nation and the wisdom of our Founding Fathers.  Our Constitution and Bill of Rights has endured the test of time, the treachery of politicians, the greed of capitalists, the distortion of the news media, and the suffocation of special interests.

This year the news media, politicians, political pundits, and even the historians seem to be suffering from collective brain-dead syndrome.  The partisanship, the intolerance of the opinion of others, and the downright bias of the media has fed an enormous appetite of polarizing mania.

At first, I thought it was the result of nearly eight years of the Obama Administration failure to deliver on many of the key promises of 2008 and 2012.  When Trump struck a responsive chord with far more of the public than the so-called experts expected, it was clear there was much more to his campaign.

The media, politicians, and political pundits first ridiculed, then gave extraordinary attention to the neophyte they knew never had a chance to be elected.  In time this free media coverage became obsessive and helped Trump drown out all the highly regarded competition.

When he stunned the experts and emerged as winner of the GOP primary campaign, they made light of the stupidity of the Republicans in nominating Trump.  However, as the Democrats finished their convention and as the Clinton campaign outspent Trump five to ten to one depending on television and the Internet, a strange result started to emerge.

Hillary could not put Trump away as expected.

Now here we are, just 45 days from the end, and nothing seems settled like expected.  The bombastic billionaire will not go away.  No matter what he says or does, no matter how juvenile or odd his perspective on the world, he is headed for a photo finish with Clinton.

No matter what happens on Election Day, over 50% of the voters will disagree with the choice.  That is because both candidates have the worst favorable rating in history, with each hovering around 60% unfavorable.

Forgotten in the race to capture the hearts of America were the Independents and once again due to the lack of due diligence by the news media, there could be a tsunami building across the land.  People have had it with both political parties.  Both parties are beholden to big money.  No matter who wins, the rich keep getting richer at the expense of the people.

Not even the election of Barack Obama in 2008, the first Black president in our history, could break the stranglehold of big money control of our government.  Members of the two parties might not have noticed, but the Independents did as well as seniors and the millennial youth.

When you consider a significant number of party members are fed up with the lack of progress, along with a lack of interest in the election by both Black and Hispanic voters, you have a groundswell of dissention.

Add to that the astonishing fact that for the first time in our nation's history there are more registered Independents than members of either political party and you have the ingredients of that elusive tsunami.

Eight years ago, in the last great recession brought about by the greed of big money, financial, banking, political, and government officials assured us all was well.  Financial rating services said things were fine and major financial institutions were too busy preparing for a financial meltdown to warn us of impending doom.

Nearly every expert from finance, banks, political polls, and rating agencies were wrong and the result was the near destruction of the American economy.  The lives, jobs, and retirement assets of the public were left shattered.

No matter what anyone says, we have not recovered from that unnecessary tragedy and not a single major executive of any of the financial institutions that raped and pillaged our economy is in jail.  The result is the slowest recovery in history with the vast economic benefits going to less than one percent of the rich.  That is the memory of the public.

Add to this condition a sinking feeling in the public regarding their safety from racial strife, an understandable fear of terrorist attacks, awareness that American foreign policy is a disaster, and a huge increase in the distrust of the establishment, and logic would dictate the results fail to conform to any past elections in the modern era.

My sense is the polls are 5-7% wrong, they under-represent the potential for new voters for Trump, and misrepresent the number and distribution of Independent votes.  If the polls remain within the margin of error like today through Election Day, Trump could most likely triumph.

The next election article will be life under a Clinton versus a Trump presidency.  Stay tuned.

     

Riots with most property damage in America                

1. LA Riots, 1992: $1.268 billion

2. The Los Angeles Watts Riots, 1965: $321 million

3. 12th Street Riot, Detroit 1967: $289 million

4. Miami Riots, 1980: $181 million

5. 1968 Holy Week Uprising—Washington, D.C.: $158 million

6. New York City Blackout of 1977: $106 million

7. Newark Riots, 1967: $103 million

8. 1968 Holy Week Uprising, Baltimore: $92 million

9. 1968 Holy Week Uprising, Chicago: $86 million

10. 1968 Holy Week Uprising, New York City: $26 million

http://coltonspointtimes.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-day-of-reckoning-is-nearly-at-hand.html

.

CPT Prediction - UK vote on EU Brexit issue - To Remain or not to Remain

.

Today the UK goes to the polls in one of the most polarizing elections in modern history (boy does that sound familiar.).  The voters must decide if the UK will remain part of the European Union.  The decision will impact on the world economy for many years to come.

UK Prime Minister David Cameron has bet his career in politics on persuading voters to remain in the EU. Pollsters show the outcome too close to call or predict.
  

As posted several days ago on LinkedIn, the Coltons Point Times predicts the UK will vote to remain in the EU on June 23.

The stock market will soar,

the Pound currency will strengthen,

and David Cameron of the UK will win election as Prime Minister again.

The Crown Jewels will be safe for another few decades.

Unfortunately, Member of Parliament and rising star Jo Cox was assassinated by a fanatic opposed to her stand in support of remaining in the EU.
.

American Elections 6 - Tips for International Followers - Who votes in America?

What the news media and political parties are not telling us about our $5 billion election this year?

Our media and politicians tend to portray the United States of America as the ultimate democracy in the world and have consistently presented us as the defenders of freedom and democracy.

Well I must be confused because nowhere is the word "democracy" mentioned in the Declaration of Independence or the U.S. Constitution. How could that be?  Come to think of it, no where are the words capitalism or political party mentioned either.

Our government is supposed to be a democracy!

What exactly is the definition of a democracy?

The Cambridge Dictionary - Definition of "democracy"

The belief in freedom and equality between people, or a system of government based on this belief, in which power is held by elected representatives or directly by the people themselves.

A country in which power is held by elected representatives.

The Cambridge Dictionary - Definition of "republic"

A country that is governed by elected representatives and an elected leader.

So in a pure democracy power is held by the people directly, while a republic elects representatives to look out for the public interest.  Well let us look at that in light of the current state of American participation in the election of our representatives and leader.

Pythagorean Analysis of Voter reality in America

Total USA Population Today           325,332,205

Total Population under 18                 78,000,000

Total Population 18 and over          247,322,000

Total Eligible Voters 18+                 247,322,000

Total Registered Voters                  142,200,000

Percent                                                            57%

Total Voter Turnout 2012                121,757,000

Percent of Registered Voters                       85.6%

Percent of Eligible Voters                             49.2%

Total Obama Votes 2012                   62,615,406

Percent of Registered Voters                       44%

Percent of Eligible Voters                             25.3%                                                                        

Total Romney Voters 2012               59,100,000

Percent of Registered Voters                      41.5%

Percent of Eligible Voters                            23.9%                                    

Total Eligible Voters not Voting      125,565,000

Percent of Eligible Voters                            50.8%
                                               

Total Leaning Independent                          43%

Total Leaning Democrat                              30%

Total Leaning Republican                            26%                           

Nothing can be more dramatic than the realization that not only do we not have a democracy we do not even have a functioning republic in this the citadel of world democracy.  For perhaps the first time in our history, more Americans refused to participate in the voting process by refusing to register to vote, a consequence of freedom or common sense I suspect.

Our political system has failed to support our constitutional requirements for a republic.  Yet I do not hear a single candidate for either party raise the issue of the disconnect between our political parties and our constitutional rights.

Wake up America!  Better yet, wake up news media and politicians who are ignorant of history and fail to understand the meaning of a republic.  As a last, gasp effort to steer them in the right direction, here is an explanation of the American system of government as envisioned by our founding fathers back before the concentration of power in our news media and political parties.

Is the United States a democracy?  Here is an explanation by ThisNation.com

The Pledge of Alliance includes the phrase: "and to the republic for which it stands." Is the United States of America a republic? I always thought it was a democracy? What's the difference between the two?

The United States is, indeed, a republic, not a democracy. Accurately defined, a democracy is a form of government in which the people decide policy matters directly--through town hall meetings or by voting on ballot initiatives and referendums. A republic, on the other hand, is a system in which the people choose representatives who, in turn, make policy decisions on their behalf. 

The Framers of the Constitution were altogether fearful of pure democracy. Everything they read and studied taught them that pure democracies "have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths" (Federalist No. 10).

By popular usage, however, the word "democracy" come to mean a form of government in which the government derives its power from the people and is accountable to them for the use of that power. In this sense the United States might accurately be called a democracy. However, there are examples of "pure democracy" at work in the United States today that would probably trouble the Framers of the Constitution if they were still alive to see them. Many states allow for policy questions to be decided directly by the people by voting on ballot initiatives or referendums.

(Initiatives originate with, or are initiated by, the people while referendums originate with, or are referred to the people by, a state's legislative body.) That the Constitution does not provide for national ballot initiatives or referendums is indicative of the Framers' opposition to such mechanisms. They were not confident that the people had the time, wisdom or level-headedness to make complex decisions, such as those that are often presented on ballots on election day.

Writing of the merits of a republican or representative form of government, James Madison observed that one of the most important differences between a democracy and a republic is "the delegation of the government [in a republic] to a small number of citizens elected by the rest."

The primary effect of such a scheme, Madison continued, was to:

. . . refine and enlarge the public views by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the same purpose (Federalist No. 10).

Later, Madison elaborated on the importance of "refining and enlarging the public views" through a scheme of representation:

There are particular moments in public affairs when the people, stimulated by some irregular passion, or some illicit advantage, or misled by the artful misrepresentations of interested men, may call for measures which they themselves will afterwards be most ready to lament and condemn. In these critical moments, how salutary will be the interference of some temperate and respectable body of citizens, in order to check the misguided career and to suspend the blow meditated by the people against themselves, until reason, justice and truth can regain their authority over the public mind (Federalist No. 63).

In the strictest sense of the word, the system of government established by the Constitution was never intended to be a "democracy." This is evident not only in the wording of the Pledge of Alliance but in the Constitution itself which declares that "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government" (Article IV, Section 4).  Moreover, the scheme of representation and the various mechanisms for selecting representatives established by the Constitution were clearly intended to produce a republic, not a democracy.

To the extent that the United States of America has moved away from its republican roots and become more "democratic," it has strayed from the intentions of the Constitution's authors. Whether or not the trend toward more direct democracy would be smiled upon by the Framers depends on the answer to another question. Are the American people today sufficiently better informed and otherwise equipped to be wise and prudent democratic citizens than were American citizens in the late 1700s? By all accounts, the answer to this second question is an emphatic "no."

Note Data Source for statistics: U.S. Bureau of the Census. "Projected Population by Single Year of Age (0-99, 100+), Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin for the United States: July 1, 2014 to July 1, 2060." Released December 2014. Web-based data files available at:

http://www.census.gov/population/projections/data/national/2014/downloadablefiles.html

.