convinced?

  Listening to the news accounts of Trumps legal problems and I keep hearing the same narrative. We can't have a president that is a convicted felon. Well, the truth is he hasn't been convicted of anything. Accused certainly, on at least four occasions, but not convicted of anything. A conviction means that a majority agrees on the wrongdoing, that they are convinced he is the responsible party. That's the way our legal system works. Guilt is established by a preponderance of the evidence. It does not include the number of witnesses or documents produced. It is based on the quality and persuasiveness of the evidence. It relies upon an unbiased jury of your peers. That is the most difficult thing to obtain. They have to be convinced. And people aren't always that easy to convince of anything. I'd say that is getting more difficult every day. Schools are teaching children that boys may not in fact be boys or girls, girls. They may be something else entirely! Terminating a pregnancy isn't ending a life, preventing a baby from being born, it's just a choice. Same as deciding if I want vanilla or chocolate ice cream. When it comes to Trump is their going to be an impartial jury of his peers? I don't believe you could find that in the world! Well maybe in some isolated tribes in Africa or South America or a desert island. I'm thinking most people are already convinced, one way or the other.

  Now if you're listening to that narrative, you should be noticing something. The assumption is that Trump will win reelection. "We can't have a president that is a convicted felon" assumes he will be found guilty and that he would win the election despite that conviction. That says a lot right there, doesn't it? It's obvious enough to me that the real concern here is that Trump will win reelection. Everything else is just a distraction. The objective is to not allow him to be on the ballot! Remember when you were a kid and picking teams? You always wanted to pick the best player first, he can't beat you if he is on your team! It's the same mentality. He can't win the election if he isn't allowed to play. Seems like the thinking is that is the only way to stop him from winning. He has to be disqualified somehow! The only problem is convincing the majority of that. 

  The thing about that is relying on the vote. Isn't that how a president is chosen? Now the Democrats have been filing charges, pointing fingers and insisting that trump and the republicans tried to overthrow an election. They insist there were no irregularities in any of that, that the vote was accurate and secure. We are all supposed to accept the results of those elections without question. I guess that is the reason they can't have Trump in the election. They believe he would win and then they couldn't question that. It sure would be awkward, to say the very least. If Trump were to win, as they obviously feel confident he would, what then? Well, it has been decided an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure. It's best if we somehow disqualify him. They only need to convince a jury of twelve. The odds are better than convincing millions of people Trump violated the Rico act. Even the democrats know that is a bit of a stretch. But it is the bottom of the ninth and they need to swing for the fences. 

  That sadly sums up what this election is all about. It isn't about the issues, about the good of the country. It is about personalities, and convincing the general public that government is in charge. The democrats doing everything they possibly can to keep Trump off the ballot. The republicans are busy trying to get someone on the ballot. Abraham Lincoln was the last president to create such a huge divide in the nation. Remember he was the first republican president this nation had. The big fear was that he was going to abolish slavery. Lincoln never said that he was going to do that. Lincoln did want to prevent the spread of slavery into new states and territories. He believed that slavery as an institution would eventually go away on its' own. But the southern democrats were very concerned that Lincoln would abolish that, and it would cause a severe economic impact on them. Hey, that was their labor base! 

 What is the big fear with Trump? What economic impact could he possibly have on what group? That is the central core of all of this. The only difference between the democrats and the republicans is what it has always been. The republicans are concerned for Americans and the democrats are concerned for their own purses. The republican party was formed to oppose the expansion of slavery. They won the election of Lincoln over a divided democratic party. Their response was succession from the union! The first time they denied election results as the legitimate choice of the people. They decided to just leave. At the cost of over 600,000 American lives the union was saved. I'm not trying to say the republicans are all selfless patriots. They are as interested in making money as anyone else. It is only in the method of obtaining that wealth that the differences emerge. Wealth can be obtained through mutual agreement or through subjugation. The democrats prefer the latter. The only thing that has changed is their methods. Slavery, sharecropper, second class citizens dependent upon the government, it makes no difference. The importance lies in control. That's what the democrats want more than money, simple control. A straight up democracy fits the bill, only need 51 out of a hundred for that! A republic, with republicans! Can't have that because you have too many people to convince, or convict.