Trump Will Deal with N. Korea/ US Elections are Tough to Predict

President Trump reacted to the November 28 ballistic missile launch test by North Korea with just six words. He said, “We will take care of it”.

These few words may sound innocuous, but they have enormous power. These words represent The Trump Doctrine – speak softly, but prepare to launch a massive military strike and don’t be afraid to do it.

Trump is not afraid. He said last Summer that he is prepared to “totally destroy North Korea”. And he can. The US has the military capacity to do so.

This is the only rational way to approach a maniacal and insane dictatorship like North Korea – by being fearless. believes that the US, South Korea and Japan are jointly preparing a massive strike on key missile and military installations in North Korea.

Most casual observers would say that this would be dangerous, but it is important to know that the combined economic output of the US, Japan and South Korea is about 1,300 times the output of North Korea, which is a destitute and backward communist nation. North Korea’s military equipment and technology are antiquated and its military is composed of hundreds of thousands of forced conscripts who are poorly fed and trained.

Look at what Yahoo News reported about South Korea’s reaction to the North Korean missile launch:

South Korea staged a missile exercise Tuesday aimed at potentially taking out North Korea’s most valuable military assets. It was in response to North Korea’s launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) over the Sea of Japan.

South Korea’s Joint Chief of Staff said its military conducted what it called a “precision strike” missile exercise in immediate response to North Korea’s latest “provocation” in more than two months, according to South Korea’s official Yonhap News Agency. The neighboring nations have technically remained at war since the 1950s, and fears of renewed conflict have been stoked by rising tensions between President Donald Trump and North Korean supreme leader Kim Jong Un, both of whom have access to nuclear weapons.

Thus even South Korea, which has the most to lose in a military confrontation with the North, is fed up with the waiting game and the intimidation game being played by the North. believes that the South is ready to act, and that it is only the leadership of president Trump that is inducing them to finally prepare for the final takedown of the North.

So let us hope that we can rain “fire and fury” on North Korea, like president Trump said he would, and put an end to their madness. predicts that the three-nation assault would be cataclysmic for the North Korean military and would be over in a short period, and that it would result in the assassination of dictator Kim Jong-un by his own military leaders who then would sue for peace.

Meanwhile if you would like to read about how Bill Clinton caused the current situation in North Korea, go here.

Now here is a second commentary:

US elections are difficult to predict. Oh, certainly there are expected outcomes like Ronald Reagan winning a second term in 1984 with 49 electoral states out of 50. On the opposite end of the spectrum are the unexpected wild cards like Donald Trump winning the presidency in 2016.

Most elections fall somewhere in between, but even people who ‘crunch the numbers’ and try to predict outcomes mathematically can come up totally wrong like revered prognosticator Nate Silver who predicted that Hillary Clinton had a 91% chance of winning. Or Larry Sabato who said that Hillary would win the electoral college by 24 points when she lost it by 14 points. predicted as far back as 2011 that Trump would win, and never wavered. On the other hand the recent gubernatorial election in Virginia was problematic. predicted that Republican Ed Gillespie would win, but he lost by a significant margin.

I made my prediction by applying my own homegrown technique: Take the Fake News media polls, which are biased against Republicans, and add 5 to 10 points for the Republican candidate and that will give you the outcome.

For instance Fake News polls in Wisconsin showed that Republican governor Scott Walker was tied in his re-election bid in 2014, but then he won by 5 points.

Yet the Fake News polls in Virginia were wrong and in the totally opposite direction than usual. As election day neared some polls showed Gillespie slightly ahead while some showed him a few points behind. So it looked like he could or would win if you applied my theory. But then Gillespie lost by 9 points.

So what happened?

Well, the old adage came true – elections are difficult to predict. On top of that had not studied Virginia closely and did not know that Virginia has really turned into a solid liberal “blue” state; it is not a moderate “purple” state as it has been for the last 15 years, where elections went either way. Thus it is no surprise that Gillespie lost.

Virginia now has a Democrat governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, and two US senators. That’s “blue”. Meanwhile look at this shocker from Ann Coulter:

In 1970, only one out of every 100 Virginians was foreign-born. By 2012, one in nine Virginians was foreign-born.

The foreign-born vote overwhelmingly, by about 80 percent, for Democrats. They always have and they always will — especially now that our immigration policies aggressively discriminate in favor of the poorest, least-educated, most unskilled people on Earth. They arrive in need of a LOT of government services.

True, Virginia is home to 322,198 people who are either current or retired federal employees. On the other hand, there are more than 800,000 Virginians who are foreign-born — and that’s not including the children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the foreign-born who arrived in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s.

Wow. Another major factor: did not sufficiently account for The Romney Effect, when conservatives refuse to turn out to vote for an Establishment Republican like Romney or Gillespie.

But wait. Virginia gets worse. Look at this from Fox News:

By April of this year, the (Democrat governor Terry McAuliffe) was able to announce that he had conferred the right to vote on more than 156,000 criminals. Not only would those people immediately be allowed to register to vote, they would also be allowed “to run for office, to serve on a jury and to serve as a notary public.” The governor declared it his “proudest achievement”.

Note: Criminals vote overwhelmingly Democrat.

Here are some other noteworthy election results:

*Political lore says that a presidential candidate must win the electoral votes in Ohio in order to win the White House, that Ohio is a ‘bellwether’.

In September 2016 it was being reported that the Clinton campaign was pulling its efforts out of Ohio, which Obama had won twice. This allegedly came as a result of internal polling by the Clinton campaign. Still some Fake News polls showed Hillary winning Ohio easily, but then Trump went on to win it by 8 points.

During the re-election campaign of George W. Bush in 2004, election-day exit polls showed Democrat John Kerry winning Ohio and, by extension the presidency. But then Kerry lost Ohio and lost the election.

Then the Loony Left actually said (get this…) that the polls were correct and that the actual vote count was wrong, and that Kerry should be president.

*On the other hand, the nationwide election-day 2016 exit polls showed Hillary Clinton easily winning the presidency. There is even a video of Bill Clinton hopping up and down like a little kid upon hearing those results.

Poor Billy…

*In the Summer of 2012 many Republicans were confident that Republican Mitt Romney was going to unseat incumbent president Obama. In the first of three presidential debates Romney hammered Obama. Mid-October polls showed Romney surging as election day neared, with big crowds at his rallies, but then he lost big-time with just 38% of the electoral votes.

*In another case few would have predicted before election day 2016 that Vermont Republican gubernatorial candidate Phil Scott would win in that very liberal state by 9 points.

*In Alaska in 2010 one July poll reported that Republican incumbent US senator Lisa Murkowski, whose family had been in Alaska politics for decades, would beat her primary challenger Joe Miller by 32 points. On primary election day Miller won by one point.

On September 17, 2010 Murkowski re-entered the general election as a write-in candidate and most polls said Miller would win easily over Murkowski and the Democrat. Write-in candidacies are virtually never successful yet Murkowski won the general election in November by 10,000 votes over Miller, or 4 points, with every single vote a write-in. That’s one for the history books.

*Here’s another famous story about an Alaska election: On October 27, 2008 popular and long-serving incumbent Republican US senator Ted Stevens was convicted on corruption charges. He lost his re-election bid shortly thereafter by just 1.25 points. Many Alaskans believed that the charges were a political hit job. And they were. In April 2009 CNN reported:

A federal judge on Tuesday set aside the conviction of Republican former Sen. Ted Stevens while excoriating the case’s prosecutors.

Emmet Sullivan also appointed an independent, nongovernment attorney, Henry Schuelke III, to investigate possible misconduct by the government lawyers who prosecuted the 85-year-old former senator from Alaska.

“In nearly 25 years on the bench, I’ve never seen anything approaching the mishandling and misconduct that I’ve seen in this case,” Sullivan said.

This case shows how Democrats win elections using ‘dirty tricks’. They muddy the waters long enough for the Democrat to win like they are trying to do with Roy Moore in Alabama.

One of the few major public figures to predict Trump’s victory was long-time Democrat pollster and political commentator Pat Caddell who forecast a Trump ‘landslide’. Trump went on to win the electoral college 57% to 43% for Hillary, which is pretty much a landslide.

Virtually every major pollster said that Trump not only would lose but would take down the Republican-majority US Senate and give control back to the Democrats. That didn’t happen either.

One of the big reasons that elections are hard to predict is that most of the polls are totally dishonest. They are “media polls” run by liberal media companies like CBS, New York Times, ABC, CNN, etc. Thus the polls are slanted against Republicans.

These “media polls” are not even real polls. They are Fake News polls that are intentionally skewed to show Democrats winning or doing well in order to give the media something to talk about, i.e., “CBS has learned that a recent CNN poll shows Democrat A is 10 points ahead of Republican B…”

Unfortunately for Democrats this approach backfired massively in the 2016 presidential election. Skewed polls made Democrats complacent that Hillary was going to win easily, and that complacency is one of the big reasons that Trump won.

The only national polls that you should believe are independent ones like Zogby or Rasmussen. These two have been pretty accurate over the last decade because they are trying to build a reputation for being right, not to swing public opinion like those media polls are.

On the other hand, it is amazing how far off these media polls are and then how, by the next election, people forget how wrong they were and believe them once again.

But believes that this is changing, that Trump’s war on the Fake News media is making a huge dent in media credibility, including their polls.

(Please bookmark this website and send this article by e-mail to your friends. Please recommend this site to all of your friends via Facebook and any other means. Let’s make the #1 conservative site by word of mouth. And if you would like to contribute to, please click the link at the upper right where it says “support this site”. Thank you, Nikitas)

This entry was posted in Current Events (More than 1,500 previous editorials!). Bookmark the permalink.