In light of AboveAlpha's nomination by DennisTate...

Well that's why I wish I could run! We need a better candidate than these two crackpots, and not some libertarian or Jill Stein, like an actual candidate.

 

If you don't play their game, their being the powerful insiders and lobbyists, you'll never get to run.

 

Unless...... the most powerful people decide that they want to put somebody forward who
legitimately seems to be unwilling to play their game........?

Could it be that their game.... can be ramped up to that high of a level that it makes little difference
who holds the office of President?????

 

Whether or not America chooses to have President Clinton or
President Trump on November 8.... .the very fact that a sixteen year old
can write as you do means that you are set up to play an exceptionally interesting role....

perhaps within months......... but you may wish to not come out publicly that your
public persona is also... HailVictory over on political forum .com.

The poll questions that I made up for AboveAlpha also apply to your situation......
some of what you write here could come back to haunt you........

... but if you don't clearly identify yourself as HailVictory.... except to a tiny number of
people who you discern could actually never publicly pass on what you write.....
then you are fine......

... one way to do this is to call attention to another young writer through this forum...
but you never, never, never admit... that this person is also you!

 

Interesting!

I can see why you might think that but....
it is intriguing how such a high percentage of people who report
having an NDE come back saying that they were given a question along the line of....
"what did you do with your life that you can show me?"

Whether this question comes from some sort of G-d outside of us.....
or from the most ancient part of our own soul - spirit / the very foundation
for our psychology ...... doesn't matter....

most of us want to accomplish something somewhat altruistic with our lives.....
and it is difficult to imagine that The Donald is no more altruistic than the
average........?!

All of us psychologically profile everybody that we study more than a little and....
my opinion of The Donald is that he wants to be looked at as another Lincoln or
Kennedy......... and he wants to make the world a better place in many ways.....
I think that he is sick and tired of the rule of political correctness over the government of
the USA.

In his favor.... he seems like one of the only G. O. P. leaders who truly is able to
give President Obama some credit for how he handled the debt crisis of 2009......
the bottom line is that the USA and world economy were in a lot of danger at that time and.....
President Obama and his team did..... handle the whole thing with relative wisdom.

 

In some cases yes.
But not in all.

 

I think that you are going to kind of enjoy it
when you see dozens and later on hundreds of us
on the forum trying our best to argue with you
on your rather fatalistic view of how climate change will
probably lead to the deaths of millions and even billions of people over the
coming decades and centuries!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI

How to green the world's deserts and reverse climate change | Allan Savory

....

Please check out my forwarding of one of your writings on to
Canada's retired P. M. Stephen Harper in post #26 here:

http://www.politicalforum.com/canada/477572-kellie-leitch-national-leader-conservative-party-3.html


One of the seriously cool possible implications of your Multiverse Theory is the
possibility of new time lines in which humanity truly learns from our errors in other
possible, (perhaps probable), time lines in which the earth probably experienced a
ninety to ninety five percent depopulation. (The Dr. Chet Snow and Helen Wambach Ph. D. research is
one replicable and somewhat verifiable source of evidence for this)!

 

True.... I personally breathed a massive sigh of relief on November 9 when I
found out for certain that Mr. Donald Trump had been elected President of the USA!

 

And I think that our young friend may just have hit another one right out of the park?!

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=492235&p=1067127696#post1067127696
Kevin O'Leary on how to make Canada more energy independent"


.....

 

Because Ecuador uses the USA Dollar as their official currency
I have something in mind that Ecuador could do for President Trump and
all of America over the coming months and years.


Ecuador could become another Venezuela.....


http://www.politicalforum.com/index...s-early-as-2016.397835/page-8#post-1067354662

 

Yeah good luck taking all the guns from private owners OP because I bet a whole lot more people would be getting killed from that policy than has ever been killed in every mass shooting there has been.

Some what the OP stated was logical but the anti-gun stance was purely rooted in unrealistic almost communist like idealism. Not that I blame the OP as when I was younger I had quite the leftist idealism view of the world. Then I read some history books and looked at what money, power and the spotlight do to people.

 

One of the only writers whose posts can attract over fifty thousand views
here on PoliticaForum:


Russia's Government talks about Release of E.T. data. (Part 2)

 

I would never support a Merchantilist.

 

Autarky is a terrible idea. It is a quick way to poverty and backwardness for nations which adopt it. Examples, North Korea and Albania prior to the end of Communism. Less extreme examples are some Latin American nations (Argentina is one) and the old Soviet Union. Also if we ban imports other nations will ban our exports or impose high tariffs on them. I strongly doubt that Canada would want to join the US under these conditions.

While I'm not against reasonable gun controls your plan is too restrictive and not practical. Some people need guns for self defense.

Making the police part of the military isn't a good idea because the main job of the military is to deter foreign nations from attacking the US or its allies and to fight and win the war if we fail to deter them. Law enforcement has a very different job of preventing crime or when that fails arresting the criminals. A secret police is a very bad idea.

You do have some good ideas and I believe you have good intentions. After you get some real life experience whether in the military, politics, or otherwise reconsider your ideas and try to improve them.

 

Thank you for inspiring me to look that up.......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercantilism

Intriguing.........

 

I wrote this a while ago, and have changed a few things around.

However, I would argue that autarky, when done correctly, can be helpful. For example, the United States around its founding operated under near autarky, and obtained great riches from tobacco, cotton, and ship building industries. The issue is not necessarily foreign imports, but more the issue with not being able to survive without other countries. Let's say China going into a civil war, what happens to the US? Economic nationalism isn't bad; economic discrimination on the other hand, which is what most autarkists advocate for, is bad. For example, the Smoot-Hawley tariff that led to the Great Depression, that was the wrong idea. I'm just saying keep to America first, then other countries. Because complete autarky is pretty much impossible. Also, I find American outsourcing immoral to both the US and other nations. Because it creates economic competition for nations that essentially bars them access to their own markets. If a Chinese soda company springs up, it has to compete with Coke, and will always lose. But Coke's revenue eventually comes back to the US, and only the tiny workers' wages go into the Chinese economy. It also takes away American jobs, obviously.

Now, I am more into the control of the sale of guns rather than gun control itself.

Police and military merger I have a slightly different viewpoint than expressed originally. I think that the police should be treated like a military organization, but not necessarily be in charge of military operations. I think it should be absorbed into the military, but just another branch of the military, like the National Guard or the Coast Guard. This makes police officers accountable to military court tribunals, instills military discipline into our police force, and also strengthens our police force. Essentially, I want to eliminate police brutality but strengthen the power of our police force. A secret police is really more for government officials than the people, although with terrorism nowadays, people are important to watch as well. Government officials have way too much leeway when it comes to scandals, and as we can see with our new president, have dealings under the table that are important to uncover. I think that government surveillance is also very important. Obviously, I see the potential for wrongful accusations and wrongful imprisonment. To prevent this, there must be limits to what they can do, as in, they can't just seize people, they need warrants and still have to go through the due process just like any other police force.

 

I am going to respectfully ask some questions on the ideas that you support as follows:

1) I want to first ask you something that if you were to become president and do everything that you want to do with expanding the powers of the government would you trust the next president with those expanded powers?

If you would trust them why is that when you don't know who they will be?

2) So you want the Police to be held to the standard of military court and want to give them more firepower even though many people have long said that it would be a living nightmare to make the police a branch of the military. That just doesn't seem very wise nor does it sound like it will make them less brutal. On top of this a secret police that is it's own branch of the military whos boss is the head of a whole civil branch of government. I am sorry to have said this in the way I have but I have to ask: How on this earth would it fight what you think our new president is doing when in this case he would be their boss?

Also how do you know they will act any different than the FBI on Hillary where they will be overtaken by the billion dollar lobbyist cartel?

Actually what if the most corrupt use this new police force to jail the lest corrupt to keep corrupt official's from stepping out of line while also strong arming those who want to do the right thing.

 

Canada and the U.S. will both be Energy Self Sufficient by 2023.

AA

 

I agree...
and something that you wrote about a couple of years ago
can play a significant role in this happening.

Ocean acidification...

 

You may find this even more surprising........

The next 100 years.. Your predictions? List them. (Use this format)
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-them-use-this-format.507210/#post-1067639735

 

I also think that many within his administration would be very interested in a plan
originating in Canada, and in Louisiana, to alter the way that we look at money......
and what can potentially be accomplished by thinking in terms of a bigger picture.......

Jamie Baillie, Nova Scotia, Israel and Jordan.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/jamie-baillie-nova-scotia-israel-and-jordan.506627/

 

Sorry about this, forgot about it . Again, I wrote this a while ago when I was a naïve teenager. I stand by the fact that corruption is obviously an issue to deal with. As far as trusting the next president with expanded powers, everything is within the bounds of the US Constitution. Nowhere have I contradicted that. As such, the people ultimately decide who stays in power. We can see the pushback to Trump, and he has barely violated the Constitution. I would trust any president because I know that there are measures to remove the president from office if necessary.

As for the second. I am on the verge of entering our armed forces soon. The US military does not serve the president of the United States, but the Constitution of the United States. Contrary to popular belief, it is non-partisan (which, of course, has been hard for some people to understand). Similarly, the police force, I would argue, should serve none but the US Constitution. We have had problems in both sectors with honor violations. Now, contrary to popular belief, soldiers who are in violation of honor get seriously grilled. I think that the issue with the police force is that they still go under the regular judiciary system if they are convicted of brutality, and ultimately get away with it a lot. We should hold them to the same standard that we hold our military, after all, both serve honorably (or at least should).

 

The CIA treats the US constitution like toilet paper and so does some parts of the Military related to intel collection. My father was in the navy for 6 years and I know that most of the Military is non-partisan though some of the leadership has become that way due to a number of factors over the years. I won't join our Military as I believe nearly war we have been in or are in is wrong, but that is just me.

There was a time when I was a naïve teenager and thought a number of ideas were good such as a federalized police force due to local abuses. Some of the things I supported back then would likely have made even your naïve teen views seem mild in some areas. I wasn't anti-gun, but for the promotion of tech advancement and population growth at nearly every cost.

But getting back to asking some questions, would you take on %25,50,75 or even nearly %100 of those in government to get them removed for corruption?

Because I think you would likely find many more holding office have illegal pay to play gig's doing on or other stuff that sways the way they vote on or support bills/laws than you think there are. If more than %50 of government officials in DC had to be arrested by this new police force due to discovered corruption then how would you explain this to the large corporate press that will surely try and paint the picture that you are arresting your "rivals" in mass though a police force that you created.

Also our Military has killed many civilians and I don't think that the standard is very high or else less people would be killed. I mean more in the middle east have been killed by the US than by Russia and they are the ones with the supposed lax standards. To be fair we bomb a lot more than they do, but the point is most of us don't really trust military court to care about the rest of us. Is there a way for the people to take care of it if a Military court choose to cover it's friends and say screw the rest of us?

I ask because there are many very logical reasons people don't want a Military police around the civilian population and there would likely be powerful united pushback on this idea of yours. How would you address the public accountability factor because like it or not we the people want a direct way to deal with a flaw in the system such as a Military cop just shooting someone because they slept with there wife that gets off the hook because he couldn't resist the urge. Currently we at lest have local election's for the chief of police and though there are many flaws it's better than nothing at all. In a military system you replace the representative republic with a dictatorship because that is what the Military really is at the end of the day. This is what my father that served told me about how it is and works having been in a branch of it for 6 years. Also it's not hard for me to see this being true myself and though it can be a good thing, I don't want the culture to bleed into cops pulling people over for stupid speeding tickets where we see Military cops donned in camo with an M-16/4 rife just to write up a ticket while feeling up the suspect just in case he might have done something else other than speeding with an itchy trigger finger waiting to shoot the person with a rife guilty of doing no more than go 10 miles over the posted speed limit.

About the measures to remove the president, how could that be done if nearly or all of congress is locked up for "corruption" by the secret police force?

 

What do you think of the statistic that over ninety percent of voters in D. C. cast their ballot for Hillary?


http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/district-of-colombia-results-plus.499268/


District of Colombia Results plus.....

 

Well considering Trump wants to drain the swamp and the swamp is DC....makes sense really.