This is good! I just read another substacker’s post lamenting the way President Trump seems to have been “friendly” with the bad actors, like Putin or Kim. But these relationships are critical…. Wise words on opponents say, “Be close to your friends, but be CLOSER to your enemies.” This is why the whiny liberal perception is there. Trump knows how to hold the aces, and he knows how to play them when needed. We can only hope and pray that he will prevail. If not, then I would predict our forces will be involved in a large and chaotic war within a year or so. Our enemies will know our leaders are weak, and they will play their aces.
I was trained as an economist not a scientist and find your insights to be of enormous assistance in my own work. Applying critical thinking to economics is often determined by whatever school of economic thought to feed, house, educate and socialize them. I would like your ideas on how to tackle this vast problem. My study is to find a means of measuring the full economic impact on the US economy of allowing up to 50 million illegal aliens and their children into our nation who are I'll prepared to contribute anything of significance but require the use of resources to. My own study is that our economy suffers up to and more than 5 trillion of damage annually. If I am correct, then this is an issue far more important than any other. Do you agree?
John: I agree that allowing an unprecidented many millions of foreigners into the country, with essentially zero vetting and almost no tracking, is a guaranteed recipe for disaster. Because of the almost non-existent tracking, it is extremely difficult to accurately determine any of their effects (economic, criminal, sabotage, etc.) IMHO that was the intent of the parties who allowed this fiasco, so their accountability would be minimized.
We are here because too many were too self-absorbed to build strong relationships with our communities and God. Then too pre-occupied with the trivial to see the long range consequences of our neglect; and finally too overwhelmed by the truth to do anything but surrender to the collective insanity of psychopathic tribes.
Although I didn't write this article (below), it does reflect my views of the current political situation in the US. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything other than the US is about to make a binary choice, that being - voting for and electing:
1. extremely dangerous Marx-inspired leadership that is leaning favorably towards an authoritarian (oligarchy) government, that appears to be courting the concept of a global oligarchy for future generations - where our kids and grandkids "will own nothing, and be happy" . All in a very Orwellian "having-no-say" way however, similar to what we see in countries like China, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, and North Korea. NO, I don't mean the platitudinous Harris - She's totally incapable of leading anyone, just as Biden was and is incapable. I do mean the reprobates who have been pulling Biden's strings and are now pulling Harris's strings.
OR
2. leadership by a man with questionable morals back down a path of continued democracy, free enterprise, national security, restored law and order, and with the same common sense set of social values we have been living by until these Marxist ideologues began infesting our western-world left-leaning political parties, universities, and media.
For what it's worth, my choice would be No. 2 if I had the right to vote in the upcoming US election. Much like that of anyone who appreciates and enjoys the freedoms we have (thanks to the selfless efforts of our parents, grandparents, and great grandparents), but very much unlike those bent on having authoritarian control over anyone and everyone. And I sure don't want to be a party to, or a useful idiot of, those who so desperately do want that authoritarian control.
Russ Babcock
Canadian observer
Michael Taube: In the battle of imperfect presidential candidates, Donald Trump is the best choice
The former president is better equipped to handle the burden of leadership than Kamala Harris
Author of the article:
Michael Taube
Published Oct 30, 2024 • Last updated 2 days ago • 4 minute read
Yes, Donald Trump.
For all his flaws (and there are many), the businessman, reality TV star, former U.S. president and current Republican presidential candidate is a far better option over Vice-President Kamala Harris, his Democratic rival, in the Nov. 5 election. By a long shot, in fact.
“Ah-ha!” some of you are thinking. “You’re a Trump supporter! We knew it all along!”
No, I’m not. I would certainly be a Republican if I lived in the U.S., but I‘ve been fairly middle-of-the-road about Trump since the very start. I don’t regard him as either a conservative or a Republican. I also don’t regard him as “fascist,” “racist,” “far right” or the “devil in disguise.”
So, why am I endorsing him? Trump is a far more competent political leader on his worst day than Harris would ever be on her best.
Harris, a one-term California Senator of little importance, has long been regarded as a left-wing political lightweight. She ran in the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries and was polling in the single digits before dropping out. She only became the Democratic presidential nominee in 2024 when a weak, ineffective and feeble Joe Biden stepped aside on July 21 and endorsed her.
Harris leads Trump by less than 1 per cent on average in the popular vote. He never won the popular vote against Hillary Clinton (whom he beat in 2016) and Biden (who beat him in 2020), so that’s no surprise. In the all-important electoral college, most models show a slight lead for either Harris or Trump, with a significant number of toss-up states in play that will determine the final outcome.
Why hasn’t Harris been able to make significant gains against Trump? She’s weak and ineffective, too.
Her political and economic views are horrendous. Pro-abortion, pro-affirmative action and pro-gun control. She favours higher corporate taxes, is soft on illegal immigration and crime rates, and believes in more state-centric policies like public health care, sanctuary states and a Green New Deal. Harris is clearly a progressive’s progressive.
As for foreign policy, Harris is completely inexperienced and hopelessly inept. How would she be able to handle major wars between Russia and Ukraine or Israel and Hamas? How could she strike fear in the hearts of totalitarian regimes, rogue nations and terrorist organizations that want to obliterate the U.S. and its allies? That’s the problem — she couldn’t. America and the world would therefore be far less safe with Harris as president.
This wouldn’t be the case with Trump in the White House.
It’s no secret that Trump can be volatile and unpredictable. He often marches to the beat of his own drummer. He will argue with world leaders, the media and even members of his own cabinet. He doesn’t pay strict attention to briefing notes, and believes he knows more than the experts do. He’s expressed levels of admiration for controversial leaders like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un. He handled the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol poorly. He faced impeachment not once, but twice.
In spite of all this, the former president is better equipped to handle the burden of leadership than his political rival.
Trump wouldn’t be the second coming of former president Ronald Reagan or former Republican presidential nominee Barry Goldwater with respect to economic conservatism. He tends to favour using economic nationalism and the short-term implementation of tariffs as bargaining tools, which has frustrated many conservatives.
Nevertheless, Trump is more supportive in principle of free markets and private enterprise than Harris. Like most Republicans, he respects the need for tax cuts, economic growth, profitability and a competitive marketplace. He would also support fair trade policies, work with farmers and trade unions, and help middle-class Americans achieve greater economic success and prosperity.
Trump would be a stronger advocate for safety and security than Harris. He supports hard-working legal immigrants, and wants to crack down on illegal immigration. He will eliminate the black market for illegal weapons and drugs, appoint more right-leaning judges and make cross-border travel and trade quicker and more efficient. In that same vein, he would also push for more individual rights and freedoms. This includes his strong support for free speech and greater protections for Christian, Jewish and moderate Muslim communities across America.
As well, Trump would be a much stronger and more confident political leader on the international stage than Harris. He created a tense environment at times with some world leaders and international organizations. Nevertheless, he’s achieved more than his fair share in foreign affairs. He’s staunchly defended Israel and supported a new Middle East peace plan. He withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal, left the Paris Agreement, rolled back relations with Cuba and launched airstrikes against Syria. He pushed back against NATO, the G7 and the United Nations to make them more accountable, and became the first U.S. president to visit North Korea. Not a bad record, all things considered.
The 2024 presidential election could end up being one of the closest in American history. Many voters will likely bite their tongues when they go to the ballot boxes. In this battle of imperfect political candidates, the best choice is to give Trump a second (and final) term in the White House and make America great again.
Always appreciate your wisdom and rational thoughts amidst the chaos. Your reporting on election integrity and cases have been most useful and equally appreciated.
It's kinda cool to think that I've now voted for President Trump 3 times.
This is good! I just read another substacker’s post lamenting the way President Trump seems to have been “friendly” with the bad actors, like Putin or Kim. But these relationships are critical…. Wise words on opponents say, “Be close to your friends, but be CLOSER to your enemies.” This is why the whiny liberal perception is there. Trump knows how to hold the aces, and he knows how to play them when needed. We can only hope and pray that he will prevail. If not, then I would predict our forces will be involved in a large and chaotic war within a year or so. Our enemies will know our leaders are weak, and they will play their aces.
Gerry: TY. Clearly Trump is not a true "friend" of Putin or Kim — but the mainstream media is not capable of understanding such a subtlety.
Yep. Classic Sun Tzu. They would never have read his book. 👍
I was trained as an economist not a scientist and find your insights to be of enormous assistance in my own work. Applying critical thinking to economics is often determined by whatever school of economic thought to feed, house, educate and socialize them. I would like your ideas on how to tackle this vast problem. My study is to find a means of measuring the full economic impact on the US economy of allowing up to 50 million illegal aliens and their children into our nation who are I'll prepared to contribute anything of significance but require the use of resources to. My own study is that our economy suffers up to and more than 5 trillion of damage annually. If I am correct, then this is an issue far more important than any other. Do you agree?
John: I agree that allowing an unprecidented many millions of foreigners into the country, with essentially zero vetting and almost no tracking, is a guaranteed recipe for disaster. Because of the almost non-existent tracking, it is extremely difficult to accurately determine any of their effects (economic, criminal, sabotage, etc.) IMHO that was the intent of the parties who allowed this fiasco, so their accountability would be minimized.
Very well put, John. I couldn't agree with you more!
Thomas: Thank you.
We are here because too many were too self-absorbed to build strong relationships with our communities and God. Then too pre-occupied with the trivial to see the long range consequences of our neglect; and finally too overwhelmed by the truth to do anything but surrender to the collective insanity of psychopathic tribes.
John: Yes. I also say that too many people do not have the ability to do critical thinking.
Although I didn't write this article (below), it does reflect my views of the current political situation in the US. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything other than the US is about to make a binary choice, that being - voting for and electing:
1. extremely dangerous Marx-inspired leadership that is leaning favorably towards an authoritarian (oligarchy) government, that appears to be courting the concept of a global oligarchy for future generations - where our kids and grandkids "will own nothing, and be happy" . All in a very Orwellian "having-no-say" way however, similar to what we see in countries like China, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, and North Korea. NO, I don't mean the platitudinous Harris - She's totally incapable of leading anyone, just as Biden was and is incapable. I do mean the reprobates who have been pulling Biden's strings and are now pulling Harris's strings.
OR
2. leadership by a man with questionable morals back down a path of continued democracy, free enterprise, national security, restored law and order, and with the same common sense set of social values we have been living by until these Marxist ideologues began infesting our western-world left-leaning political parties, universities, and media.
For what it's worth, my choice would be No. 2 if I had the right to vote in the upcoming US election. Much like that of anyone who appreciates and enjoys the freedoms we have (thanks to the selfless efforts of our parents, grandparents, and great grandparents), but very much unlike those bent on having authoritarian control over anyone and everyone. And I sure don't want to be a party to, or a useful idiot of, those who so desperately do want that authoritarian control.
Russ Babcock
Canadian observer
Michael Taube: In the battle of imperfect presidential candidates, Donald Trump is the best choice
The former president is better equipped to handle the burden of leadership than Kamala Harris
Author of the article:
Michael Taube
Published Oct 30, 2024 • Last updated 2 days ago • 4 minute read
Yes, Donald Trump.
For all his flaws (and there are many), the businessman, reality TV star, former U.S. president and current Republican presidential candidate is a far better option over Vice-President Kamala Harris, his Democratic rival, in the Nov. 5 election. By a long shot, in fact.
“Ah-ha!” some of you are thinking. “You’re a Trump supporter! We knew it all along!”
No, I’m not. I would certainly be a Republican if I lived in the U.S., but I‘ve been fairly middle-of-the-road about Trump since the very start. I don’t regard him as either a conservative or a Republican. I also don’t regard him as “fascist,” “racist,” “far right” or the “devil in disguise.”
So, why am I endorsing him? Trump is a far more competent political leader on his worst day than Harris would ever be on her best.
Harris, a one-term California Senator of little importance, has long been regarded as a left-wing political lightweight. She ran in the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries and was polling in the single digits before dropping out. She only became the Democratic presidential nominee in 2024 when a weak, ineffective and feeble Joe Biden stepped aside on July 21 and endorsed her.
Harris leads Trump by less than 1 per cent on average in the popular vote. He never won the popular vote against Hillary Clinton (whom he beat in 2016) and Biden (who beat him in 2020), so that’s no surprise. In the all-important electoral college, most models show a slight lead for either Harris or Trump, with a significant number of toss-up states in play that will determine the final outcome.
Why hasn’t Harris been able to make significant gains against Trump? She’s weak and ineffective, too.
Her political and economic views are horrendous. Pro-abortion, pro-affirmative action and pro-gun control. She favours higher corporate taxes, is soft on illegal immigration and crime rates, and believes in more state-centric policies like public health care, sanctuary states and a Green New Deal. Harris is clearly a progressive’s progressive.
As for foreign policy, Harris is completely inexperienced and hopelessly inept. How would she be able to handle major wars between Russia and Ukraine or Israel and Hamas? How could she strike fear in the hearts of totalitarian regimes, rogue nations and terrorist organizations that want to obliterate the U.S. and its allies? That’s the problem — she couldn’t. America and the world would therefore be far less safe with Harris as president.
This wouldn’t be the case with Trump in the White House.
It’s no secret that Trump can be volatile and unpredictable. He often marches to the beat of his own drummer. He will argue with world leaders, the media and even members of his own cabinet. He doesn’t pay strict attention to briefing notes, and believes he knows more than the experts do. He’s expressed levels of admiration for controversial leaders like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un. He handled the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol poorly. He faced impeachment not once, but twice.
In spite of all this, the former president is better equipped to handle the burden of leadership than his political rival.
Trump wouldn’t be the second coming of former president Ronald Reagan or former Republican presidential nominee Barry Goldwater with respect to economic conservatism. He tends to favour using economic nationalism and the short-term implementation of tariffs as bargaining tools, which has frustrated many conservatives.
Nevertheless, Trump is more supportive in principle of free markets and private enterprise than Harris. Like most Republicans, he respects the need for tax cuts, economic growth, profitability and a competitive marketplace. He would also support fair trade policies, work with farmers and trade unions, and help middle-class Americans achieve greater economic success and prosperity.
Trump would be a stronger advocate for safety and security than Harris. He supports hard-working legal immigrants, and wants to crack down on illegal immigration. He will eliminate the black market for illegal weapons and drugs, appoint more right-leaning judges and make cross-border travel and trade quicker and more efficient. In that same vein, he would also push for more individual rights and freedoms. This includes his strong support for free speech and greater protections for Christian, Jewish and moderate Muslim communities across America.
As well, Trump would be a much stronger and more confident political leader on the international stage than Harris. He created a tense environment at times with some world leaders and international organizations. Nevertheless, he’s achieved more than his fair share in foreign affairs. He’s staunchly defended Israel and supported a new Middle East peace plan. He withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal, left the Paris Agreement, rolled back relations with Cuba and launched airstrikes against Syria. He pushed back against NATO, the G7 and the United Nations to make them more accountable, and became the first U.S. president to visit North Korea. Not a bad record, all things considered.
The 2024 presidential election could end up being one of the closest in American history. Many voters will likely bite their tongues when they go to the ballot boxes. In this battle of imperfect political candidates, the best choice is to give Trump a second (and final) term in the White House and make America great again.
National Post
Russ: I agree with your personal assessment, and the sentiments expressed by the article you referenced.
Always appreciate your wisdom and rational thoughts amidst the chaos. Your reporting on election integrity and cases have been most useful and equally appreciated.
It's kinda cool to think that I've now voted for President Trump 3 times.
Aaron: Your appreciation is much appreciated.
John,
I did step back before I voted. I know what Smart Woman is! I married one 56 years ago.
Dan Smith
Dan: Good analogy.