WILL AN OBAMA DEFEAT PRODUCE MASS RIOTS?
By Marc Krieger
CLICK HERE to send this article to a friend!
The farcical spectacle of the US Presidential election should mercifully end in the coming days. After two years of interminable campaigning and both candidates spending upwards of US $1 billion on their campaigns, the United States will either re-elect Barack Hussein Obama or replace him with Willard Mitt Romney.
Admittedly, both candidates are two sides of the same coin and nothing will change regardless of who emerges victorious. Both men are deeply flawed. They spend most of their time fighting for the approbation of a fickle mob whilst working to enrich the connected insiders. They are devoid of leadership qualities and they agree on virtually every important issue. Both men favour the continuation of the Federal Reserve cabal along with the humongous welfare/warfare state that will inexorably bankrupt the United States. Regardless of who wins, the result is that America loses.
If Americans had any sense and wanted transformative change, then they would have elected Ron Paul. Ron Paul proposed revolutionary change. He advocated the abolition of the Federal Reserve, has repeatedly called for ending the American military empire and drastically reducing the role of the bloated and imperious federal government in Washington DC. Unlike other politicians, Dr Paul’s actions matched his rhetoric, but credulous and knavish Americans rejected him preferring instead to vote for demagogues like Obama and Romney.
Public opinion surveys at present paint an inconclusively close election and no one knows who will win. Perhaps the oligarchs have programmed the Diebold electronic voting machines to choose a winner and already know the result. Incidentally, many Americans cast their votes through electronic voting machines. However, these voting machines leave behind no paper trail, making them vulnerable to tampering or outright manipulation. This should eviscerate the notion of the United States having a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
Ultimately, the issue of who wins is irrelevant. However, the possibility of a disputed election, such as occurred in 2000 remains probable. Under the American system, voters do not elect the President directly. Rather, they indirectly elect a slate of electors representing their state. Each state receives a number of electoral votes equal to the number of Senators and Representatives it has in Congress. Each state receives a minimum of three electoral votes and some like California have fifty-five. The candidate who receives a majority of the 538 electoral votes becomes President. It is possible for someone to win the popular vote, but lose the electoral vote as happened in 2000.
Incidentally, few Americans know why the Framers of the Constitution created the Electoral College. In 1787, each state had disparate voting requirements. States in the Northeast tended to have broader suffrage whereas southern states tended to impose stricter property requirements. The Framers created the Electoral College so that a state with a broader franchise that allowed more people to vote did not exert a disproportionate influence when electing a President over a state with a more restrictive franchise. For example, if State A allowed women to vote and State B did not then state A would automatically double its influence by extending the vote to women and dilute the influence of State B.
Digressions aside, the possibility of a disputed election remains high, particularly given the racial chasm in the United States. A scenario that could unleash violence is if Obama loses a disputed election or happens to win the popular vote and lose the electoral vote. Were this to happen, I would expect rioting on par to what occurred in Los Angeles in 1992 to occur in America’s urban centres. The black Obamatron urban masses would riot, loot, and pillage if they felt that white people conspired to defeat Obama. Many of Obama’s followers exhibit symptoms akin to what members of religious cults display for their leaders, so irrational responses are likely. Given the racial antipathy that many of Obama’s black followers have towards whites, the possibility of violence exists.
If something like this were to happen on a national scale, it is possible that the government would declare martial law. This might result in the closing of borders, confiscation of guns, imposition of curfews, and an assortment of draconian measures to preserve state supremacy.
Some might dismiss my concerns, yet the possibility remains. The winner of the popular vote has lost the electoral vote four times in American history. Given the closeness of the election, the appalling state of the American economy, and the latent racial tension that exists in the United States, one cannot discount the possibility of violence.
My practical suggestion for those in the United States would be to have extra food, supplies, and ready access to firearms and ammunition. Additionally, I recommend going to the country or getting away from America’s urban centres should violence erupt. Again, I am not saying that this outcome will occur, but the possibility is high enough to warrant taking these practical steps.
In the meantime, do remember that this election is meaningless and that free places do exist abroad. Feel free to visit www.kriegercapital.biz if you are interested in emigration.
Managing Director of Krieger Capital