Our proposal ensures against any lack of coalescing
in such electoral college incarnations which would be thrown to the House. It can also be seen as
getting to the point quicker which may come in handy if similarly applied to party conventions as
opposed to using multiple rounds. The last sentence of our proposal said:
You may ask what should happen if a very unlikely case of greater-than-three tied victors occurs
in the electoral college's range vote. In that case, the House would first whittle down to three
victors by a regular vote yielding the highest three candidate tallies or if occurs any further embedded, stumbler ties
the House eliminates them from there in like manner. They may also option for a range ballot or to call for drawing of lots
by the campaigns involved. After that, a state-by-state quorum would follow based on those three
final candidates.
Wouldn't it be nice to see the interparty debates having more than just a Democrat and Republican?
The networks were fine with carrying a slew of intraparty debates with several or many candidates on stage.
Can't we now handle 4-5 candidates participating in a few interparty debates as well? If they want to limit the
participants to say three, then the candidates could rotate based on their parties through several debates
giving an absent candidate or two a break to campaign elsewhere and commenting on a particular debate the next day.
If the stronger third-parties or independents are excluded in order to protect the Democrat-Republican
paradigm then there should be a release-valve of follow-up debates consisting of the thirds and
independents where clips from the two-party debates are played and the true outsider candidates
can then respond to the questions that were posed and comment on the Democrat and Republican responses. Such a
debate should not be relegated just to small venues but carried on the major networks. PBS/NPR
should be drafted by the people to carry this out nationally should no other major networks do so.
PBS/NPR are funded by the government and by donations of the people and therefore owe it to the
electorate to provide such service nationally. We do recognize and appreciate that local carriers
of public broadcasting do allow minor candidates to engage the public in debates.
Talking of networks, we do wish to expose some of the biased coverage concerning the violence at Trump
rallies. Depending on the broadcaster or presenter there were instances of obvious editorializing of those
events. It was acted as if the violence was totally Trump's
fault because of his America-first positions or bombastic delivery and therefore his rhetoric is what is to blame. No, the truth
is that radical leftists invaded those rallies and disrupted them while attacking Trump supporters.
HEY - Trump and his supporters have right to peaceably assemble and speak their own views.
Obviously the disruptors where invasive leftists who favor candidates like Clinton and Sanders. The
older, institutional hearsay media wants to explicitly or by insinuation conclude that Trump supporters
are inherently violent and that his rhetoric makes otherwise rational people go violently beserk and so his
ideas and presence are justifiably denied. Again no -- if all attendees at those rallies were Trump supporters
there would have been no major incidents. The Trumpers' real problem is that they are likely too trusting of Trump's
record. We lay all this on the psychological conditioning of the populace further down this page.
We do recognize the controversy with his then campaign manager shoving the reporter and the
attendee sucker-punching the detainee, but those were more isolated and reactionary instances as
opposed to the premeditated leftist/anarchist rent-a-mob types who want to quell any free speech
or campaign that is in oppostion to them and their sacrosanct views. However, we are not clearing
the Trump campaign of thuggish tactics as we will discuss delegate intimidation in the Trump sections
to follow.
Now if we do not open the electoral process more for the 2016 election then you will have only
two main, overpowering options concerning president:
We don't expect perfection but these candidates are far from a good option to solve the
nation's problems and they will not preserve our freedoms so there is not much to really lose by fully attempting
a third-party approach. Hopefully the third-party candidates will get
greater exposure and become better options though they still may not be fully reservist in
their stances and approach. If one or two of them can muster just a 2-3% weekly growth rate in the polls from August
to election day, then they will be competitive with the two-main party candidates in the electorate
leanings. To ensure this we have to start giving money to the alternative candidates. It takes money to carry out a campaign
and just $15 a month from each of the many independent-oriented voters will make quite a difference. Buy their campaign signs,
bumper stickers and apparel. Spread the word to your friends about them. Greater exposure has a
snowball effect.
Keep in mind that we are dealing with psychological conditioning of the population as much as
politics. The diehard supporters of Clinton and Trump are cultists who are in denial of all the
evidence about Clinton's corruption and Trump's contradictory record and both of their characters.
No matter what red flags, facts or situations these candidates have on their records -- the diehards
will accept any weak, dubious, incomplete, unfactual or absurd reasoning or excuse to still believe
in the rhetoric of their candidate. It's the two-party mentality of 'my-party-always-right' and
'other-party-always-wrong'. All a society needs is a mixture of some authority, habitual thinking,
apathy and gullibility plus the overriding desire for the diehards to win at all cost to achieve this state of affairs.
This is why we would rather risk having governance of a lesser perfect, third-party outsider than a
polished two-party candidate that will lead in many wrong directions while not being held to account
for their failing approach or promises.
We emplore citizens in the time remaining to lobby their state and
local governments to ease ballot access for true outsiders -- the simultaneously non-Democrats and
non-Republicans. If you are ignored then it is time for rebellion. Gather in the squares and demand
an end to the two-party electoral system. Just sitting back and voting the habitual, "safe" & convenient way will
only yield the same results we keep getting which is taking us to destruction.
Near term don't be unaware of all the choices you have on the ballot already, including the better of the
two-party candidates. One place you can research all state and federal candidates is at Politics1.
Please do your homework on congressional and local races as they will be
important to counter or balance the possible effects of the presidential outcome - which while
important receives too much of the attention.
To further push these electoral ideas, we leave you similar as in the last installment with a sample ballot
that this time represents a direct range-vote election for president. Where some parties have yet to determine
a nominee as of this posting, the party name was entered instead. Pass it around to your friends
to enlighten them as to what we are missing due to our enslavement within the two-party, majority-plurality electoral
system. And don't forget - you can play with the ballot buttons.
'Former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has joined forces with his 2012 rival, President Obama, to fight a lawsuit charging
the Commission on Presidential Debates with antitrust violations.' ~ By SEAN HIGGINS • 1/15/16 5:02 PM
This article demonstrates the arseholes Obama and Romney really are.
They and their party elites are nothing but a bunch of anti-representative government goons! THEY ARE AGAINST THE PEOPLE!!!
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/romney-obama-join-forces-in-lawsuit-against-debate-commission/article/2580665
'Yet, the private Commission on Presidential Debates, created in 1987 by the Democratic and Republican parties, has created a debate duopoly
that makes it virtually impossible for candidates other than the Republican and Democrat nominees to participate. '
Don't take to the
streets to support cop-killers. Instead take to the streets to open up our debates and ballots in this country!
https://www.ouramericainitiative.com/presidential-debate-commission.html
'They do so by using a rule excluding every candidate who fails to poll at at least 15% support in five polls chosen by them (which often only ask about the two major party nominees).'
'Internationally, few places use a polling threshold to exclude candidates for office, and those that do set polling thresholds lower than 15% – in fact, 5% is more typical.'
` ~ Drew Spencer, originally published on FairVote’s blog on April 15, 2016
Note that thwarting the votes of the people and excluding all but a few parties has been cause for revolution in other countries.
http://ivn.us/2016/04/15/fairvote-joins-lawsuit-to-open-presidential-debates/
'The issue has taken on a new life in 2016 as polling data has borne out Americans’ frustration with the two-party system.'
'There has been a movement of people registering as independents, with several states now boasting pluralities — or in the case
of Massachusetts, a majority of registered voters unaffiliated with any party.' ~ By Jonathan Easley and Ben Kamisar - 05/12/16 06:00 AM EDT
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/279624-third-party-candidates-face-uphill-climb-to-get-place-on-presidential
'San Diego police reported that approximately 300 to 400 protesters gathered outside of Trump's event, which led to four arrests for
"for incidents including assault with a deadly weapon and unlawful assembly," Officer Albert Morales said in a statement.' ~ By JOHN SANTUCCI, CANDACE SMITH, DAVID CAPLAN | Jun 3, 2016 - 5:50 PM ET
The keyword this case is 'outside'. Yet whether inside or outside of the Trump events the disruptors are
obviously of the leftist inclination.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/violence-breaks-trump-rally-san-jose-protesters-hurl/story?id=39576437
Their justification of violence at Trump rallies:
'Violence that takes place at Trump rallies—in support or opposition—is a reaction to the tone he’s set, and the blame for it should land primarily on his shoulders.'
'Understanding European anti-fascists use of violent tactics to shut down large rallies from White Supremacists can be illustrative here.' ~
Jesse Benn - 06/06/2016 05:08 pm 17:08:14 | Updated Jun 06, 2016
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn/sorry-liberals-a-violent-_b_10316186.html
“He set a bad example,” Clinton said on CNN. “He created an environment in which it seemed to be acceptable for someone running for
president to be inciting violence, to be encouraging his supporters. Now we are seeing people who are against it respond in kind.” ~ By ALLEGRA KIRKLAND | Published JUNE 4, 2016, 11:12 AM EDT
Or is it more the other way around? It first started with leftists coming into his events and
then having to be thrown out for heckling and disrupting. Trump then began to react to their tactics
which got more and more intense. Any group or individual should be able to advocate for use of reasonable force
against those who disrupt the right of peaceful assembly.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/sanders-san-jose-trump-rally-violence-unacceptable
'I have previously defended nonviolent protests that disrupt Trump rallies, like when Bernie Sanders supporters and Black Lives Matters activists flooded into a rally in Chicago, singing songs and
chanting slogans, which caused Trump to cancel the rally in fear.' ~ Ryan Cooper June 6 2016
The keywords here are 'disrupt' and 'fear'. Note also 'flooding' and 'chanting'. In today's America, leftists are usually the ones
who impede the right of others to peaceably assemble and discuss their views.
http://theweek.com/articles/627995/why-america-better-prepare-onslaught-violence-trump-rallies
'The Establishment on both the left and the right, who want to disenfranchise the millions of Republican voters who support Donald Trump,
have blamed the staged riots near Trump rallies on Trump or on Bernie Sanders. That’s like blaming the Russians for the Reichstag Fire.
Bernie has little to do with these manufactured protests. This is a Clinton operation, a faux protest.' ~ ROGER STONE | 9:48 AM 03/21/2016
With Clinton's record of tactics we would
not be surprised if her operatives were to blame behind at least some the scenes.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/21/clinton-and-soros-are-behind-violent-riots-at-trump-rallies-not-sanders/
'Clinton Foundation donations have also been linked to State Department favors for weapons manufacturers and foreign governments.
Peter Schweitzer’s book, Clinton Cash, cites four trustees of the Clinton Foundation charged with or convicted of financial crimes.
Aside from the security risks her private email server posed, evidence suggests Clinton’s intent was not convenience, but rather to
circumvent FOIA laws.' ~ By Michael Sainato • 07/13/16 8:00am
http://observer.com/2016/07/up-next-for-the-fbi-clinton-foundation-corruption/
“Schweizer lays out compelling patterns in which the timing of policy decisions or international deals relative to
donations, transcends coincidence - or at least, merits closer inspection. He narrates with crisp prose and illuminating
detail.” ~ Forbes review
https://www.amazon.com/Clinton-Cash-Foreign-Governments-Businesses/dp/0062369288
'People don't have a lot of "impromptu meetings" in private jets sitting on airport tarmacs. As ABC15 Arizona reported, [Bill] Clinton arrived to
the airport to depart, heard Lynch was en route to that airport and then waited for her arrival. Maybe it was just dumb luck that this
happened only a day before the Benghazi report was released by Congress, and a few days after the Associated Press published another
165 pages of emails then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sent via her unsanctioned and unsecure private email server and did not want
anyone to see. ' ~ David Harsanyi | July 1, 2016
http://reason.com/archives/2016/07/01/clinton-and-lynchcorruption-not-optics
'According to the official statement of FBI director, James Comey, agency experts were unable to recover information from Clinton’s
wiped-clean server, and Clinton’s legal team claims there are no backups. Thus the contents of the 30,000 deleted “private” emails
are not known unless they are in the hands of foreign intelligence hackers, who could deploy them to influence the 2016 election,
blackmail a President Clinton once in office, or to embarrass her and the United States.' ~ Paul Roderick Gregory - JUL 9, 2016 @ 11:46 AM
http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2016/07/09/its-the-30000-wiped-clean-clinton-e-mails/#472ff2d2467f
'And former CIA director David Petraeus has stated that the US government ascertained that the Benghazi massacre was a coordinated act
of terrorism "almost immediately." State Department documents and Hillary's own virtual paper trail affirm this. The Secretary of
State understood the truth, with clarity. She shared it with her own daughter and with foreign diplomats, while serving up a fiction
to the American people, including heartbroken family members of the deceased.'
'The Obama administration claimed that all relevant information had been provided years ago, and Democrats have assailed the current
investigation as redundant and partisan -- yet the Benghazi Select Committee is just now receiving these emails from Patrick Kennedy,
a high-ranking Clinton subordinate at the center of this and several other controversies. In fact, State officials are saying that are
so many previously-unreleased, relevant documents in need of review that they were unable to fully comply with the federal judge's
orders on time. ' ~ Guy Benson | Posted: Jan 04, 2016 10:25 AM
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/01/04/hillary-im-not-lying-so-the-benghazi-families-must-be-n2099353
'Hillary Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, combined to earn more than $153 million in paid speeches
from 2001 until Hillary Clinton launched her presidential campaign last spring, a CNN analysis shows.'
'The Clinton campaign has been noncommittal about releasing transcripts of the paid speeches and Clinton has told reporters
that she will "look into" making her remarks public.' ~ By Robert Yoon, CNN
Updated 1:15 PM ET, Sat February 6, 2016
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-paid-speeches/
'Hillary Clinton's speaking fees have been the subject of much political debate.'
'What's more, the investigation revealed that many of the groups had federal contracts or lobbied the Clinton State
Department. Some even had direct contact with Clinton or her top aides while she was secretary of state.'
'See all the fees the AP discovered in the graphic....' ~ By Lindsey Cook | Data Editor April 22, 2016, at 11:32 a.m.
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-04-22/heres-who-paid-hillary-clinton-22-million-in-speaking-fees
'Mrs. Clinton’s financial disclosure forms show that she reported personal income of more than $11 million for 51 speeches
in 13 months. Yet she has not defined how she and Mr. Clinton decide which fees are personal income and which go directly
to charity. Normally, the IRS doesn’t let taxpayers pick and choose. But this is no normal family, nor is it a normal
charity.' ~ FEB 9, 2016 @ 08:42 AM | Robert W. Wood
http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2016/02/09/hillarys-wall-street-speech-fees-hers-or-clinton-foundations/#6c85e0946232
'It is difficult to imagine no breach of ethics when a high-profile, presumptive candidate for president is paid more
than $21 million in less than two years for almost no work from corporate, healthcare, investment banks and other concerns,
only to announce one month after the speaking tour has ended that she is indeed running for president. ' ~ Published on
Monday, February 22, 2016 | By Howard Friel
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/02/22/hillary-clintons-pay-play-speaking-fees-disqualify-her-presidential-candidate
'She did not intend to break the law and would not be prosecuted even if the evidence showed she did –
a precedent coming about three days too late for a U.S. Navy seaman who pleaded guilty Friday to using his
cellphone to take pictures inside restricted areas of a nuclear submarine and keeping them, in violation of
the rules for handling classified materials.'
'The most troubling thing, which will ultimately be left to the voters to work out for themselves, is how she and her
minions lied to the public at just about every turn. She wanted everything on one device. There were no private servers.
There were private servers but no classified materials were sent through them. There are as many excuses and denials as
there are emails – some of which have probably been destroyed, contrary to the provisions of federal record-keeping acts
that are in place just to prevent things like this from ever happening.' ~ By Peter Roff | Contributing Editor
July 5, 2016, at 6:00 p.m.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-07-05/fbi-email-investigation-shows-hillary-clinton-lied-and-got-away-with-it
“When my mother says she’s going to vote for Hillary Clinton because she’s a woman, to me that is identity politics at its
worst,” Soldati tells Quartz. “It’s putting the value of a female president over the value of a president with your values.”
'And as far as they’re concerned, Clinton stands at the apex of the establishment pyramid, one that is entrenched in the
power politics of Washington, far removed from the average young American. She’s just another politician, and that class
as a whole should not be trusted.'
'Hillary fans say that having a woman at the helm in the White House would provide much stronger support for policies that
are critical for women, like equal pay, paid maternity and family leave, universal child care, and reproductive rights.'
~ Hanna Kozlowska February 24, 2016
http://qz.com/623503/why-young-women-reject-hillary-clintons-brand-of-feminism/
'Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, was forced to resign after
Wikileak unloaded thousands of e-mails including some that proved top DNC staff plotted
to sabotage Sanders’ presidential hopes'.
'But then Hillary Clinton issued a statement extolling Wasserman Schultz’s tenure and
announcing thst she would become honorary campaign chair of her presidential campaign.' ~ By Steven Rosenfeld / July 24, 2016
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/chaotic-start-dnc-wasserman-shultz-resigns-disgrace-only-be-elevated-clinton-key
'As for Trump's Cruz-is-a-politics-as-usual D.C. insider lie, Mr. Trump cannot have it both ways. Remember when Trump said both parties
in Washington hate Cruz, citing Cruz's outsider status as a negative, making him unable to make deals?'
'In reality, Trump is the D.C. insider, hiring lobbyists and paying politicians for decades. Trump admits being friendly and ready to make
deals with extreme partisan Democrats. ' ~ April 28, 2016 by Lloyd Marcus
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/04/trumps_three_huge_lies_about_cruz.html
'He called Ted Cruz a liar in debate after Cruz said Trump supported funding Planned Parenthood – but Trump does support funding Planned
Parenthood’s “non-abortion services,” a completely nonsensical position'
'Trump says that Cruz lied about Ben Carson dropping out of the race in Iowa; we’ve dealt with the entire timeline here. Suffice it to say,
that’s nonsense. Carson gave indicators he was dropping out to CNN, which reported it, and the Cruz campaign told people about it. End of
story. ' ~ BY: BEN SHAPIRO | FEBRUARY 17, 2016
http://www.dailywire.com/news/3451/so-whos-real-liar-cruz-trump-or-rubio-ben-shapiro
'Donald Trump agrees with the liberal SCOTUS majority and The New York Times that eminent-domain for corporate gain is marvelous
Trump loves eminent domain for limousine parking lots and other corporate projects.'
'All Democratic presidential candidates for decades have supported mandates and subsidies for ethanol. The most conservative Republicans
— Cruz and Rand Paul — opposed them. Trump was the most pro-ethanol of the major GOP candidates.' ~ By TIMOTHY P. CARNEY (@TPCARNEY) • 2/26/16 - 5:15 PM
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/yes-trump-is-the-liberal-republican-in-the-race/article/2584381
'And yet Trump still believes in a critical Washington role. He’s backed a proposal to create a national health-care system —
Trumpcare anyone? — similar to one offered to federal employees that is government run.'
'Yet if American companies continue to move to Mexico or other countries, Trump repeated his promise in Las Vegas to slap a 35% tariff
on any goods they try to send back to the United States.' ~ Published: Feb 24, 2016 10:36 a.m. ET | By JEFFRY BARTASH
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-is-the-most-liberal-republican-on-economics-since-nixon-2015-12-14
'But what does Donald Trump really believe on policy? It’s hard to tell — his campaign will identify no policy director, he has no “issues”
tab on his campaign website and he hasn’t given any substantive policy speeches on the campaign trail.'
'Given an opportunity earlier this month to revise his view of unions, Trump did not. “I have great relationships with unions,” he told
Newsweek’s Matthew Cooper. Trump is himself a union member, collecting a $110,228 annual pension from the Screen Actors Guild, according
to his financial disclosure.'
' Trump proposed a 35 percent tax on “every car and every truck and every part” manufactured by American automakers in Mexico that crosses
into the U.S. Trump also favors a 20 percent tariff on all imported goods and a 15 percent tax “for outsourcing jobs.” ~ By TIMOTHY NOAH 07/26/15 | 07:47 AM EDT
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/will-the-real-donald-trump-please-stand-up-120607
'Donald Trump was a registered Democrat for a number of years, and has frequently contributed to the campaigns of liberal Democrats like
Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid, while rarely contributing to Republicans. He favors policies that all but the most left-wing Democrats
shy away from, like socialized medicine.' ~ POSTED ON FEBRUARY 15, 2016 BY JOHN HINDERAKER
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/02/is-donald-trump-a-liberal-democrat.php
'He said the New York Times has a "secret tape" of Trump saying that "he doesn't believe what he's saying on immigration."
"That all of his promises to secure the borders are not real and if he's president he doesn't intend to do what he says," Cruz said.'
"Donald Trump should ask The New York Times to release the audio of his interview with him so we can see exactly what it is he truly
believes about this issue that he has made the cornerstone of his campaign," Rubio said in a news release.' ~ February 29, 2016, 04:46 pm - By Rebecca Savransky
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/271187-new-york-times-refusing-to-release-off-the-record-tape-of-trump-on
'Throughout his wildly inconsistent presidential campaign, the erratic billionaire has routinely taken one position one day and the
opposite the next. And in many cases, observers can wait a week or so and find that the Donald has reversed himself a few more times.'
'Then, just last week, he appeared to further throw any notion of fiscal conservatism out the window, asserting that the U.S. won’t ever
default on its debt because it can always print more money.' ~ BY ADAM EDELMAN Updated: Saturday, May 14, 2016, 5:20 PM
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election/trump-flip-flops-small-handful-donald-policy-shifts-article-1.2637066
'Trump has often channeled Sanders as a kindred spirit, arguing that both were being kept down by a "rigged system" and applauding his stance on trade.' ~ June 07, 2016, 09:25 pm - By Ben Kamisar
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/282619-trump-welcomes-sanders-supporters-left-out-in-the-cold
'Up until now, of course, candidates have just released their tax returns as a matter of good practice. The public and pundits are used
to it. But only tradition requires releasing the returns. It is part of the ’nothing to hide’ candidate vetting.' ~ JUL 13, 2016 @ 09:08 AM - Robert W. Wood
http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2016/07/13/man-offers-5-million-for-trump-tax-returns/#298099a36475
'Another Utah delegate, Stefani Stone Williams, received an intimidating email from Carl Paladino, the co-chairman of Trump's New York campaign.....
"You should be hung [sic] for treason Stefani," Paladino wrote. "There will not be a Republican Party if you attempt to replace Trump. I'll be in your face in Cleveland." ~ By THOMAS BURR | The Salt Lake Tribune - Jul 18 2016 07:29PM
http://www.sltrib.com/home/4130621-155/you-should-die-trump-supporters-threaten
'It’s a noticeable shift away from the slash-and-burn approach of Trump’s campaign manager
Corey Lewandowski, who some party insiders blame for cultivating, or at least enabling, Trump’s
brasher tendencies. One state party leader, who requested anonymity, described the intimidation
tactics coming from Trump supporters as part of “Corey culture.” ~ By Eli Stokols and Kyle Cheney
04/22/16 05:06 AM EDT
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/delegates-face-death-threats-from-trump-supporters-222302#ixzz4EqszoOeJ
Psychological Conditioning
It would seem that psychological conditioning of the populace keeps them surrendering to the two-party electoral tactics
despite the parties taking us to our obvious doom:
All you need is some authority and habitual thinking in order to manipulate people into submission to the powers that be as
Milgram's obedience experiment showed.
https://youtu.be/fCVlI-_4GZQ
We see how the two-party mentality of ' Us vs. Them ' is a systemic extension of Zimbardo's infamous prison experiment at Stanford.
https://youtu.be/oAX9b7agT9o
Hoover
'Far from being a bystander, Hoover actively intervened in the economy, advocating and implementing polices that were quite
similar to those that Franklin Roosevelt later implemented. Moreover, many of Hoover's interventions, like those of his
successor, caused the Great Depression to be “great”—that is, to last a long time.'
'Hoover proposed, and Congress approved, the largest peacetime tax increase in U.S. history. The Revenue Act of 1932
increased personal income taxes dramatically, but also brought back a variety of excise taxes that had been used during
World War I.'
'On top of that increase, the Act placed a large surtax on higher-income earners, leading to a total tax rate of anywhere
from 25 to 63%. The Act also raised the corporate income tax along with several taxes on other forms of income and wealth.'
'Roosevelt’s own advisors understood that much of what they created during the New Deal owed its origins to Hoover’s
policies, going as far back as his time at the Commerce Department in the 1920s.' ~ by Steven Horwitz
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/HooversEconomicPolicies.html
'In response to the stock market crash of 1929, however, protectionism gained strength, and, though the tariff legislation
subsequently passed only by a narrow margin (44–42) in the Senate, it passed easily in the House of Representatives.
Despite a petition from more than 1,000 economists urging him to veto the legislation, Hoover signed the bill into law
on June 17, 1930.'
'Smoot-Hawley contributed to the early loss of confidence on Wall Street and signaled U.S. isolationism. By raising the
average tariff by some 20 percent, it also prompted retaliation from foreign governments, and many overseas banks began
to fail.'
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Smoot-Hawley-Tariff-Act
Mao
'Mao was the leader of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) from 1935 until his death, and he was chairman (chief of state)
of the People’s Republic of China from 1949 to 1959 and chairman of the party also until his death.' ~ Written by: Stuart Reynolds Schram
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mao-Zedong
Bull Moose Party
'True to Roosevelt's progressive beliefs, the platform of the party called for major reforms including women's suffrage,
social welfare assistance for women and children, farm relief, revisions in banking, health insurance in industries, and
worker's compensation. The party also wanted an easier method to amend the constitution.'
'Roosevelt shared many of the progressive policies of Wilson yet his core support came from Republicans who defected from the party.' ~ By Martin Kelly
American History Expert
http://americanhistory.about.com/od/politicalparties/p/bull_moose.htm
'But the most clear parallel is to 1912, when, then as now, a celebrity candidate swept in and threw the GOP establishment
off balance. It was Theodore Roosevelt, a showman if ever there was one, like Trump today.' ~ By Kenneth T. Walsh | March 11, 2016, at 6:00 a.m.
http://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2016-03-11/will-trump-launch-the-next-bull-moose-party
' We can take the reins of power away from the ruling elites. We can rewrite the rules of the game, resurrect the middle
class, and fulfill the people's vision of the American dream. Join with us today, and together we—the new Progressive Bull
Moose Party—will clean out the U.S. Congress and sweep away the political and economic tyranny that the Democratic and
Republican parties have proven so utterly incapable and unwilling to stop.'
http://www.progressivebullmoose.party/