It Turns Out the Bolsheviks Love the Top 1%

Notes From The Field By Simon Black 

 February 12, 2020 Bahia Beach, Puerto Rico

One of the really interesting things about where I live here in Puerto Rico is that my house is located within the grounds of a resort… so I bump into a fair number of tourists when I’m at the gym or walking on the beach. People engage me in conversation a lot-- they can’t imagine actually living in such a paradise, and they’re full of questions about what it’s like.

I always enjoy talking about Puerto Rico and giving visitors a candid view of the advantages and disadvantages of living here. But almost invariably as part of that conversation, someone asks:

“Yeah, but don’t you lose the right to vote when you move here?”

Yes, it’s true that Puerto Rican residents cannot vote in a national election. Puerto Rico does hold a presidential primary. But once the party nominees are decided, Puerto Ricans cannot participate in the general election in November.

And I’ve heard this dozens of times since I moved to Puerto Rico in 2018-- it seems people REALLY cling to their right to vote.

My view is that it’s a completely pointless exercise, and one that I was happy to trade for Puerto Rico’s generous tax incentives.

I always respond in the same way when people bring up this issue-- “Do you really think your vote actually counts?”

And what’s happened so far this month in the primary race really proves the point.

Just look at the Iowa race; the party is so hapless and incompetent that they can’t manage to properly count the votes (yet these same people want to be in charge of your healthcare and children’s education…)

And when they do count the votes, it still doesn’t seem to matter.

More people voted for Bernie Sanders in the Iowa race than for any other candidate. Yet Pete Buttigieg ‘won’ the state because he received the most delegates.

Then there are ‘superdelegates’, i.e. party elders who can choose whichever candidate they want regardless of who the voters pick.

And of course, by the time the national convention takes place this summer, it’s entirely possible that no single candidate will have won enough delegates to lock up the nomination.

At that point, all the votes will be discarded and it will be up to the party insiders-- delegates and superdelegates-- to decide who the nominee should be.

How can these people possibly say with a straight face that votes actually matter?

The even bigger quirk is the outsized importance of these earliest caucuses and primary races.

About 300,000 people voted yesterday in the New Hampshire primary. That’s less than 0.1% of the US population.

And yet those 300,000 New Hampshire voters have enormous influence over the entire Presidential race.

Joe Biden came in a distant 5th in yesterday’s New Hampshire primary. As a result, the media is now saying that he is no longer viable, and his former campaign donors are lining up to fund other candidates.

But in actuality the gap between Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders (who came in first place) was just 50,522 votes.

Nationwide, that’s a drop in the bucket. It’s scarcely a rounding error.

That’s 50,522 people in New Hampshire who have effectively sealed the fate of Joe Biden’s campaign.

And if he drops out in the next few weeks, it means that people who live in states that don’t hold their primaries until May or June won’t even have the opportunity to vote for Joe Biden.

Don’t get me wrong-- I have no love for Joe Biden… or any of these people for that matter. I like politicians as much as I like a visit to the proctologist.

But it strikes me as a bizarre that a tiny fraction of a percent of the population has so much influence over a national race. Is this really the most advanced republican democracy in the world?

These Bolsheviks are constantly howling about economic inequality and complaining about wealthy people in the top 1%.

Well, they have managed to engineer massive electoral inequality and created a top 1% among voters.

A voter in New Hampshire has far more influence than a voter in, say, Kentucky, who won’t have the opportunity to vote until May 19th.

By then, the pool of candidates that a Kentucky voter will have to choose from in his/her primary election will be much more limited.

This is effectively a form of disenfranchisement. This idiotic system gives a handful of voters more power, and more choices, than other voters.

And I have to say, for as ‘woke’ as this Bolshevik party pretends to be, it’s certainly ironic that this top 1% voting elite happens to be in states that are predominantly white.

Try explaining to a Native American living in South Dakota whose primary isn’t until June 2nd that his/her vote counts as much as the white guy in New Hampshire.

This system is a complete farce, rampant with insider corruption, comical incompetence, and a deliberate lack of innovation.

And I don’t exactly cry myself to sleep every night that I’m no longer able to participate… I’m more than happy to trade away my voting rights for the extraordinary 4% tax incentives of living in Puerto Rico.

To continue reading, please go to the original article here:

https://www.sovereignman.com/trends/it-turns-out-the-bolsheviks-love-the-top-1-27196/