Cato is very likely correct (many Americans are afraid)

These fears cross partisan lines. Majorities of Democrats (52%), independents (59%) and Republicans (77%) all agree they have political opinions they are afraid to share.

The foregoing excerpt and data are from an article by Emily Ekins titled: Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share. The article is about a recent national poll by the Cato Institute. If this poll is correct, one can easily deduce that many other current polls about the upcoming election are incorrect, which explains a whole lot. The article in reference uses the phrase "strong liberals." Supposedly, 50% of the strong liberals support firing Trump. Personally, I do not need a poll to understand this one. I would assume the percentage is way higher. Usually, strong liberals are the most vociferous in any crowd. Moreover, they are probably the most confident. Why? Well, many of them probably do not realize that they have most of the mainstream media support which may be the reason for the confidence which probably makes many of them feel that they are the majority. However, if this poll is correct, the majority is afraid to say anything. Moreover, if 77% of conservatives are afraid, the recent polls are probably way off. Of course, the Biden people seem to agree with this poll because if Biden was really 10 or 12 points ahead of Trump without picking a VP, why all the fuss and delays for picking one, then? They should be confident enough to pick whoever they wish, but that is not the case. I do not think I need to say more, I will let you digest what I have said thus far. I still would like everyone to remember that voter turnout in the 2016 election was only 55%. Well, I will let you research the numbers again and do your own math. The Electoral College probably was not as big of a problem for Hillary as some of her fans would like to believe. Just wanted to share some thoughts! Read the full referenced article at the link below. 

Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share | Cato Institute

Reference:

https://www.cato.org/publications/survey-reports/poll-62-americans-say-they-have-political-views-theyre-afraid-share#introduction

On listening

People most often would like and want to be heard when they have something to say. Sadly, many times the ones who wish to be heard are not willing to listen to the other. Perhaps many times those not willing to listen think that their analysis of what they argued is flawless and their could not possibly be a counterargument, unknowing that the person who just heard all they had to say thinks they probably don't have half a brain. It seems this is where many are presently, very divided. This thought perhaps provides a partial understanding for the current divorce rate. And I am sure the popular thought is also that there are plenty of fish in the sea, and that is true. However, anyone who has done a little bit of fishing knows that one almost always catches the same type of fish when using the same bait. Basically, when fishing it is very easy to get into a vicious cycle. Seemingly, I got side tracked, but it is relevant as an analogy. Bottom line: dialogue is a good way to increase knowledge and understanding. Limiting to monologue may have kept one, unknowingly, in a vicious cycle for most of one's life. Unknowingly, one can die still the same. Happy life!

Statue removal

What I find mind boggling is this physical removal of statues. Why? Well, it's physically draining, and dangerous with relevance to safety. There is always a risk of a big heavy object falling on someone. It is also littering, since they won't pick up after themselves. Not very civil, even if it may be biodegradable material. Of course, whom or whoever is backing the movement wants to appear that there is desperation and going by proper legal means can't be done...no time to waste, in other words. Obviously, the desperation wasn't there all that much during the previous 8 year administration, so obviously much is politics. Going by legal means ensures the statue is removed permanently, if deemed so. Not going via a legal process doesn't guarantee that the statue will not be reinstalled sooner or later thus the energy spent was a waste. Moreover, one is better off trying to transform how a society thinks via civil expression. Unless one has a well planned revolution in which a gradual escalation can be maintained this erratic behavior and scattered pockets of unrest appear to not be properly thought-out and foolish. Whoever is backing the movement might have a long-term goal perhaps, but doesn't seem to give a crap about the slaves they are currently using to achieve it.

Collective politicization? Imagine that?

Picture a thriving economy! It shouldn't be too difficult, we had one about 4 months ago before this so called pandemic. Picture Trump being hated by his opposition party so much that they are willing to do anything to bring him down this election year. It shouldn't be too difficult, we've seen this for the past 3 and a half years. Willing to do anything is probably an understatement, perhaps. They will do anything collectively to achieve their goal. After almost everything had been attempted, suddenly a novel virus breaks out that has questionable symptoms similar to many Coronaviruses. Imagine that mainstream media and certain political establishment experts collectively team up to politicize this pandemic to shut down the once thriving economy with the intent of making Trump look bad so he loses the election this year. Now, is this thought difficult to imagine? Imagine that perhaps many numbers are being manipulated to the extent that perhaps there was no need to shut down so many businesses which will perhaps never come back leaving the owners broke. Of course, I am only asking you so far to picture and imagine. Now, picture that in the near future, we were to find out that all I've asked you to imagine was true, and that there was collective fraud, deception, and politicization by the opposing party to achieve the goal of winning an election. Well, if this turned out to be true, can you imagine how angry many of those who lost businesses and livelihoods because of the deception will be? Now, imagine how far those whose lives were destroyed will be willing to go to get even? I hope you can imagine this because, if true, this would be similar conditions to those right before the Civil War in the 19th century United States. Now, imagine what will happen next, and I am only asking you to imagine similarly to Lennon's song.

What are they really trying to say (with that bumper sticker)?

I recently passed by a car with a bumper sticker that read: "aint no time to hate." Immediately my question was does this person hate, but just has a bumper sticker to make others think they don't? Or, is this person telling me that I hate without even knowing me? Is this person assuming I hate, or that many people hate? The reality is that the slogan is vague. There may actually be some room for hate depending on what, or even who is being hated. For example, some might hate Hitler and this probably should be ok. Some might hate ice cream, which may be mind blowing to many, but I suppose it is still ok.

My final thought is that I am not sure if some bumper stickers are meant to be offensive and judgemental, or whatever, as if they think everyone should read their mind about what it is they intended to say with the vague phrase. If your bumper sticker is meant as an accusation, although you don't know me, my words to you are F**k-off! I am sure I can get a bumper sticker with my rebuttal, but most likely it will be misunderstood, maybe. 

Are they really concerned?

Traditionally some politicians have usually wanted you to believe that your safety is a huge concern for them. Of course, that doesn't mean it is, they just want you to believe it.Traditionally, what they have really wanted was and is your vote. Why? Politics has the best perks, especially if you don't ever get caught.

Bottom line, when I see one of these politicians seem a bit overly concerned for my health and safety, the red flags pop-up immediately. They are most likely a swamp dweller politician.

Interpreting Jesus

The left has an interpretation of Jesus, and so does the right, but who is correct? According to Jesus, probably neither...lol. I will have to revisit this one.

This election is the most important ever!

Basically, politicization is a big thing these days. I know a lot of this China virus thing is being politicized. I know propaganda rhetoric as soon as I hear it. I was born in Cuba and I know. I understand people want their party to win. My problem is that this time around one of the parties has selected a useful idiot that will be controlled by the totalitarian group who will instruct every move he makes. No way in heaven or hell will I accept his presidency! Moreover, I support an immediate challenge if he wins because I will be a thousand percent convinced there was fraud in the election, which was foreseen.

if new cases do not maintain the previous proportional mortality rate

If the number of cases have been accurate, the mortality rate should increase proportionally within 2 or 3 weeks. If cases do not yield the supposed results, Covid-19 must be downgraded.

Why Roger Stone's Commutation should not be a big deal at all

Roger Stone's sentence was recently commuted by President Trump. He is still guilty of seven felony charges in obstructing Mueller's Russia collusion investigation. which we know what it yielded. He had supposedly also provided information to Wiki Leaks. Roger Stone is a senior citizen, and we are in the middle of a pandemic, but why would I say it's not a big deal?

Thus far in his first term president Trump has only commuted the criminal sentences of about 10 people. Should we compare to the previous administration, Obama's? Let's see! President Obama granted more Commutations than any president in this nation’s history. I believe the total of clemencies was about 1715 at the end. One of those commutations was Chelsea Manning (formerly Bradley Manning). What were Manning's crimes? She was sentenced to 35 years for 19 of 22 specified charges which included theft, 6 counts of espionage, and also shared information with Wiki Leaks.

My conclusion: feel free to fact check me, but I am not posting any references. Just Google it! My point is that we should compare Chelsea Manning with Roger Stone. If Manning was good enough for Obama, I suppose Stone can be good enough for Trump.

How is Black Lives Matter funded?

Watch this short little video by Bill O'Reilly and find out how Black Lives Matter is funded, and how it is allied to Thousand Currents.

Reference:

https://youtu.be/61do-MF8aw0