Associated Press, Austria, Boris Johnson, BREXIT, Catholic Church, Catholic Church in Poland, Cavalcade of the Three Kings, Chapel of the Holy Trinity, chastity belts, Chlamydia trachomatis, Cryptosporidium, Cultural Marxism, Deconstructionism, Father Anthony Cekada, Fox News, Francis Effect, Frankfurt School, FSSP, Genderism, George Soros, Germany, Giardia lamblia, Gonorrhea, Great Cardinal, Havana, Hemorrhoids, heretical pope, Herpes simplex virus, hippies, HIV, Holy Year of Mercy, Human immunodeficiency virus, Human papilloma virus, Humanism, Isospora belli, Jacque Derrida, James O'Keefe, Jesuits, Jesus Christ, Joseph Ratzinger, Keynes, Keynesian Economics, Kirill I, Krakow, Law of Unintended Consequences, messeging, Mexico City, Microsporidia, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Nassim Taleb, neo-modernism, Neo-Pagan, Net Neutrality, new springtime, New York Times, Nigel Farage, Pagan Christians, pathological, Poland, Pontifical High Mass, Pope Pius VI, President Andrzej Duda, Project Veritas, Raymond Burke, Republic of Poland, retained foreign bodies, risk event, Roman Curia, s "theological structuring", s ABC News, s ABERRO AGENDA, s aberro-sex agenda, s AIDS, s Ambiguity, s Anal Cancer, s anorectal traum, s Archbishop of Warsaw- Praga, s Benedict XVI, s Bergoglio, s Big Gender, s Card. Muller, s Cardinal Burke, s Cardinal Kazimierz Nycz, s cardinal Walter Kasper, s optics, s Pope Francis, Saul Alinsky, Sexually transmitted diseases, spirit of Vatican II, SSPX, St Thomas Aquinas, sustainability, Synod 2014, Synod of Filth, Syphilis25, Tags anal fissures, Tags Black Lives Matter, Team Bergoglio, The Remnant, The Scholasticum, theological deconstructionism, Thomism, Tradition, TransRational, Truth, Unjust ruler, Vatican II, Work of Human Hands
Today being Friday, I will try to review and synthesize that which I have written over the past few days. In those posts, your humble blogger has dealt with analyzing the Trump campaign message and tried to identify not only the base issues of the Trump campaign, but to also gauge the “strength” of those issues as they affect the potential electorate and voter turnout in for the upcoming presidential election. I have been performing this analysis in the wider context of what we have termed the NORMALIZATION PROCESS™.
Before I start however, I would just like to point your attention to the video at the top of the page. Please view it. I have also put it up at the top of a new Catholic Voting Guide page at the top of this blog. (see here) I will have more to say about this subject matter in a future post. But for now, I will say this: it provides proper context!
And now to the subject at hand.
In the post titled Hidden Electorate: The Underemployed (see here), the issue of “uncontrolled migration” was identified as a major campaign issue for the Trump campaign for this upcoming election. The potential voter base that this issue encompassed was estimated at 31% of the US population or 102 million potential voters.
In the post titled Gun Ownership: Addressing Most Basic Needs Of Humanity (see here), the issue of the “right to own and bear arms” was identified as a major campaign issue for the Trump campaign for this upcoming election . The potential voter base that this issue encompassed was estimated at not less than 41% of the US population which gives us a figure of 132 million potential voters.
The reason we decided to focus on these two issues is that they both met our OBJECTIVE CRITERIA for discerning the most relevant issues on which the 2016 presidential campaign would be contested. The OBJECTIVE CRITERIA that was used was the hierarchy of needs set out by Abraham Maslow in 1943.
The reason we used Maslow was: his hierarchy is an OBJECTIVE CRITERIA and it provides us with a METHODOLOGY to gauge of strength as to the motivation that these major campaign issues generate among the electorate. Here is the relevant passage: (see here)
Maslow (1943) stated that people are motivated to achieve certain needs. When one need is fulfilled a person seeks to fulfill the next one, and so on.
As we can read in the above, the Maslow hierarchy is independent of either rewards or unconscious desires. This makes the Maslow hierarchy OBJECTIVE in that it exists in and of itself. If you recall the discussion in our post State of Necessity and the Doritos Test, (see here) the same conclusions hold for the Maslow hierarchy, namely this hierarchy exists in nature and “in and of itself”.
Furthermore, the Maslow hierarchy allows one to prioritize the respective needs. Maslow identified that the most basic needs pertain to human existence itself, i.e. the physiological needs. Next, only when those needs are met, the human desires to satisfy his safety and security needs, and so forth. The METHODOLOGY then goes on to identify the next and of lesser importance needs.
Given the above, your humble blogger has made the following ASSUMPTION and that is this: voters will place a much greater value on the basic needs (physiological and safety) over the much less important needs (need to belong, self-esteem, self-actualization).
Given this ASSUMPTION, the inference that can be drawn is that the candidate who best addresses these needs will get the vote of these identified above voting blocks. And taking our METHODOLOGY one step further, your humble blogger has observed that the candidate that OBJECTIVELY addresses the two basic needs (physiological and safety) is Donald Trump.
I will stop here and provide examples that support the above general ASSUMPTION.
The first piece of evidence comes via the video below from the Project Veritas website. (see here) In the video below, there is an exchange that starts at the 1:12 mark that makes my case. Here is the video:
In that above identified exchange, the white Clinton supporter and the black Bernie Sanders voter state the following:
White lady (giving first of three reasons to vote for Clinton): Glass ceiling…
Black gentleman: What the hell does the glass ceiling mean,… I’m trying to put food in the refrigerator.
Next, while watching the video, also notice the level of emotion among these Democratic voters and the manner in which they respond to the main Clinton campaign arguments; about her being a “woman”, the “glass ceilings” and the “first female president” issues. Notice the RATIONAL and emotional nature of some of the responces.
Further please notice that we are dealing with the need to belong, self-esteem, self-actualization part of Maslow’s hierarchy in the Clinton campaign. Please keep in mind while watching this video that these are lower level needs that are only satisfied once the basic physiological and safety needs are satisfied. Therefore, one can make the assumption that the level of motivation of the proponants of these earlier stated needs and corresponding issues should be much lower.
Noting that the level of emotion is quite high of the Sanders voters, I would like to now bring to your attention the motivation level (level of emotions) on the Clinton campaign’s side. A number of independent pieces of evidence have surfaced that allow us to conclude that the Clinton campaign, and more precisely the major campaign issues of the Clinton campaing itself, are not generating this same intense level of motivation or emotion.
On the I am a Malaysian via the Zero Hedge website, I found a video (among others) that is titled Hundreds of Empty DNC Seats for Hillary… (see here).
Please note when watching the video just how unmotivated the DNC Clinton delegates are. The inference being that if the Clinton delegates are this unmotivated, while the Sanders delegates are in revolt, the motivational level for the November 8 voter turnout could be affected to the detriment of the Clinton campaign.
Further evidence of the above comes by way of information that the Democratic National Committee (confirmed) had to hire actors to fill in the empty seats at the convention. See here.
Furthermore, independent confirmation of the above REALITY appeared on none other than the Washington Post website titled These vendors at the Democratic convention don’t see much enthusiasm for Clinton. The link is here. What this implies is that the low level of enthusiasm is not limited to inside the convention but also appears among the general population in Philadelphia.
I will end here for this week
Concluding, what needs to be understood is the following. The November presidential election will be contested on issues that each candidate’s campaign determines will be critical in the election. We have identified two of those issues of the Trump campaign and inferred that these are issues that not only affect a sizeable part of the electorate, but likewise are issues that address the most basic needs of the electorate as human beings.
Given the above, when combined with the information that has appeared in the most recent voter polls, we have concluded that it is in fact these two issues, namely physiological and safety issues, that are most likely at the root of the poll results.
The INFERENCES that we can now draw from the above is that if this is in fact the case, and your humble blogger thinks that it is, then what we can in fact be observing is what we call the NORMALIZATION PROCESS™.
The reason that the NORMALIZATION PROCESS™ is taking hold is that the REAL situation in the United States in general and in the economy in particular, is in such a state that a majority of the electorate is having a problem or is unable to satisfy their basic human needs.
And as we recall from the second principle of the LEX ARMATICUS, i.e. that even neo-modernists need to eat, this principle also holds for the United States population at large. So the information above is just another proof of this truism and by extension of the LEX ARMATICUS.
So what we can say is that since the Donald Trump campaign has alined it’s major campaign issues with the principles of the LEX ARMATICUS, he is in fact the candidate through which the NORMALIZATION PROCESS™ has taken hold in the area of human activity known as POLITICS and is being propogated.
Have a pleasant weekend!
Update 07:13 29 July 2016
Here is the latest – MUST WATCH:
UPDATE 2: 05:40 30 July 2016
Came across this article on the Washington Examiner. The reason that I bring it to your attention is that the results of the live poll (no methodology bias) were not what the demographic of the program would suggest. B/t/w notice the stunned faces of the studio guests (see here)