Skip to main content

Trump Victorious in 2024 Presidential Election

As of this hour, former President and now President-elect Donald Trump has secured his second term as the forty-seventh President of the United States. Trump’s victory comes after winning key battleground states Wisconsin, Michigan, Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. 

As for the popular vote, Trump was victorious there as well, winning by a one-and-a-half-percent margin. Despite these results, it’s evident that there remains a significant social and political problem in the United States, where politically-motivated violence, social unrest, crime and general instability have become rampant over the years since the death of George Floyd. 

However, I’d say the fact that it was even this close is ominous for the years ahead. This was as clear as it gets for an election, that the incumbents (both Biden and Harris) are wholly unfit for any office, that they present a real and present danger where they’re allowed within twelve thousand miles of a school zone, let alone anywhere near 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. This was as clear as it gets for any election, whether for student council or chief executive, that the clear and obvious choice (considering the lackluster alternatives outside of the two major parties and the dropping out of a key contender, Robert Kennedy, Jr.) was Donald Trump, the candidate championing the people’s cause, the man whose very slogan is Make America Great Again, the man who was martyred as the target of several assassination attempts, the man whose campaign (more than anything) symbolizes the criticism of corruption, the draining of the swamp; and yet the fact that it was even this close indicates that we have an irreconcilable divide within our country, over not just abstract political ideology but foundational values and general attitudes toward truth, honesty and personal responsibility.

I also caution against too much optimism for this reason: the economy is likely to continue to deteriorate before it is able to sustainably improve, and this phase will continue under Trump’s administration, meaning that he and his administration will assume blame, however warranted; there are simply too many negative trends and unresolved fundamental problems that can be reconciled only through sweeping economic changes, a severe economic recession, an honest reconciliation of debts, and a large-scale purging of toxic assets and malinvestnents. 

Another concern of mine is this: that this election, by appearing more legitimate, may restore some measure of faith in contemporary government and the electoral process where it is not warranted. 

As Americans, we must remember that it is limited government and maximal liberty which have distinguished our political system from others across the globe. We must remember that it is our obligation as Americans to maintain accountability in government, to preserve our principles, our heritage, and the mandates enshrined within our Constitutions, at both the federal and state levels. It is our calling, for the purposes of continuing the tradition of American exceptionalism and preserving for our heirs the conditions which enable prosperous and fulfilling lives. 

That is our calling, not the mere election of “conservative” or Republican candidates for office. 

The election of the lesser of evils, or in this case the only sensible option on the ballot, will never be our highest cause nor the panacea it is so often assumed to be.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Deal with Tariffs

Over the course of President Trump’s two terms, there has been much talk around the matter of tariffs — taxes on imported goods. However, much of the talk seems to miss the point. After all, for those of us who seek the truth, it’s not really a question of whether tariffs are ‘good’ but whether they are preferable to other kinds of taxes — assuming, of course, that taxes are the rule, as certain as the eventuality of death. First, let’s establish the theory: beyond the generic purpose of revenue generation for the state, the institution of tariffs ordinarily serves to  reduce (or discourage) imports by making them artificially more expensive, while encouraging domestic production by making domestic products more appealing on a relative price basis. In the realm of foreign affairs, tariffs are instituted or threatened in the course of international trade negotiations in order to signal dissatisfaction with existing trade barriers and to push for more favorable trade terms; or in ord...

Fischer: Tortured in the Pasadena Jailhouse (featuring the Morals of Chess by Benjamin Franklin)

Buy your copy today of  Fischer: Tortured in the Pasadena Jailhouse (featuring the Morals of Chess by Benjamin Franklin) , available at  Amazon  and Barnes & Noble . The name Bobby Fischer reigns supreme in the world of chess, yet there was a time when it hogged headlines, struck fear into the eyes of the competition, and was on the lips of folks all across the globe. More than the face of the centuries-old game, there was a time when Bobby Fischer was synonymous with the cause and spirit of America, that his moves on the chessboard sought more than checkmate but to pit the strength of “raw-boned American individualism” against “the Soviet megalithic system” which had come to dominate the game of chess at the same time it dominated Cold War politics. Fischer’s triumph over the USSR's Boris Spassky in the ’72 World Chess Championship would ultimately be celebrated as a symbolic and diplomatic victory for the U.S., but, as time would tell, it would not mean the American...

The Cost of Government is What It Spends, Not What It Taxes

The cost of government is the quantity it spends, not the quantity it taxes; that cost representing the financial burden imposed upon those who pay the taxes and all who transact within that economy or through its common currency. Likewise, governments can either take the people’s money through taxation or they can take the people’s purchasing power through money-printing (or the like).  Therefore, the argument against tax cuts requires further context to appreciate why tax cuts have failed and will continue to fail to deliver economic growth, especially where those tax cuts promote or serve excess indulgence and cheap speculation. In short, it’s not that tax cuts are inherently destructive, or that reducing the tax liability of the wealthiest in society “doesn’t work”; rather, the fact is that the public debt is so high that the country simply cannot afford those tax cuts without defaulting on its debts or — which is the same — covering them through inflation (i.e. money-printing,...