top of page
  • publiusfederalist

The "Battle of the Brands” needs a Voter's Test: "Is it Ok to End a Baby's Life?"



No, this is not an article about abortion. Though we will leverage this premise to devise a political test which can help us to determine the relevance of an important subject, VOTING RIGHTS. The question we will ask is the following:

Is it ok to end the life of a 1 year old baby?

The answer is of course no. ALL of us, no matter the side would determine this is not ok. If by chance you have come to formulate reasons why this would be ok, we at the federalist2.org site would ask that you seek professional help.


In short, the answer to this question then is:

No

No it is not ok to end the life of innocent babies between the age of new born and 1 year old. But we should note, through history it has been ok to do so, this practice was called infanticide:


Infanticide (orinfant homicide) is the intentional killing of infants. Now universally illegal, infanticide was a widespread practice throughout human history that was mainly used to dispose of unwanted children. Its main purposes were controlling population growth and saving resources from being spent on weak or disabled offspring. Unwanted infants were normally abandoned to die of exposure, but in some societies they were manually killed.

This practice, for ages, was performed in times of crisis, in times of war and specifically in times of conquest where the invading armies would eliminate the elite group that ran the culture or cities. This ensured that there was no leadership to help the people over throw their invaders.


What is the political significance to this question? Well it becomes relevant, through the use of reason and logic, that if we as a people used to find the use of this strategy as common place and not un-heard of, would it not be feasible and possible in a future history it could be acceptable again? Could it not be possible that somehow we might find our selves in the position where the "ok" nature of ending the life of babies would be proposed as a political solution to some issue? We do have the current movement to allow the older generation to end their life at their choosing? We have other challenges around the world where some very upsetting events can happen. For example, could it be possible to unleash a virus to reduce the burden of an older generation (senicide)? So it is a possible path into the future, though not possible today for the United States of America.

As such we can then look at what path would we have to take to get to that place where we would find the ending of life for the innocence a real possibility? This would be in two or more paths:

  1. Referendum or law allowing this practice of Infanticide

  2. The possible political position taken by someone that would advocate for Infanticide

We then must ask ourselves, in today's world what possible voting methods would allow this to happen? The following are possible in terms of voting and the outcomes:

  1. An actual vote from the citizens (one vote one citizen)

  2. Votes have been created from dead people

  3. People whom are voting two or more times

  4. Votes are being generated out of thin air

  5. People are being fooled into voting this way

  6. People are not in their right mind and cannot vote properly


All of these methods of voting that could possibly bring us to a place we do not want. There are methods that can also allow us to envision that we can have a few people dis-enfranchise the many and give us a result that is not only immoral but culturally destructive by the ending of innocent lives.


These 6 possibilities mentioned fall into three groups:

  1. Authentic Voting (one vote one citizen)

  2. Voting ballot manipulation

  3. Abuse of Freewill

Authentic Voting

The first group is the only REAL consideration. One voter that is a citizen of a nation gets ONE vote for their election in their community. This single vote of a right-minded voter, is the only way we can best understand if the citizens are able to guide the selection of an individual that will look after them as CITIZENS, not as a special interest group. We will discuss more in a little bit about how the RIGHT to vote has significant impact & responsibility to understanding what and whom you are voting for and how those you are voting for can impact your life. Before we do that, let's address the other two categories...



Ballot Manipulation

This is most obvious crime, voting ballot manipulation, as talked about this includes the dead voting, voting multiple times and generating votes out of thin air (actively filling out voter forms then assigning to random voters that did not vote). This kind of voting requires someone to perform these acts. The act of voting on behalf of the dead, actively voting two times and then voting with highjacking voters that did not vote.


As we have discussed, the premise of the Federalist 2.0 is to properly construct a society such that we have the citizens not be tempted or feel required to Lie, Cheat and/or Steal. This is basic common sense. If we cannot have a fair and free election where there is one vote for one citizen, that is cast by themselves in a conscious way, the vote is not countable, not applicable, not directional in aligning to True North perspectives. (See the discussion here for what is True North.)


When we disconnect the voters from their votes we not only suppress those individuals, we change the natural mechanism for guiding a society to a right-minded system of correction and balance, to one that is completely un-hinged and not able to make the necessary corrections. This leads to Tyranny through the positive reinforcement of Lying, Cheating and Stealing.


Finally, the allowance of this type of untethered voting is endless. If this is allowed, there are an endless supply of voting options with the Dead, Double Votes and Miss Directed Voting. Now let's address our last group...


Abuse of Freewill

This area is more insidious, how does one impose on the free will of another through the voting process? You do so by the following:

  1. Lying to the citizens to misguide their perceptions to vote for your candidate

  2. Actively voting with the citizen and telling them how to vote (either forcibly or directionally since they might may not have the cognitive power to make their own choices.)


The abuse of freewill is the most insidious of them all in-terms of voter fraud. We must understand, from the Federalist 2.0 perspective, we are after a clear set of decisions from the citizen as to whom might best lead their country or local political systems. If we have people that are not entirely coherent, then the goal becomes, whom can sign up the most incoherent people vs who are the candidates and which candidate will best guide us into the future.


When we lie to the public, or tell half-truths, we instill in the citizens the HOPE that you will perform as you expect. The loftier the promises the most votes, but the government can do very little for the individual, other than rules, regulations and taxation, the government only does other thing very poorly. The impact to the citizen, when lied to, is expansive and very damning for the citizen as life moves into the future. The citizen, once lied to, decides to not vote or votes in anger/spite. We then find ourselves in a position as a candidate, trying to spin the messages to minimize the spite and reduce the anger while promising the most. The goal to best manage government through right alignment and reduction of costs, never leaves their mouths.

Voting Rights

So what have we learned, ballot manipulation and abuse of freewill with voters, are both very poor implementations of the idea of voting. They are considered to be fraud/rigging in fact. These methods will result in the following types of fraud as outline by the BBC back in 2017:


The first two tell tale signs are "Too many voters/high turnout in one area", the article goes on to explain what that means. It also explains what one would expect in a national election vs the previous voting records. The historical international election acceptable top end is about 60-70% turn out in given areas. The 2020 election saw turnouts that far exceeded the norms around those areas and the overall norms, turning in over 90% turnout as well as 100% turn outs. Additionally, the overall 2020 election turnout was significantly higher then in previous years.

The third tell tale sign is "Large number of invalid votes", this is the process by which someone is filling out as many votes as possible and will most likely make errors that can get caught while tabulating results. This is a trend that the 2020 election is also seeing as noted in this data analysis mentioned below.


The fourth tell tale sign is "More votes than ballot papers issued", where the number of ballots issued are less than the ballots received. There is no evidence today that there are more "Mail-In" votes than were actually sent out. But it should be something that would be helpful in understanding. One thing that seems mysterious is that many of the Mail-In ballots that have been sent out were "returned" the same day or within 1 day. That is here.

The fifth tell tale sign is "Results that don't match", where the numbers that are actually calculated are not properly reported. This has been an issue with some of the software that has been used in the election of 2020. Here is one example that is being confirmed. If this is true, there are concerns then that the software may be compromised and could have a larger impact to the overall total of votes.


The sixth tell tale sign is "The delay in announcement", where the country that has had an election, see those election results delayed. This delay is at best an opportunity for inappropriate inclusion of ballots. We must understand that every VOTE counts, yes. But here is the unknown truth:

A truly competitive political race has equal standing on both sides. If the "Legal" end date and time is established, ALL PARTIES must stop gathering votes... NOT one additional vote can be added, no matter how important that vote might be. If one side of the political party stops bringing in votes per the agreed to time, the other party must stop as well. If this is allowed, both sides will never stop adding votes after the time has stopped.

These are some interesting things to consider in this 2020 race:


All of these items then results in the first legal action in one of the states in question:


The Purpose of Voting

What is the real purpose of voting? Why do we want a system of voting, one person one vote? From the Federalist 2.0 point of view, it is a process for the culture to determine what is working and what is not working. The political decisions made in the past, will re-enforce the decisions in the future. If we have a system where the general population, God forbid, determine that there is a reason to end the life of young people early or for that matter older people earlier, then there is nothing stopping that body of citizens voting directly for the action or electing someone that would like to put that into play.


The problem exists when people force others to vote in ways that are not in their best interest, or add more votes that do not tie to an individual. These actions sway the culture and the perceptions of the population to the proposed new norms. This directional focus then feeds on itself, and those that have commandeered the directional notion of that culture now are freed to define the truth as they wish.

This movement of laws, regulations and referendums, eventually have to and must lead to Socialism and the installment of a Tyrant. We must be accepted as a FACT.


The purpose and intent of the Constitution of the United States is to prevent this from happening. The founding fathers suspected there is a path inwhich we could devise a system that could correct itself. That system of correction depends on and must implement an authentic vote from all individuals, with awareness and intent.

Mark Levin: If the election is not contested, there will never be free election again.


As time passes, the MISTAKES we make will unfold as they always do, the citizens of the nation then have the opportunity to make amends, to correct those mistakes. They do that through the ballot box. But here is the challenge, when there is that cultural shift, when that direction the nation is taking is realized by the majority of the citizens as a path that will not best serve each individual's quest for their own happiness and/or their own salvation:

The Purpose of a Society is to properly organize to best set a soul free to discover their relationship to a higher power. The setting of that purpose for the citizens to pursue their best selves such that the citizens can climb the ladder of right minded ness (righteousness).

Where, here at the Federalist 2.0, we can then say the following about the system:

The natural progression of the individual's purpose within the Purpose of Society requires mechanisms to guide the society. These mechanisms CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be man made. These natural self guided decisions (Votes) within the small (Individual Votes) compiled to the large (Aggregated within Communities) cannot be human engineered to best guide the society as a whole. Only the Higher Power has the capacity to best understand our goal, our True North. Only in an Open and Free election can this direction be established and should not be tampered with by any one individual or group, EVER.

So if these are Truths as defined by the Federalist 2.0 philosophy, were are we today with the election of 2020?


The Battle of the Brands

In the efforts and struggles that we are currently seeing today, we have two groups battling it out, on one side we have the Republicans and on the other side we have the Democrats. If we dial back and look from afar there is another perspective we can see. There are different brands that are supporting the different groups. On the Republican side we have the Trump brand, and.... that is pretty much it. We then have the Democrats and their supporting brands are NEW YORK TIMES/CNN/MSNBC/AP/FACEBOOK/TWITTER/Etc.


The lines have been drawn with the media outlets choosing the Democratic winners and promoting their advancement to the presidency. The Republicans have been encouraged to not contest the results of the election. At this point it looks like the Republicans (Trump) will be contesting up to 6 state elections (AZ, NV, PA, GA, MI, WI). Where the evidence is starting to increase by the day.

What is at stake here for the Democrats:

Democrats and the Media - If the election is overturned they will suffer significant PR problems, not alone the amount of anger they will create with the media narrative that has established that they are the rightful owner of the position. Remember one of the rules we have put together for the Federalist 2.0? (Political Power is based on Length of Time)


The losing side for the Democrats (Media) - The Democrats have been holding out on the second stimulus to be able to add in the bailouts so many Democrat States and Municipalities have been needing. The Democrats also, if possible could loose the coming mid-terms. With a Trump win, and the Republicans ruling the Senate, the clear path to pass any bill they would like to, would be open. Finally, Trump has promised to clean house if elected again, I can only assume wide changes in the administrative state and the potential criminal charges that would be levied against those that have been doing wrong in the past 10-15 years.

What is at Stake here for the Republicans:

Republicans and Trump - If the election is implemented as stated and the Democrats win the presidency, Trump will be loosing more than just face. The embarrassment of loosing will be significant to himself, his family and his own brand. Most successful Presidents have their second term, this will be a first where he would not have his second term. The impact to the base is significant, if there is a perception that the race was rigged. (All evidence so far is pointing to this possibility.)


The losing side for the Republicans - If the election is resulting in the Trump Administration loosing the battle, the impact is very significant. The ability for the Republicans to implement their long term strategy to reconfigure and reduce the size of government will be thwarted. The different freedom groups and christian groups will see Presidential powers come down on them to reduce their powers and influence. The media sites have already implemented the powerful flagging tools and have determined that the notion that something that is determined dangerous and not considered mainstream or popular is now becoming a norm. This lose if not litigated in the courts and resulting in an outcome will be most impactful to the Constitution.

And at the end of the day that is what is at stake here, the Constitution and the belief that we can have a say in our Government. As noted before, where we are in history, and where we are tacking from a navigational standpoint is a reversal of course. The culture and the political systems that have evolved over the past 50-60 years have taken us in a direction that the US population as a whole have determined is not the right direction.


This last step that is occurring, if true, is that alignment to True North. Trump has bet his own name and his family's name on the notion that the Constitution will prevail. Whether you can say that Trump is riding the coat tails of the Constitution or the Constitution is riding the coat tails of Trump, we have unwittingly committed ourselves to someone that has bet it all including our Constitutional way of living.

Was that a good bet? I am not sure we can say, but from the Federalist 2.0 perspective, it might have been our only bet back in 2016. If the issues that we are seeing are brought to light and that there are methods used by the Democrat party to secure and ensure wins into the future without the citizen's ability to redirect the course of events, that 2016 decision was critical. If voting irregularities remain into the future and become standard operations, we lose the intent of the constitution. It will end a long and prosperous existence for the United States of America. (If there are irregularities in the voting and those prove to be systematic, these tools can be used by the Democrats in the next election and from there on out.)


The following is a summation, now that we know what is going on, from Candic Owen, whom describes the situation and plays out the way the Democrats worked the COVID virus and the BLM protests/riots the past year.

The Coming Lawsuits

If the coming days and weeks produce a Democrat win, AND WE FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESS, the world as we know it will return and the Republicans will have to suffer through the defeat. And they will endure it if the holes in the voting process are patched and fixed, we will survive another day even though the Democrats will hold the presidency. But if Trump looses and there is clear fraud, faith in the system will have been shattered. If voting issues remain, it will be unlikely another Republican will become president.

If Trump wins the legal challenges in accordance with the constitution, and the left then calls theft, the only two options for the Left are to go away or to call for protests and allow violence. And if they are bold enough they will call for an effort to forcibly remove Trump.


If this occurs, it will be clear what the true intent was, and where this was going to only lead. If this happens, it is clear there was only going to be one winner and it was not going to be Donald Trump.


But, let’s be clear, until which time the constitution is discarded or changed, peacefully or forcefully, the enterprises that operate within its boundaries are responsible for holding to it. As such, if any individual is harmed due to the “Battle of the Brands”, these enterprises that are aligned against the Constitution are liable. They have a direct responsibility to not encourage violence.

Regardless of who you are, the Constitutional process must be followed and results be accepted. People must be educated in this process and institutions must communicate this process for the reasons stated. It does not matter how you feel about a candidate. Any call for violent means to blackmail the citizens or forcibly remove politicians must be refrained. We know the Democrats have everything to loose in this election, but the citizens are realizing they don’t want it. And if the Democrats are “right” the citizens will pay the price and move back to those positions. But the Democrats do not get to play God, because the know they are right.


So will we let the Constitutional process work? Will we be taking a turn from the path we are on? Will we make a choice that will take us down the path of normalizing senicide and infanticide?

In the creation of the Federalist 2.0, it is our goal and commitment to you the reader, to share with you the pieces of the original intent of the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence and why it is critical that we claim this moral imperative to ensure the health and safety of our future generations and our capacity to continue as the Originally Planned United States of America.

Come join the Federalist 2.0 effort, help us resurrect the beliefs and understandings that made this United States of America the greatest nation on the planet to date. Let's make America great once more!

In the end, what do you have to lose?.... Maybe you can be Publius too?

- Publius

(C) 2020 Federalist2.org

(TM) Federalist 2.0


The following are interesting links:



Examples of voter manipulation:


These examples, if wide spread across America, will prevent the culture from moving or tacking back to a True North perspective.


Data mining proving problems in the process across the nation that needs to be investigated:

Deep Dive on the Election Data








Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page