The Patriot Post® · Third Party Democrat Divide & Conquer Methodology
Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli lost the VA election for governor, mainly due to Libertarian Robert Sarvis who siphoned off 7% of Republican/Conservative votes. Terry McAuliffe won the Virginia governor race with 48% of the vote versus 45% for Cuccinelli, while Third Party “Libertarian” Robert Sarvis garnered the deciding 7%.
Libertarian Robert Sarvis was a top bundler for President Barack Obama, but is not a Libertarian as advertised, but actually a Democrat plant for the specific purpose of attracting Republicans dissatisfied with their own candidate. Texas software billionaire Joe Liemandt, a top bundler for President Barack Obama reportedly contributed $150,000 toward the VA election, and was previously rewarded with an invitation to a state dinner honoring British Prime Minister David Cameron. Liemandt’s company, Trilogy, split political giving between libertarian third-party efforts and liberal Democrats, covering all the bases.
American politics are based on the Two-Party system and any break from that guarantees most voting victories in favor of Democrats who are loyal to a fault. Regardless of its Party being right or wrong, Democrats never vote the other side, unlike many Republicans and especially Conservatives who vote for the best candidate regardless of Party affiliation, or sit it out if they have no hope.
The 2013 VA Governor election serves as a Blueprint for near permanent Democratic control of key national elections with its Divide and Conquer methodology. The “E-Party, None Of The Above” has been advocated by this writer since 2000, but it can only work if there is massive dissatisfaction with candidates, ineffectiveness of both political parties, and non-availability of a popular alternative.
Democrats are better politicians, better at following the Party line, better at obfuscation and muddying political waters, that may cause eventual collapse of the Democratic Party. Staying in lockstep guarantees control, but when the unforeseen happens as occurred in Nazi Germany that religiously followed their anointed Fuehrer Adolph Hitler. who impressed with stirring and fiery speeches from his podium, leading blind follower lemmings right over the political cliff into destruction of WWII.
Reinforcement of the political “Divide and Conquer” schematic of the Democratic Party is proven by the case of Abraham Lincoln, as published by delanceyplace.com 11/7/13, who won his first term as President in 1860 with a record winning low of only 39.8% of the vote.
The delanceyplace article goes on as follows: “He was the luckiest man to run for president: He won with only 39.8 percent of the popular votes cast – the smallest percentage ever recorded. He had no help from his running mate: he only met his vice president Hannibal Hamlin on Election Day. How did Abraham Lincoln manage to win?”
The remaining 60.2 percent was split among three other candidates: Stephen A. Douglas (29 percent), John C. Breckenridge (18 percent), and John Bell (13 percent). Had it not been for the presence of two ‘third-party’ candidates – Breckenridge and Bell – Lincoln might not have been elected. (In that year there were four candidates because each of the two parties had nominated an upstart Southern candidate as well as an official Northern one.) Says the historian Jay Winik: Lincoln’s victory ‘was in many ways a fluke and nothing more.’“
Lost in translation is that Obama in effect channels Lincoln who overrode the Constitution as does Obama now, 153 years later. Both are from Illinois and were sort of lucky to have won the presidency in the first place. Both knew how to win without garnering the majority of the popular vote. Lincoln’s multiple presidential opponents were not by design but enabled the first term of his presidency. Obama being an astute politician, knows well how to use multiple candidates to accomplish his goals by design and this was done with aplomb in Virginia.
Lincoln engineered the Civil War that was about secession, not slavery, until Lincoln made it so to reinvigorate the North to continue the Civil War. Second term for Lincoln was only assured by his third-year of the war Emancipation Proclamation that freed only Slaves in the rebelling Southern States. Certainly beyond his power to enforce, but Lincoln used political smoke and mirrors to NOT free Northern Slaves that he had the power to do.
This kind of duplicity is part and parcel of the Obama methodology who has mastered the art of how to "Never let a good crisis go to waste.” At what point will that be a bridge too far? Is there a point at which the Obama reach does not cover the breach? And then the inevitable fall over the many proverbial cliffs the anointed one has circumvented; or will his luck hold out until the end of his term Jan 20, 2017? Obama is part Irish so he may have Blarney Stone luck in his corner.
Horoscope and astrology aficionados may have opportunities to ply their wares as a lunar eclipse will occur on Feb 11, 2017, while a Solar eclipse will occur Feb 26, 2017. Might they be omens of Obama continuing his presidency into effectively a third term?