top of page

THE DEBATE: WHY THE BAD CHESS?

Updated: Jun 30

Now I do not watch debates as a general rule, especially this last presidential debate. Why should I? A debate especially at this point in U.S. history and given what I have considered from the 2016 presidential election as the un and anti-American activities by the Desperate "Destroy the Patriarchy" radical Democrat party. And of course, the manipulations by the deep state FBI / CIA operatives and especially the Leftist Media talking heads.


So not watching any of the debate I wake up to find the overwhelming opinion on the results is that Joe Biden has not comported himself in a competent manner. Joe crashed and burned. And that should not be a surprise to anyone that draws a breath. Now what?



And the only question that has been ruminating in between my ears for a while now is: Why did the Republican party agree to accommodate the Democrat party in having a debate so early in the process and before the conventions when the candidates would be locked in? Why did the Republicans accommodate the Democrat party's strategic political needs?



Why did the Republican party give that big juicy meatball of opportunity to their political opponents? Seems like strategic, purposeful bad chess move to me. Possibly even potentially throwing the game. Why give that gift of an early debate and give the Democrats the opportunity to replace their candidate with an "I'm not Joe" candidate?


And as this disastrous Biden performance unfolds, we find that it is Republicans that are eagerly attempting to facilitate the repairs for the Democrats? You never help your opponent when they are in the process of destroying themselves. That is how I understand things anyway. I guess the Republicans see things differently? I don't trust it, I don't trust them, and I don't like it.



The only strategy that may make sense is if the Democrat party threatened the Republicans with no debate if they did not agree to the early debate where the Democrats could replace their candidate if they needed to. Either way the Republican candidate debate or no debate had the edge IMO. They did not need a debate.


Or the Republicans calculated that either way it is too late in the game to credibly replace a presidential candidate and it did not matter. And still, you do not give your opponent an opportunity to recalculate and retool when you know you have them beat. That is just good basic chess strategy. Politics is chess and the game is not decided as of yet. Why the bad chess?


OR, the Republicans understood this: "More Bad News for Democrats: Biden Cannot be Replaced on Ballot in Three Swing States, Except for Death or 25th Amendment". Knowing that the Democrat party will do anything including ignoring existing rules or law in order to at the minimum send the country into chaos and a contested election result into the states courts which they control to a great degree.


The opportunity to replace the Democrat candidate still exists, why take the gamble? The debate just revealed the Democrat party's massive vulnerability and the opportunity to recover has been given to them, to some degree anyway.


And I think we can all agree that their second in line, Kamala Harris will not be leading them to victory. She will either remain on the ticket as it bursts into flames in November and disintegrates. Or she will be "Retiring to spend more quality time with her family" like Joe will more than likely be doing? Or Joe, who is the president and in power may decide to remain to the end.


William Shakespear famously stated in part: "All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely Players; They have their exits and their entrances, and one man in his time plays many parts".


Understand that politics as I have described it many times previously: "Politics is the dirtiest, filthiest most corrupt and deadly activity that human beings participate in". JGL


And make no mistake, you are currently witness to the most consequential political play and theatre in human history.


And so, I ask again: Why did the Republican party agree to accommodate the Democrat party in having a debate so early in the process and before the conventions when the candidates would be locked in? Why did the Republicans accommodate the Democrat party's strategic political needs?


Trust them, anyone, by their actions and not ever by their words.


Are you paying attention yet America? JGL 6/28/24



84 views0 comments

Comments

Rated 0 out of 5 stars.
No ratings yet

Add a rating
bottom of page