Radio Lux Lucet 128

You're listening to Radio Looks List and I'm your host, Steve Matthews. Thanks for joining me for episode 128. The title of this episode is Trump's Big Win and What Lessons Can We Take From It? So yeah, this has been an exciting week here this past week.

It's been a really good week. I'd even say this, it's actually been a real blessing this past week, some of the events that happened. You know, sometimes, you know, I'm always just this glass half-empty guy or, yeah, glass half-empty guy.

And by nature, I tend to be pretty pessimistic. And that's not a good thing. It's something I really need to repent of. But I'm working on it. I'm working on it. But you know, sometimes it can be easy to be overcome by, you know, by negativity and you think sometimes things are going to be, just everything's going to be horrible and terrible.

And you find out, you know, it isn't nearly as bad as what it could have been. And I think certainly this last week, I think, was actually something very positive for America and for liberty in the United States, and not just here in the United States.

But I think, really, I think throughout the world, I think this is going to have some big repercussions. And I think they're going to be positive repercussions, and I think this is something as Christians we can be happy about.

And we're going to talk about that here in a little bit. I hope everybody has had a good week. Boy, you know, I was out working earlier today. I was just getting some of the final fall cleanup around the yard done.

You know, our big maple tree in the backyard, and I think the thing dumped almost all of its leaves here this week. It had actually been holding up pretty well, but this week it decided it was going to shed about 90 of its leaves and it made a big mess, and I had to go back and get that cleaned up and, yeah, do a few other things around the yard.

And I wasn't able to get started on my preps for the show here as soon as I wanted to. That and the other thing, I had a stubborn camera. That was on a conference call earlier today, and I don't know if that's what did it.

I was using a new application I hadn't used before, a place called Clout Hub is the name.

Of it.

It's kind of like Zoom, but their big selling point is data security. And so I had that meeting and got off of that, and I went to set up my stream here for tonight, and my camera decided not to work, and I was like, well, why is my camera not working?

And I checked the connection and everything looks good. I went into settings on my computer, and it was working fine there, but for whatever reason, it would not pull into my streaming service. I've got to use an outfit called Restream.

Never had that problem before, but anyway, I fiddled around, I think took me about half an hour, and finally got it working again. You know, I mean, computers are sort of this, I don't know, they're kind of like this necessary.

Evil.

You know, it's like sometimes when they work, you can do great things, and then for some weird reason, they decide, I don't know, if they're a temper tantrum, they decide not.

To work.

And you don't really know why.

It's not at all obvious why that is, or why that should be the case, but anyway, I finally got it up and running. So here I am, even though it's a bit later than what I wanted, and you know, probably in some weeks, I probably just have gone to bed, honestly, but you know, this has been, I think, such a compelling story with Trump's win, and yeah, I just, I really wanted to talk about it.

That and I also had a friend of mine, Jim, sent me a really good article, one of the best things I've read in a while on the bits of political analysis, and what we're going to do, what I thought tonight's show I'd do is just walk through this piece.

I'm not going to read every sentence of it, but we'll touch on the main points of it, and I'd like to offer some additional commentary on it. I'm going to go ahead and put the article in the show notes, but let's take a look at.

This here.

So here we go.

Well, you know what?

That's not exactly what I want. Let's get out of that. I'm going to stop that showing, stop that.

I'm going to go over to here.

Yeah, here we go. This is more like it. Let's see how this does. Yeah, there we go. There we go.

I like that.

You know, I was doing some editing, actually, of my live stream that I did on election night on Tuesday, and I ummed a whole lot in that live stream. And it's just like, this drives me nuts. And it's like, it's funny when you are doing a live stream, you're not necessarily aware of that.

But boy, when I was editing the audio, I was like, um, um, um, um, um, and I had to keep going in and snipping these things out. And I should know better than that, right? Because I used to be in Toastmasters.

You know, and one of the things, if you're ever in Toastmasters, Toastmasters is where they teach you to speak in public. And it's actually a really good program. And, you know, there's that old saying that, you know, I think it's supposedly based on some survey.

I don't know. But they say that the greatest fear that people have isn't death, it's actually speaking in.

Public.

And I can kind of understand that. And if you're like that, or if maybe you don't, you know, maybe you've done some speaking in public and you don't think that you've, you necessarily are getting the results you like, or you're not comfortable, you don't feel like you know what you're doing.

Toastmasters is actually a really good program to learn how to get up and speak in public. So if it's something, a skill that you want to develop, you know, you can find a club, you know, they're all over the place in the United States and overseas.

And they've got a very structured program that'll walk you through how to learn how to speak in public. And it can be, as I say, I think it can be very helpful. But one of the things, the reason I bring that up is because when you do that, one of the things they do, they actually have people that count ums.

As part of me, at least we did in my club that I was in. I haven't been in it for a while. But when I was in the club, there would actually be somebody whose job it was to have a piece of paper and they have a little tick and they put a little mark in there.

I just did it then. I just said um right there. But they put this little tick mark on the page. And as part of the meeting wrap up, they would talk to this person who is sort of the, you know, the grammar person.

And one of the things they would talk about is how many times people said um in the speeches and presentations and various goings on in the club. It's so easy to kind of use those filler words and kind of fall back on them.

But it's better off not to use them if you can help, or at least limit it. I don't know that there's necessarily anything wrong with saying um ever, you know. It's not as if that's some horrible sin. But if you're always going um, um, um, um, um, well, you know, that can be a little bit distracting.

So anyway, I just noticed that when I was doing my editing. I was like, oh, good grief, Steve. You were just umming all over the place there. Anyway, so enough of that. So this article, this was actually something sent to me by a friend, my friend Jim.

So Jim, thanks so much for doing that. I really appreciate it. I wouldn't have, I don't know if I'd have seen this otherwise. And it's an article really well worth spending some time going through, which we're going.

To do.

And I'm going to put this, this article, I'm going to put a link to it in the show notes so you can see it. It's something that's publicly available. It's not behind a paywall or anything. So that's a good thing about it.

All right. So the title of the article here is election aftermath notes on the grand realignment as we stare down the precipice final ruminations. So that sounds a little bit foreboding, but it's actually some really, I think some things here that should be encouraging to us as a, if you're a Christian, if you're somebody who loves liberty, if you love the constitution, you love limited government.

There's a lot of really good takeaways in here. I'll read through it and we'll just comment on it a bit. So I'm reading here quote. I encourage you to read it in particular, read it particularly because the prediction set out in the opening of it.

Well, let's see.

That's not actually the beginning.

Let's see here.

Oh, here we go. Some post-election thoughts are due. Firstly, I'd like to announce the most recent paywalled article has now been opened up to the public on this occasion. I encourage you to read it particularly because the prediction set out in the opening of it has proven accurate thus far.

Insofar as Trump winning and causing a tangible realignment and soul searching on the left. So the remaining prognosis may have a special resonance. I'd like to point you to a couple of the biggest takeaways from the election result.

Here's my biggest of all. The election proved one thing, the deep state and hidden hostile powers known as the globalists, a quote put those in scare quotes, that scheme behind the scenes and secretly run the country are not all powerful.

They can clearly be defeated when the people are fed up enough. Okay, so let's stop there for a moment. So the author here and the name of the, obviously, this is a pen name of sorts. He goes by Simplicius.

So I don't know what his actual name is, but that's his pen name. So we'll go with Simplicius. So Simplicius tells us a couple of things here. He first of all acknowledges that there is such a thing as a deep state and there are things as global.

He doesn't say, you know, that's just some sort of, there we go, umming again. I'm going to try to stop that. He doesn't just say that these are figments of people's imagination or rumors or conspiracy theories or things like that.

He acknowledges that these are real things, but he also acknowledges they're not all powerful. And that's something I think that I said that maybe in last week's podcast or maybe it was in an article that I wrote because I had written a follow-up blog post last Sunday just with some additional thoughts about what was at that time the upcoming election.

And one of the things that, you know, we need to keep in mind, I kept, my mind kept going back to this verse from Isaiah. It's Isaiah 29, and it reads, now the Egyptians are men and not God, and the horses are flesh not spirit.

And the point that Isaiah was making here is that, you know, the Egyptians, or you could apply this to any great power, whether it's the Babylonians or the Romans or the Greeks or, you know, in modern day terms, you know, any of the, you know, the United States or any of the enemies, you know, enemies, real or imagined that we might have in the world, they're men, not God, or political enemies.

I mean, these are people, you know, the Democrats are clearly you know, the party of tyranny. That's what they are. I mean, there are all these attacks on the First Amendment. You know, Kamala Harris is out there attacking the First Amendment.

Tim Wallace is attacking the First Amendment. Hillary Clinton's attacking the First Amendment. John Kerry's attacking the First Amendment. They all don't like the idea that you and I can speak freely, especially that you and I can speak freely on the internet, that we can post what we want, that we can do podcasts, that we can do videos.

This really bothers them. And the point, the reason it bothers them is because it keeps canceling out their narrative. You know, they can't push out the propaganda the way they want to. And sometimes, you know, you look at these people and you think, well, you know, they've got all this money.

I mean, you know, these are famous people, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry. You got to, you know, those are both a couple of former presidential nominees with the Democrats. You've got Kamala Harris. You've got all these billionaires that, you know, run the banking system and run the media, that run the social media companies.

And you think, you know, well, what do I have? How can we stand up against them? How can we stand up against the deep state and the CIA and the Bilderbergers and the Roman Catholic Church and just all of these organizations that are plotting to take away your liberties, to loot you of your financial resources, to put you under their, put their boot on your neck forever?

And how can you fight back against them? I mean, they're so much larger, so much wealthier, so much more powerful than any of us are. How can you stand up to these people? And it's easy to kind of almost put them in the place of these omnicompetent, omniscient, almighty, you know, kind of almost attribute these godlike powers to them.

But they're not God. These people are not God. These deep staters are not God. These FBI, CIA types, these are not, they're not God. Hillary Clinton is not God. The Democrat Party isn't God. The Pope of Rome is not God.

The U .S. Congress, the Catholic bishops aren't God. The Jesuits are not God. These are powerful organizations. They're evil. They do a lot of bad stuff. But they're not God. And they can be defeated.

He says, you know, he says, they, the author here, Suplicius, he says, they can clearly be defeated when the people are fed up enough. Well, yeah, they can be defeated. I've said for a number of years that Donald Trump's victory in 2016, I really do think he stole a march on the establishment.

You know, when he first started running, he was sort of an object of derision. And I think I did talk about this last week, but thinking about, for instance, Jeb Bush, when Jeb Bush declared he was going to run, it was like a coronation.

All the media, everybody was, oh, Jeb Bush, oh, Jeb Bush, oh, Jeb Bush is just awesome. You know, he, it was, you know, can we hand you the nomination on the silver platter,.

Please?

They were almost throwing themselves at his feet. And it was just assumed that he was going to win and, and that you were going to have an election, you know, it'd be Hillary Clinton versus Jeb Bush. I mean, I'm sure Hillary Clinton would have won and Jeb Bush would have graciously accepted defeat, said, oh, well, you know, we did the best we could and, and, and all this stuff.

And then you'd had eight years of Hillary flying around on her broomstick, you know, had the monstrous regiment of Hillary Clinton, and that would have been awful. It would have been horrible for the nation, but that didn't happen.

Donald Trump, you know, despite the fact of having just massive negative news coverage in 2016, the fact that the entire establishment was against him, he still managed to pull off this, this amazing victory that not too many people expected.

And it looks apparently, from what we can tell, he defeated the deep state again here in 2024. It's quite a, quite an amazing thing. And it's something that I think should encourage us. You know, sometimes we need to learn how to take, take the W, take the win.

I think I mentioned before, you know, I, I tend to be by nature a bit of a, well, I guess a pessimist, glass half empty guy, that sort of thing. Well, I think sometimes when we get a win, sometimes there's always people looking around trying to find, oh, you know, what's, you know, what, when's the, when's the next shoe going to drop, this type of thing.

Well, maybe there isn't going to be another shoe drop. No, I'm not saying everything's going to be smooth sailing and we've still got all of these evil people around that want to do evil stuff. They're not going to give up.

I mean, you're going to have, they're going to be difficulties and we have to understand that on one hand. So we have to, we have to acknowledge, yeah, okay, there's going to be struggles and additional difficulties, maybe things we haven't even thought of yet.

One of the things some people have talked about, for instance, is, well, you know, the economy is not good. There's an interview out with a guy that I think does some really good work, Ed Dowd, and I haven't watched it yet, but I can tell from the title of it, you know, he is of the view, you know, that the economy isn't a dumper and that things could get a lot worse.

And, you know, what might happen, you know, we've got Donald Trump in power and, you know, maybe some people in powerful places would like to tank the economy, you know, would they like to, you know, manipulate the economy to bring on a recession, make it worse than what it should be?

Maybe, you know, I mean, I can't say that that's impossible. There's actually precedent for that type of thing. In history, if you read about Andrew Jackson, President Andrew Jackson, I mean, this was almost 200 years ago, but he wanted to end the first bank of the United States.

And the first bank of the United States, it was almost like a, it wasn't quite like the Federal Reserve, but it was almost like a proto-Federal Reserve Central Bank. And this guy who was the head of the bank, his name was Biddle, actually intentionally induced a recession while Jackson was president, hoping to turn the public against Jackson.

Well, it didn't work, and Jackson actually won his fight against the first bank of the United States and shut him down. For some reason, I don't think I'm saying that quite right. Let's take a look here.

It's the second bank of the United States. Okay, that's what it was. It was the second bank of the United States. I said the first bank of the United States, it's the second bank of the United States.

I got the, you know, how sometimes you say things and you're like, that doesn't sound quite right. Yeah, it was the second bank of the United States that Andrew Jackson fought his pitch battle with and won.

And this guy by the name of Biddle actually did induce a recession and, you know, caused economic problems with banking policies in order to turn the public against Jackson. Well, it didn't work. And Jackson shut down the second bank of the United States.

So good for Andy Jackson. So is it possible that somebody today could do this, you know, banking interest, powerful people behind the scenes, you know, these deep state types? Well, yeah, I mean, that is possible.

I don't know that it will happen, but it is a possibility. It's something we at least have to be aware of. And I don't say that, again, to be negative or to say, oh, you know, oh, the other shoe's gonna drop.

Look, we can face this stuff by God's grace. We have to speak the truth. We have to stand on the Word of God. And we have to continually rebuke people who speak evil and who practice evil. These people can be defeated.

And that's one of the, I guess, the big takeaway that Simplicius wants to leave us with here. And I agree with him. I think that's absolutely critical to understand that as Christians, these people can be beaten.

They're not omnipotent. They're not all powerful. When he continues here, he says, in this election cycle, they tried virtually everything and none of their previous methods were enough to rig and steal the election for their candidate.

From alleged cases of electronic vote machine rigging via machine anomalies, to ballot harvesting, false polls and surveys, rigged search results on Google and elsewhere, to the big one, mass illegal migrant invasion meant to install a permanent Democrat voting regime in perpetuity.

None of it worked. And Trump still wanted a massive Republican landslide. Republicans won the Senate. And as of this writing, are way up to winning the House, on the way to winning the House as well, with multiple seats flipped in each.

The Republican side controlling every branch of government could give Trump carte blanche power to do a great deal of the house cleaning he promised. And the writer, he didn't even mention the two assassination attempts.

Yeah, I mean, they tried to kill Trump twice. And yeah, I do think that those were deep state attempts. I think there's a lot of evidence to suggest that. We can't ever really know for sure because, of course, nobody's going to say.

But if you look at what went on, you know, in particular, the initial attempt there in Butler, Pennsylvania, that was just laughably incompetent on the part of the Secret Service. Now, there's a guy that I used to follow.

Well, he's deceased now. That's why I don't follow him, but follow his work. But he was a financial guy. He was a gold. He's particularly known as somebody influential within the gold community. Name was Jim Sinclair.

And he had a saying that I heard him use on many occasions. He would say, such and such a thing is too stupid to be stupid. Well, what did he mean by that? Well, what he meant is that when you see something and you're just going, you know, how could these people be so stupid as to believe X, Y, or Z?

Well, what he was saying is it's not stupidity.

They're lying to you.

And then you have to, you know, so when you see something that is just outrageously stupid or incompetent, really, I think what we should be thinking, and I think this is a correct way of looking at this, we ought to be asking ourselves, okay, what's going on here?

You know, what's the...there's something going on behind the scenes that's not being stated up front that we need to be aware of. And when you saw how just how horrible the Secret Service was in Butler, Pennsylvania in July, I just cannot believe that that was incompetence.

I think that what you saw going on there was a deliberate attempt to, you know, to do some harm to Donald Trump, and it didn't work.

They failed.

And they tried again with that guy down there in Florida. And of course, the guy down there in Florida, the question about him was, well, you know, who's paying this guy's freight? And it's interesting how that's never come out.

Now, maybe something will come out in a trial, I don't know, but I don't expect very much. I think there are some people, probably some very powerful, special interests that are behind all of this, and it's probably all going to get whitewashed, in my opinion.

We'll see.

I'd like to think we would get the truth, but I mean, trying to get the truth out of government, you know, that's a bit of a challenge, to say the least. So, here's something else that Simplicius talks about.

I think this is really important here too. He says, the other huge elephant in the room exposed by this election is the now undeniable, irrevocable fact that 2020 was in fact stolen. Now, this is something that I've been talking about for years, and of course, many other people have been talking about this for years as well.

The, let's just say the anomalies that took place, or apparent anomalies, don't want to get YouTube too angry here. I'm live streaming on YouTube. I don't know, maybe they're zapping me here or something, but the unusual activities that were surrounding the 2020 elections, he's got a graph here, and one of the graph that you see, it shows the total Democrat vote count in the last four elections of 2012, 2016, 2020, and 2024, and the 2012, 2016, and 2024 numbers are all very similar.

But in 2020, he had this huge spike in votes. The other three elections were like all around 65, 66, 67 million votes for the Democrat candidate, but in 2020, it blew out to over 80 million votes for Joe Biden.

And in fact, he quotes here, the Democrat vote total counts for the last six elections, and even Obama in 2008, who really set a high watermark for presidential election totals, he got 69 and a half million votes.

Kamala Harris got 66 .4 million, but Joe Biden in 2020, he got 81 .3 million votes. So he blew Obama out. He blew everybody out of the water. How is that possible? Hmm, Simplicius continues here. He says, Obama's first victory was a grand transformative national awakening.

Even Republicans must admit that pivotal 2008 campaign was special, and Obama brought a new kind of energy influence, a cultural shift signified by the now famous hope poster, which captured a kind of historic zeitgeist.

And the numbers reflect this. The 2008 vote had a record turnout of 69 .5 million for Obama. Harris's 2024 campaign spent a record-breaking $1 billion, $1 billion. It sounds like it was that guy, Dr. Evil.

Yeah, $1 billion. I think he said $1 million. This is $1 billion, and yet could not even get close to Obama's religious first election turnout, let alone Biden's miraculous. Read anonymous, anomalous, excuse me, 81 .3 million.

So yes, that's, we'll use anomalous to describe Joe Biden's vote total there. We won't say anything about how that may have occurred, but it is certainly an anomaly, a very curious anomaly. Yeah, we'll just, we'll leave it at that.

And he continues there. He says, there's simply no mathematically possible way that Biden had such an anomalously high record-breaking turnout, eclipsing both before and after Democratic candidates. For the record, Steve Bannon has now declared they will not let the issue slide and will pursue truth, pursue the truth and all remediations for what was perpetrated in 2020.

And so let's just ask a very good question. He says, so the other big question, how did the establishment lose exactly? If they had their foolproof plan of millions of new migrants, et cetera, what exactly went.

Wrong for them?

Let me provide some pretty good answers here. This is what he says. Well, it appears that Trump's team did in fact prepare the ground for the contingencies. A member of his team claimed an army of 500 lawyers per state, per state, had descended last night to watch for all irregularities and in fact appeared to even, uh, to have even countered several attempts in the vein of 2020.

He provides an example. So simplicity continues. For example, not only were statewide irregularities reported, mostly smaller ones like playing with vote times, officials showing up late or machines allegedly going down in mostly red counties, but there was also this in center County, Pennsylvania.

And this is a, a post from X that he cites here, this gentleman named John Strand. And this post says this breaking another legal win. Center County, Pennsylvania officials were planning to stop county ballots throughout the night in violation of state law.

The RNC threatened to sue. And that was enough. Officials agreed to continue the count as required this time. We don't fold.

Hmm.

So that was a post that was actually on election night. It was 10 0 4 PM. I suppose it's probably Eastern time on November 5th. So that was election night. Simplicity continues. We'll likely never know for certain, but it did appear that RNC and Trump's team were far better prepared to handle all the tricks and gimmicks.

The lack of COVID protocols, obviously obviated a lot of the mail-in ballot chicanery from last time, but it is still a bit of a mystery why tens of millions of new illegal migrants did not massively swing the election the way they had planned.

In truth, maybe they did swing it far more than we know, but it was simply that Kamala is so unpopular that they couldn't even get her close to the finishing line. Perhaps without an illegal vote, she would have ended up with 30 or 40 million votes rather than 65 million.

So that's a bit of speculation, but that is certainly a possibility. Maybe it turns out that there were a ton of illegal votes out there, but it was just too big to rig, right? I mean, that was one of the things the Trump campaign talked about quite a bit in the months leading up to this election.

Too big to rig. They wanted to have a victory that was too big to rig. And this is true. We talked a little bit earlier about the fact that these deep state types, they're men and they're not gods. So they're not omnipotent.

And since they're not gods, since they're not omnipotent, that means that there's some sort of upper limit to how much they can rig, how many anomalies they can create. So maybe it's possible that this was just too big of a win for Trump.

It just could not be flipped the way that they wanted to. It's definitely possible. And Simplicius actually goes on, he says this, he says, there's some circumstantial evidence to back this up. That is, dealing with the illegal votes for Kamala, but possible illegal votes for Kamala.

There is some circumstantial evidence to back this up. Kamala just happened to win only the states which did not require IDs, according to this chart. And if you're watching this on video, I'm going to show this.

You can see in the lower chart here, it shows the United States. And there's this, I don't know, is it green or gray? Sometimes my color vision isn't so great. It looks like it may be green here. But it shows these states where no ID is required.

For instance, if you look along the left coast, the west coast, you've got Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada. These states do not require any type of ID to vote. What states did Kamala win? Washington, Oregon, California.

She did not win Nevada. And she won Colorado and New Mexico. Now, Colorado does require some ID, but it's a non-photo ID. And of course, they flooded, I know the mayor of Denver has been flooding Denver with illegal aliens.

He calls them newcomers. That's his nice little buzzword that I, I don't know, maybe he picked that up from the U .S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. But he, yeah, he likes to call them newcomers. He's flooding Colorado with all of these illegal aliens.

And of course, New Mexico, they, New Mexico does not require voter ID. Illinois does not require voter ID.

Kamala won there.

Minnesota does not require any voter ID. She won Minnesota. And the New England states, they don't require for the most part voter ID. She won those. But she did not win a state in which, well, I guess New Hampshire maybe is the exception.

So maybe, maybe that's true. But yes, I mean, it's, it's amazing how the, the map of the states that Kamala Harris won is almost a perfect overlay with the states that don't require, don't require voter ID.

That's an amazing thing. That's an amazing thing. So yeah, that, that kind of does suggest that, you know, maybe there's some anomalies going on there in those states. Interesting. And Simplicius continues here.

He says, the 2024 was billed as having a record turnout for an election both sides knew was more critical and pivotal than ever. Yet its total votes cast were dwarfed by an election held during the worst health pandemic of several generations.

And Simplicius, he lists out the total votes. This isn't just votes for an individual candidate. This is the total votes cast. For instance, like 2004, he had about 21 million votes cast. 2008, he had about 129 million votes cast.

2012, 126 million. 2016, 128 million. In 2020, he had 155 million votes cast. And then in 2024, he had 129 million. So all of those, you know, like what they used to say on, what was that, Sesame Street, one of these things is not like the others.

Yeah, one of these things is not like the others. The thing that's not like the others is 2012 with this really high vote total of 155 million. And all of these other vote totals, these were all in the 120 million range, 120, 130 million range.

So 2020 is definitely an outlier. No question about it. Then you had this thing here with Bellwether counties. And, you know, Bellwether counties, there are certain counties that almost always select the winner of the president.

Whoever wins these counties then goes on to win the election. They're just certain ones and they list out, I don't know, was it about 15 or so counties, different states in the nation, for instance, in Ohio.

There's a couple here in Ohio, Ottawa County and Wood County that are considered Bellwether counties. They always pick the presidential winner. And again, this goes, he goes back to 1984 and it shows how this really plays out.

And in 2020, Donald Trump dominated in the Bellwether counties. He only lost one Bellwether county. In fact, let's count how many Bellwether counties there are. Let's see, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17.

Okay. So in 2020, Donald Trump, well, in 2016, Donald Trump swept all 17 Bellwether counties. In 2012, Obama swept all 17 Bellwether counties.

He won.

In 2008, Obama swept 16 out of 17 Bellwether counties and he won. So you can see this pattern that really does hold true. In 2020, Donald Trump won 16 out of 17 Bellwether counties. Joe Biden won one.

But guess who won the election in 2020? And there's nothing suspicious about that. And then back to 2024, Trump won 15 of 17 Bellwether counties and went on to win the election.

Hmm.