Remembering Mae Brussell

This past Sunday, May 29, 2022 marked 100 years since the birth of Mae Brussell.

Mae Brussell, who died of cancer at age 66 on October 3, 1988, was a radio personality and conspiracy theorist in California.

She did meticulous research. The 1963 assassin of then-35th U.S. president John Kennedy was a powerful influence in motivating this former housewife to change her life and look into historic matters—especially with citing post-World War II as a turning point—which would send the U.S. into decline. (No—she did not believe the Warren Report. Yes—she was ahead of her time.)

In 1970, Brussell’s daughter, Bonnie, who was 16, was killed in an automobile accident. (Find a Grave says Bonnie was 14.) The following year, she launched her radio program, Dialogue: Conspiracy (later renamed World Watchers International), which was syndicated in several markets. Her daughter’s death, no doubt, further moved Brussell to continue digging deeply into issues like assassinations, surveillance of citizens, and numerous forms of government corruption.

Her research made a number of people uncomfortable. And there were threats against Brussell. In the year of her death, she went off air and did her program episodes privately and, afterward, mailed the recordings to her listeners.

To read more on Mae Brussell, I recommend the following:

•  About Mae Brussell (from the website which is in her name)

•  Mae Brussell: A Forgotten Superhero (by Dr Stuart Jeanne Bramhall; January 22, 2015)

•  CARMEL CLOSEUP: Mae Brussell (by Judith A. Eisner; September 29, 1972)

I have not, in recent time, probed enough to come across enough videos published to YouTube. (Not enough for being timed with the date of this blog topic.) I will add one related source to recommended Videos. It is Mae Brussell Project. From this source, I will include one embedded video. (One viewer’s comment from May 2022: “This presentation [from 1978] is so timely with what's going on in with the Azov Battalion in Ukraine.” —Dboz Expat.) 

‘Reformist Leftists’ Sheepdog for 2022 Dems

Now that the general election for the 2022 midterm elections is less than a full six months…perhaps predictable with what is already playing out are those who are trying to get people to vote for the Democratic Party. 

This is not only coming from the party establishment. This is also from people who are among the, for lack of a better phrasing, Online Left. 

I am in a position that is not difficult to understand. At the same time, it is one that does not get expressed often enough. So, I will mention right now: I am not willing to vote for this current Democratic Party in a general election. This is not to say that I am unwilling to vote for either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party. I am open to receiving arguments made by the Republicans in an attempt to earn my general-election votes. So, this is not equal. The Republicans actually have a better chance with me. There are numerous reasons why I am not willing to vote for the Democratic Party. I mention them, at the mark of of 01 hour 57 minutes in the April 22, 2022 Callin’ segment on Sabby Sabs. (It is the last video appearing below.) And this comes especially with consideration for what the Democrats have become.

The first two below videos, from last week, are related to this blog topic. The first is by Revolutionary Blackout Network’s Compton Jay. The second is a response video by RBN’s Sabrina Salvati (a.k.a. Sabby Sabs). I find them to be very relevant here in May, and considering we are just under six months from the scheduled general election of November 8, 2022, because it is amazing—but not in a pleasant way—how some of the Online Left try to but cannot sell voting for the Democratic Party. I came to the conclusion that what they actually achieved was having made cases for not voting for the Democratic Party.

‘Changes’

This blog topic is personal for me. It is not too personal. It is relatable. (I invite others, who may have a similar experience, to share. If one wants to do that.)

Last week, after more than 20 years as a customer, I ended my cable-television subscription with a mini-dish satellite-to-the-home provider who I will respectfully not name. (It was not that company’s fault.)

One reason is because I am planning on getting a new roof, on which I have not one but two satellite dishes, possibly as soon as next year. 

My decision came a few months ago. It was a matter of timing. I had a promotional price going which, along my monthly period of service, were both reached last week. I knew, around late-March, that I should time both the same with cancellation. It was good for me to observe and respond.

If I get back to wanting to watch again the likes of numerous programmers, I have several choices. Already I am supplementing my local stations package with, and I don’t mind naming the company, the separate streaming service Frndly TV. As a viewer of Hallmark Channel, I can get all screens of Hallmark—the primary along with sister channels Hallmark Movies & Mysteries and Hallmark Drama—and I get over 20 other programmers: A&E (and its sister channels which include The History Channel); Lifetime; Game Show Network; UP TV; GAC Family (and its sister channel GAC Living); QVC; the outdoor-sports programmers Outdoor Channel, Sportsman Channel, and World Fishing Network; as well as the national feeds of some subchannels like Decades, Heroes & Icons, and MeTV.

Since this is new for me, I am not adding anything more for the time being. I want to see how it goes. I don’t feel an immediate need to sign up for, say, Sling to get more high-profile, basic-cable programmers. I considered FuboTV and Hulu Live (since I subscribe already to the ads-free Hulu and this would include Disney+). And I am on break from premium-movie programmers such as HBO Max and Showtime.

My area cable company, a few days ago, gave me a deal which actually lowers the cost I had been paying for my monthly Internet subscription. About –$15 less. Same speed level. And this now includes the locals from my Designated Marketing Area (DMA) of Detroit, Michigan. So, when it comes to having the access to my area’s broadcast networks’s affiliated stations, I’m good.

I have found myself watching more and more original content people livestream and/or publish to, say, YouTube. The trend, lately, for political content is with livestreams which last more than an hour; sometimes more than two hours; and they are pleasing for the viewers. More often than not, I catch them live—or I catch that content creator’s livestream later. (This comes in handy especially with my premium-level subscription to The Jimmy Dore Show.)

It is very interesting…this phenomenon of people cutting the cord, so to speak, with cable-television subscriptions. Some explain it as people preferring to stream. I don’t think that is fully accurate. I think what explains it, better than anything else, is that too many people—much thanks to this nation’s poor system—have it rough economically and, for that reason, they prioritize. (They have to.) In fact, when I let that satellite-to-the-home provider know I was cancelling service, that company’s rep may have assumed this also explained my decision. I simply stated I am leaving due to “changes”—and I could not go into details. This was received in a way which was suggested that I was cancelling due to a change in one’s economic situation. (The rep sounded sympathetic and wished me well.)

The cable companies have defeated the satellite-to-the-home providers with getting in on and investing, over time, on broadband infrastructure. Internet. For people who would choose one over the other: They opt for Internet before a cable-television subscription. And, yes, I agree with those who think the Internet should become a utility here in the United States.

The 2022 Midterm Elections, Six Months Out

The United States midterm elections are six months from this week. 

They are scheduled for Tuesday, November 8, 2022.

Since last summer, Democratic incumbent U.S. president Joe Biden’s job-approval percentages have been typically in the range of the 40s—with some polls reporting the 30s—and this continues even with the date of this blog topic.

No source is worth anything—not as one who follows electoral politics—if he/she/it thinks or believes the 2022 Democrats are going to keep their majorities for U.S. House and U.S. Senate. 

I anticipate a 2022 Republican majority-pickup sweep for new control of all three electoral levels of U.S. House, U.S. Senate, and U.S. Governors. (I haven’t followed the state houses. Do consider them as well.)

A summary:

• U.S. House: The 2020 Republicans ended up with 213 seats. Majority is 218. While the Republicans need only +5 seats (with current vacancies, +9), this also means that 213 of a needed 218 has the 2022 Republicans at 97.70 percent within reach for a new majority for the U.S. House. 

• U.S. Senate: In 2020, the Democrats won a majority-control pickup of the U.S. Senate, to go along with their pickup for U.S. President, but they drew even—50-vs.-50—which makes U.S. vice president Kamala Harris the tie-breaker vote when necessary. The 2022 Republicans must have an outright majority 51st seat for control. The GOP’s 50 of a necessary 51 seats means the 2022 Republicans are at 98.03 percent within reach for a new majority for the U.S. Senate.

• U.S. Governors: Republicans currently have a majority number of governorships—28. However, they do not have electoral majority. Setting aside non-state District of Columbia, out of the remainder of 535 allocated electoral votes from the nation’s 50 states, the Republicans enter the 2022 midterms with 265. (This counts their November 2021 pickup of the nation’s No. 12 most-populous state Virginia.) Since no state has fewer than 3 electoral votes (each state has at least one U.S. House seat and all have two U.S. Senate seats), the 2022 Republicans are only +1 net gain away from new electoral majority. This also means that 265, of a necessary 268, electoral votes has the 2022 Republicans at 98.88 percent within reach for a new electoral majority for U.S. Governors.

For one who may be rooting for the 2022 Republicans…you cannot ask for a better situation, while they are currently the minority party, with heading into the general election for the 2022 midterm elections.

What follows are my general takes on U.S. House, U.S. Senate, and U.S. Governors.

(Note: Above maps are considerations for where the 2022 Republicans may win over new majorities.) 

The first map is for U.S. House. Not all states have completed their redrawn congressional districts. So, I have colored in light red the states which may or will end up with Republican gains; light blue for states which may or will end up with Democratic gains; yellow for states—some which have not redrawn their congressional districts—which can work to either major party’s advantage. 

(In addition: Light blue includes Progressives Chat regular cathyx’s home state Oregon. Due to the 2020 U.S. Census Bureau’s report, Oregon gains an additional congressional district and electoral vote—going from 5 to 6 for U.S. House and from 7 to 8 for U.S. President—and numerous sources estimate that new U.S. House seat will end up in the Democrats’s column. This would mean Oregon would go from a three- to a four-seat advantage for the Democrats. Montana, also with a new U.S. House district and seat, would be a Republican gain—as it would go from 1–0 to 2–0. Colorado also gains a district and seat. It is generally a Lean Democratic state. In 2020, for U.S. President, Oregon and Colorado were the Democrats’s Nos. 12 and 14 best-performed states with their respective percentage-points margins. But, given this year’s midterm elections, I anticipate the Republicans may gain that new seat in Colorado—and that it would go from a 4-to-3 Democratic advantage to Even. West Virginia, which loses a district and seat, appears in neutral because it would not become a Democratic gain, unless you’re wanting to focus on the party-seat advantages or disadvantages nationwide, despite the Republicans no longer having a third district and seat and fifth electoral vote.) 

The average net gains, per involved state, tends to be +1.75 to +2. (Some states will win a net gain of +1. Some +2. Some may even gain +3 or +4.) Supposing a well-rounded 20 states become involved, which we would be able to realize after the election passes, this would explain a national outcome that could reach +35 to +40 net gains in U.S. House seats. 

At this point, I am not predicting. I will note: Since the 17th Amendment dating back to the 1910s, which allow direct elections of U.S. senators by states’s voters, White House opposition parties which flipped control of the U.S. House, in midterm elections, have never reached 60 percent of total U.S. House seats. By today’s allocation of 435 seats, this would mean 261. (The 2022 Republicans would need a net gain of +48 seats. They would have to win the U.S. Popular Vote, for U.S. House, by at least +9 percentage points—an outcome of, say, Republican 54% vs. Democratic 45%.) The Republican and Democratic U.S. House majority pickups of 1994, 2006, 2010, and 2018 ended up in the 230s and 240s. I would keep my estimate of U.S. House seats, for a re-empowered Republican Party, in the range of 53 to 58 percent. So, for now, this would in the wide range of 230 to 252 seats. Also: To gauge the number of seat gains, I focus on the 2020-to-2022 national shift in percentage-points margins. The 2020 U.S. House Republicans lost by –3.12 percentage points. (Outcome: Democratic 50.81% vs. Republican 47.69%. Typically, the U.S. Popular Vote for U.S. House and U.S. President are on a similar level. 2020 U.S. President was Democratic +4.45.) Go ahead and call that 2020 U.S. House Republican margin as –3. To win, here in 2022, by +7 would become a 10-point national shift. This would yield a net gain of +35 to +40 seats. (Reminder: At this time, this is not my prediction.)

The above second map is for U.S. Senate. The last time the U.S. Senate switched to the White House opposition party in a midterm election cycle, and yet the White House party was able to flip a seat from the opposition party, was in 1986. (The Democrats won over control on the watch of then-Republican incumbent U.S. president Ronald Reagan. The U.S. Senate Democrats entered the 1986 midterms with 47 seats. The Republicans flipped +1 state’s seat—a pickup specifically for Kit Bond in Progressives Chat regular TowerofBabel’s home state Missouri. The Democrats counter-flipped +9 to end up with a net gain of +8 and a new majority of 55 U.S. Senate seats.) 

Since the 1990s, going by these terms, the U.S. Senate flipped to then-White House opposition parties in the 1994, 2006, and 2014 midterms. In each of those cases, the White House party was not able to flip a single state. That would be the scenario I envision as well here in 2022. 

This is why I am not buying into the Democrats thinking they may or will flip Pennsylvania, with a likely nomination for lieutenant governor John Fetterman, following the exiting Republican Pat Toomey. Given 45th U.S. president Donald Trump’s endorsement for some GOP primaries, including the one scheduled in the Keystone State for next week [Tuesday, May 17, 2022], I sense Pennsylvania will end up a Republican hold as its next U.S. senator will be Mehmet “Dr.” Oz. (The map’s light red are for potential pickups in which the U.S. Senate flips to the Republicans with up to 54 seats.)

The above third and fourth maps are for U.S. Governors. (The third map is for those 36 states which are on the schedule here in 2022. The fourth map, once the election passes, is for all 50 states. Recommended reading: Biden’s Net Approval Rating Is Underwater in 40 States.)

This reminds me of the reach for electoral majority at the level for U.S. President. It feels structural. The Democrats need at least 21 or 22 states. The Republicans need at least 28 or 29 states. (If you want to know, in a presidential election, how many states will get carried by a winning Democrat or Republican: Add +21 or +22 for the Democrats or +28 or +29 for the Republicans to their U.S. Popular Vote percentage-points margins.) The Democrats average 12 electoral votes per carried state. The Republicans average 9 electoral votes per carried states. 

Current U.S. Governors are a reminder of how this feels familiar. Democrats have governors in 22 states comprising 270 electoral votes to the Republicans’s governors in 28 states for a cumulative 265 electoral votes. So, the 2022 gubernatorial Republicans need a 29th state. 

The 2022 gubernatorial Democrats are favored to flip both Massachusetts and Maryland, following exiting Republican governors Charlie Baker and Larry Hogan, and this would set back the Republicans to 26 states worth 244 electoral votes. 

This is not all.

I look for counter-flips by the 2022 gubernatorial Republicans in key states. Since the Democrats have the governorships in 6 of the nation’s Top 10 most-populous states (all are on the schedule except North Carolina), I think the current minority 4 for the Republicans will see them move up to a new majority of at least 6. (Significance of Top 10 states: Between 53 to 54 percent of the nation’s citizens, including me, live in a Top 10 state.) This would begin with the GOP winning pickups in both Pennsylvania (where Democratic incumbent Tom Wolf is term-limited) and my home state Michigan (which would involve unseating Democratic incumbent Gretchen Whitmer). I will also add non-Top 10 Wisconsin (with Democratic incumbent Tony Evers). 

This Rust Belt Trio are the nation’s three leading bellwether states. They are the only states which have voted for all presidential-election winners since 2008—three of four cycles which were won by the Democrats—and they will likely back the winner and prevailing political party again in 2024. (I first addressed this here: Election 2020’s Key Bellwethers: The Rust Belt Trio Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan.) Progressives Chat regular The_Fixer’s home state Wisconsin was the tipping-point state in the U.S. presidential elections of 2016 and 2020. Pennsylvania would have been the tipping-point state for then-Republican incumbent Donald Trump had he won re-election, rather than getting unseated, in 2020. (Pennsylvania was the 2016 tipping-point state when you factor the faithless electors as the official Electoral College scores for Donald Trump-vs.-Hillary Clinton was 304-vs.-227.) Michigan best-reflected the percentage-points margins, state-vs.-national, for U.S. House in 2016 and 2018 and—as a Democratic pickup state for Joe Biden—in 2020 for its U.S. House margin vs. the national outcome when one considers that year’s pickup states. So, clearly, these three states work in tandem. 

If this all bares out, the 2022 Republicans would end up with 29 governorships with a cumulative 288 electoral votes. Since 1992, the average number of states carried in U.S. presidential elections has been 29 with the range between 25 (a 2020 Joe Biden) and 32 (a 1992 Bill Clinton). If the 2022 gubernatorial Republicans actually reach up to 32, their additional pickups may come from (according to population ranks): Kansas, Nevada, and Maine. (Democratic incumbents are Laura Kelly, Steve Sisolak, and Janet Mills.) 

Part of figuring this has to do with involved states (and it is hard to not estimate the leading bellwether states would become involved) which would deliver Democratic-to-Republican pickups for U.S. House (possibly U.S. Senate when considering scheduled and applicable states). So, for cathyx’s home state Oregon: While it is not impossible, that state is further down the line for reach by the GOP. If the 2022 midterm elections ends up an electoral bloodbath, it would likely take at least 35 states—following, as examples, New Mexico and Minnesota—for the 2022 Republicans to reach with flipping and carrying Oregon. (TowerofBabel’s home state is on the opposite end: Democrats nowadays have to reach around 35 states for Missouri.) This would require the 2022 Republicans to win the U.S. House and U.S. Senate with considerably higher numbers. (Perhaps on the level of reaching 60 percent of U.S. House seats.)

One may stay tuned, for any further developments, as the rest of the election season unfolds.

Flashback 1972: J. Edgar Hoover Dies

Fifty [50] years ago on the day of this blog topic, which was May 2, 1972, was the death of the first director of the Bureau of Investigation, later the Federal Bureau of Investigation: J. Edgar Hoover.

I have no respect for Hoover, and certainly not for his legacy, especially given he was a corrupt and destructive force for 48 years. 

Certainly there is no respect to be given Hoover—who targeted and destroyed people’s lives due mainly to political reasons—but this week’s blog topic does note the milestone anniversary of his death.

These below videos by Hezakya Newz & Film, who I added to recommended Videos this past February. The first three videos focus on Hoover’s funeral and, while he was alive, his secrets. The fourth and fifth videos focus on two human beings who ended up destroyed by Hoover’s FBI: Black Panther Party activist Fred Hampton (1948–1969) and actress Jean Seberg (1938–1979).