"Trump has been underestimated every step of the way for the last two years. He has thrown sand into the gears of the political establishment, made up of both parties, and controlled by Deep State players used to getting their way. Trump was able to use his powers of persuasion to overcome the left wing media propaganda and motivate a large swath of disaffected Americans to come over to his side. The never ending barrage of misinformation and fake news spewed by the Deep State controlled media ignores the fact he won 53% of the white women vote, along with huge numbers of union workers from blue collar states like Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Indiana."
...and later
"The staged violent response by the billionaire funded left wing faux anarchists, fake news Russian conspiracy propaganda, and NSA/CIA/FBI campaign to discredit and/or overthrow the Trump presidency is the kind of response you would expect from a dangerous threatened animal backed into a corner. The establishment will not relinquish control without a bloody drawn out fight to the finish."
The man is well off the deep end into being a Trump apologist and conspiracy theorist.
The Mule is a truly exceptional mutant, someone like Marvel's X-men, a very remote possibility of nature that becomes probable only thanks to the huge numbers of the Empire's lifetime and population. This is about as close as science-minded Asimov will go to invoke a miracle in a plot.
Trump, meanwhile, is disgustingly unremarkable, an incompetent small-time crook with a sad set of psychological defects. Had he not won the lottery in terms of his inheritance, you could find him vegetating in a trailer park in Arkansas. And had the GOP's bizarre infighting machinations left it with a single emerging credible candidate, Trump's ship would have sunk long before the primaries.
What you quoted from the author makes it clear that his grasp of reality is as tenuous as Trump's.
Conspiracy Theorist? Damn this guy is way off the deep end.
This logic smells.
This "cycle" ignores the first World War and many others. The author includes the American Civil War and American Revolution as evidence of this "global cycle", which were not global conflicts. The American Revolution is estimated to have killed 50,000 people. But the French Revolution happened in 1792 and killed over 1,000,000, but that doesn't fit the cycle.
1800-1815 - Napoleonic Wars, 3,500,000-6,000,000 deaths. Not part of the cycle.
1850–1864 - Taiping Rebellion, China - 20,000,000-100,000,000 deaths. Not part of the cycle.
1862–1877 - Dungan Revolt, China - 8,000,000-20,000,000 deaths. Not part of the cycle.
The list goes on. Literally. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_by_death_toll in case anyone's interested)
> None of this is a coincidence
He's right about that. It's not a coincidence, it's just cherry picking history.
