Response to the Green Party Youth Caucus's Candidate Survey

Q1: Name?

A1: Joseph W. Kopsick.







Q2: Email?

A2: jwkopsick@gmail.com





Q3: Phone?

A3: 608-417-9395

Q4: Position Sought?

A4: U.S. Representative (10^th District).

Q5: State?

A5: Illinois.






Q6: Are you running as a Green? If not, why not?

A6: No, I'm running as a write-in candidate, and trying to form a Mutualist Party in Illinois. The Green Party declined to nominate me by one vote.






Q7: Have you sought and have you been endorsed by your local party and your state party? If not, why not?

A7: I tried to get nominated by the Green Party but approval failed by one vote. I tried to get nominated by the Libertarian Party before that, and David Rych was nominated instead. I was the only person whom the state Libertarian Party ran somebody against, although I was told that it was in error and I would have been nominated if I had contacted the right person in time. But the way I lost the nomination at the state convention makes me doubt that; electronic voting failed, and then in the paper ballot round I was handed a ballot filled out with the name of my opponent instead of a blank ballot. Ideologically I am right between the Libertarian and Green parties, so I probably failed both parties' tests because I am not strongly aligned enough with one party or the other. But I believe that candidates in the middle will get more votes, while still promoting a large number of Green Party interests, because I believe that the radical middle is closer to where the average undecided and independent voter is. I want radical, swift change, but I also want lasting, constitutional reform, so I tend to mention the Constitution and the need for balanced budgets more than the average Green seems to appreciate. But the need to protect the environment, anti-war issues, and small parties' need for election reform, are progressive values that will always be important to me.





Q8: What other groups have endorsed your campaign?

A8: None so far, although I am in contact with Black Lives Matter, Stepping Stones (a sexual abuse recovery organization), and the local Green and Libertarian party chapters, concerning legislative matters related to issues they care about. My campaign manager and I are working on reaching out to more groups, including on social media.





Q9: How does your campaign help build the Green Party?

A9: Growing the Green Party, the Libertarian Party, and the number of independents in elected office are major goals of mine. I like to remind Libertarians that the party's co-founder David Nolan was a "Geo-Libertarian". This means that in terms of economics and tax policy, Nolan believed that Land Value Taxation is the most efficient, and least harmful, form of taxation. Milton Friedman praised L.V.T. as well. This means that Greens and Libertarians are much more compatible on environmental and tax issues than they think they are. I will promote things Greens and Libertarians agree on: decentralization, anti-war issues, civil liberties and police brutality reforms, and re-orienting tax policies across the nation in a manner which focuses on preserving the environment and the quality of land. I will advocate replacing all or most current forms of taxation - except for mineral resource exploration fees - with a tax on the unimproved value of land, and on the disuse and abuse of land in a way which makes it unusable by other potential human owners and by native species.





Q10: How does your campaign help empower youth?

A10: One of my top three issues is protecting children, together with reforming education. My proposed constitutional amendment, SKA (the Safe Kids Amendment), would reform education and child trafficking laws in a manner which protects children from kidnapping while also providing them with the skills and education they need to have middle class careers. I support bringing wood and auto shops, and other trade skills courses, back to high schools, but only for upperclassmen, and only with waiver systems, and on campuses separate from freshmen and sophomores. Additionally, as part of SKA, all states should be prohibited from allowing people under 17 to get married. I will also push for a full congressional investigation into the crimes of Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein.









Q11: How do you foresee your campaign advancing liberation for frontline communities?

[Author's Note: “Frontline communities” refers to communities on the front line of potential ocean level rise due to sea ice melting which results from less and less ice melting each year due to harsher summers between those melting seasons.]


A11: Tax policy should be re-oriented so as to focus on using punitive taxation to disincentivize the degradation of land, water, and air. Sourcing all of government's taxes from the misuse and abuse of land, will help prevent environmental degradation, while improving our economy. It will help production occur with the minimum amount of pollution necessary, and for each community to set up Community Land Trusts would help ensure that no pollution and mineral extraction occur without fully compensating the community (through paying taxes and compensating the community's health costs). Refocusing a huge portion of our political economy on environmental issues and land use, will help ensure that the land is responsibly developed, without either sacrificing the environment, or sacrificing too many jobs too quickly. I additionally support a tax on land hoarding, and I support ending all subsidies to all forms of energy, to end the rigging of the energy markets.





Q12: How do your foresee you campaign advancing anticapitalism and ecosocialism?

A12: If the question is "How do you foresee your campaign advancing ecosocialism?", then my answer is that I hope to promote Georgist (land-oriented), Mutualist, and socialist values and policy proposals, by discouraging the collection of rent, interest, and profit, but without prohibiting them. I will make it clear that these things are symptoms of the problems of monopoly; government grants the monopoly right to collect rent, interest, and/or profit to a given bank or business or certified lender. This rigs the economy; therefore rent, interest, and profit should decrease. They will only go away completely, when monopolies are broken up and defunded. I support removing all taxpayer supports of monopolies and oligopolies, to give socialists (and people wishing to build voluntary communes) the opportunity to participate in the economy with everybody else.





Q13: How many doors do you think your campaign can knock on? How many calls can it make?

A13: My campaign currently has only a small number of volunteers, but we are in the process of finding more volunteers. We will be spreading awareness about mail-in voting, as well as the push to make mail-in voting more difficult.



Q14: What kind of events and community involvement will your campaign have?

A14: My campaign will attempt to hold meet-and-greets, including candidate question-and-answer sessions, at local libraries, and possibly private events. We have held one meet-and-greet so far; in March in Lake Bluff.





Q15: How much money does your campaign anticipate fundraising? And how?

A15: We are not actively fundraising. My campaign manager has donated some gifts to the campaign, in the form of paying for campaign literature and signs and advertisements to be printed. But I want to set a good example for other congressional campaigns, by not accepting corporate contributions, and having my campaign be funded (thus far) by myself and my campaign manager. I hope that other candidates follow my example, and I hope that this helps get money out of politics.



Q16: What other groups will you seek support from?

A16: I will seek support from any and all parties, clubs, interest groups, and organizations that support civil liberties, peace, environmental justice, racial justice, equal protection of minorities, individual rights, increased ballot access for third parties and independents, decentralization of powers not specifically delegated to the federal government, and serious fiscal reform.






Q17: What parts of the district do you think you are strongest in and why?

A17: I'm not sure. Due to my message of promoting economic reforms that would make the markets more free and more fair, I suspect that I will do the best in areas with large numbers of young people, low-income voters, and people who do not identify strongly with either the Democratic Party or Republican Party. I also believe that making environmental issues a top priority will help appeal to people across my district, because many people in Lake County live near places where industrial pollution has recently taken place.





Q18: What forms of support would you ideally like from the Youth Caucus?

A18: I would like your endorsement, but what really matters to me are the individual write-in votes on Election Day (as well as your members' trust in me as an independent citizen-legislator). And if your members and supporters could share links about my campaign, I would appreciate it.






Q19: What is your current online and social media presence?

A19: I am active on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, and other sites.





Q20: Website?

A20: www.joekopsick.com (under construction).




Q21: Facebook?

A21:
- Personal: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100012735515034
- Campaign Group: http://www.facebook.com/groups/586988188625917/
- Mutualist Party of IL page: http://www.facebook.com/MutualistPartyIL/?modal=admin_todo_tour





Q22: Twitter?

A22: http://twitter.com/JoeKopsick





Q23: Other?

A23:
- My blog: www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/

- My platform: http://aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2019/08/expanded-platform-for-us-house-of.html
- YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/JoeKopsick4Congress





Q24: What is your media plan for your campaign?

A24: I believe that it will not be necessary to attempt to garner media coverage during the second half of August, because I suspect that the fact that I have made it into the League of Women Voters' debates throughout the month of September, will gain me some media coverage, without any effort on my own behalf. But I am interested in reaching out to independent media, freelance journalists, and reporters who are used to covering independent and third party runs.

Responses Written and Published on August 17th, 2020

State of Illinois v. Smollett: What if Jussie Smollett is Telling the Truth? (Incomplete)

     The following article was written as a script for my presentation to the Chicago College of Complexes, which I delivered on August 15th, 2020 via video teleconference.

Table of Contents

Part I: Introductions
     1. Introduction to Illinois v. Smollett, incl. Basic Facts About the Attack
     2. Why People Suspect This Was a Fabricated, Staged, Fake Hate Crime
     3. Speculation vs. the Rules of Evidence

Part II: The Physical Evidence and Verbal Testimony in the Case
     1. Examining the Supposed Proof That the Attacks Were Fabricated
     2. Additional Facts and Possibilities
     3. Conclusions About Physical Evidence, Verbal Testimony, and Speculation

Part III: Looking Closer at the Claims About "M.A.G.A."
     1. What is the Role of "M.A.G.A." in the Attack?
     2. Looking Closer at the Threatening Letter Smollett Received
     3. What the Police Say About the Purchases
     4. What Did the Osundairo Brothers Purchase Before the Attack?
     5. What Did the Police Find in the Osundairo Brothers' Apartment?

Part IV: Legal and Political Aspects of the Case
     1. Introduction to Legal and Political Aspects
     2. Did Smollett Confess? Did the Osundairo Brothers Confess? Who Says They Confessed?
     3. Political Aspects of the Case
     4. Did Smollett Get a "Sweetheart Deal"? Why Was He Let Off?

Part V: Conclusions, Part 1
     1. Confessions and Police Statements Don't Match Up with Verbal Testimony or Physical Evidence
     2. The Fact that Cameras Didn't Capture the Incident Could Mean Absolutely Nothing
     3. Smollett's Explanation of the Phone Call and the Noose Makes Sense
     4. Mayor Emanuel and Police Chief Johnson Made People Believe Smollett Defamed the City, Owed Reparations

Part VI: Conclusions, Part 2
     1. Faked Hate Crimes in America
     2. Jussie Smollett Was Lynched

Content

Part I: Introductions





     1. Introduction to Illinois v. Smollett, incl. Basic Facts About the Attack

     Introduction

     Thank you for having me. My name is Joseph W. Kopsick, I'm an independent researcher and blogger, and frequent candidate. I first addressed the topic of Jussie Smollett on my YouTube channel, JoeKopsick4Congress, on April 4th, 2019. That video is titled "Why Jussie Smollett Might Be Innocent." [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dbcrl5k6DU

     In that video, I read an e-mail which I addressed to podcast host and comedian Jimmy Dore. I thanked him for covering the Jussie Smollett case, but I explained that I disagreed with him that CNN host Brian Stelter was wrong to say that we can never really be sure about what happened the night that actor Jussie Smollett was allegedly attacked in Chicago (the morning of January 29th, 2019).

     I explained why I believe that Jussie Smollett might be telling the truth, and why I think it's possible that the Osundairo brothers were in fact extorting Smollett for money rather than Smollett commissioning them to attack him in a staged hate crime.

     I will do the same thing here tonight, and I will additionally explain why I think statements by the Chicago Police Department are a mix of lies and truth. Most importantly, I will explain why I think the physical evidence and the verbal testimony in the case contradicts a large portion of what the police are saying about what happened.


     Basic Facts About the Attack

     For those who aren't familiar with the case, Jussie Smollett was friends with Abimbola "Abel" Osundairo, and his brother Olabinjo "Ola" Osundairo, both immigrants from Nigeria. Smollett had worked on the Fox T.V. series Empire with Abel, who was a stand-in for the character "Kai", who was the love interest of Smollett's character Jamal Lyon.
     Jussie Smollett claims that he was attacked around 2 A.M. on the morning of January 29th, 2019, while on the phone, after leaving a Subway located at 511 North McClurg Street in Chicago. The attack occurred on the 300 block of East Lower North Water Street in the Streeterville neighborhood of Chicago.
     Smollett told police that he had received a threatening letter in the days before the attack. That letter contained a white powdery substance, and was mailed to Smollett at the T.V. studio where Empire was filmed; 1445 South Rockwell Street in Chicago.

     2. Why People Suspect This Was a Fabricated, Staged, Fake Hate Crime

     There are eight main reasons why people suspect that this was a staged, fabricated hate crime:

     1. People can't understand why Smollett's assailants would shout "This is M.A.G.A. country" in Chicago.

     2. People can't understand why Smollett would be outside at 2 A.M. in the middle of a polar vortex, in below-zero weather.

     3. People can't figure out how the bleach which was allegedly poured on Smollett, could have stayed warm long enough to remain a liquid, in time to be poured on Smollett, as he claims.

     4. People can't understand why Smollett would go outside in the middle of the night, given the supposed danger he was in, from the people who had been sending him threatening letters.

     5. People seem to suspect that the fact that Smollett received a threatening letter before the alleged attack, was done by the Osundairo brothers, at the direction of Jussie Smollett.

     6. People can't understand why Smollett was wearing the noose allegedly used in the attack, when the police arrived.

     7. Smollett's job (his role on Empire) was supposedly at risk, which people believe suggests that he staged the attack in order to create publicity for himself, as a victim of a staged hate crime, to keep his role, and increase his wealth; and people think he used his acting skills to do it.

     8. People aren't pleased about the fact that security cameras in the area supposedly didn't capture the alleged attack.

     3. Speculation vs. the Rules of Evidence

     I will show, throughout this presentation, that a lot of what the public has been led to believe - by the mainstream media and the Chicago Police Department, and by citizens commenting on the case - is purely a matter of speculation, or else is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the physical evidence and verbal testimony surrounding the case (which are better indicators of the facts).

     The rules of evidence, and the scientific method, are such that the person making the claim, must be the one who proves his claims; not the person being accused. I agree with the notion that perhaps we will never know what really happened that night", but my goal in this presentation is not to figure out exactly what happened. It is to figure out what might have happened that night, if Smollett has been telling the truth all or most of the time.

     We should remember that Smollett has barely had a chance to tell his story, and when he has, his statements have been twisted around by countless YouTube commenters, including people claiming to be "body language experts", whose credentials are dubious and whose comments are mostly speculation. I will additionally explain how each and every one of Smollett's actions and statements have been twisted to make him look like he is guilty and lying.

Part II: The Physical Evidence and Verbal Testimony in the Case




     1. Examining the Supposed Proof That the Attacks Were Fabricated


     M.A.G.A. Country

     Smollett stated that his attackers shouted "This is M.A.G.A. country" during the attack. This refers to Donald Trump's slogan "Make America Great Again".

     Judging from the conversations I've had on the subject, the average Chicagoan who hears Smollett claim that his attackers shouted "This is M.A.G.A. country", thinks "Chicago is definitely not 'M.A.G.A. country'. Why would Smollett's attackers say such a thing in one of the most heavily Democratic cities in the country?

     People who are already convinced that Smollett is lying, will jump to the conclusion that, if whomever attacked Smollett shouted something that wasn't true, then Smollett couldn't possibly be telling the truth.

     But isn't it more likely - or at least just as likely - that the attackers were lying? Isn't it possible that the attackers just said "This is M.A.G.A. country" - even though they didn't believe it - in order to conceal their identities?

     The Polar Vortex, the Temperature, and Bleach

     Some Americans who discussed the case were led to believe that the temperature outside, when Smollett was allegedly attacked, was 60 degrees below zero. However, the actual temperature at the time was probably sixteen degrees below zero (although it has been reported as anywhere between -20 and +2).
     The temperature was sixty below, with the wind chill included. That means it felt like sixty below, but that was not the actual temperature. However, some sources, such as C.B.S., gave the wind chill at the time as 40 below, 55 below, and 60 below. So what the temperature and wind chill were at the time of the alleged attack, is a matter which is under dispute.

     Most Americans were perplexed as to why Smollett would be outside, at 2 in the morning, in the middle of a polar vortex. That's why they think Smollett must be lying about the attack. But what many Americans don't know is that Chicagoans are used to going out in below-zero temperatures. We are used to it because we sometimes have to go outside in the middle of the night, for whatever reason, and we have to dig our cars out of the snow sometimes. 

     Another thing that confused people watching Smollett's case develop, was the issue of how the bleach stayed a liquid in such cold temperatures. However, Smollett only believed that bleach had been poured on him. It was reported as a "bleach-like substance". Different types of bleach freeze at either 7, 19, or 20 degrees above Fahrenheit, depending on which type of bleach, or bleach-like substance it is.
     Still, that's a higher temperature than the temperature at which the attack occurred, so it's understandable that people would be confused about how the bleach stayed a liquid at such a low temperature. But there is an explanation: The bleach could have been stored indoors, and then brought outside for the attack before it could freeze.

[The remainder of this article will appear on this page at a later date.]

Published in Part on August 16th, 2020

Incomplete Portions Removed on August 17th, 2020

Joe Kopsick for Congress Yard Signs

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

Created and Published on August 7th, 2020

Originally Published Under the Title

"Joe Kopsick for Congress Yard Sign"

First Image Created and Added on August 7th, 2020

All Other Images Created and Added on August 17th, 2020

2020 U.S. Presidential Candidates, Arranged by the Number of States in Which They'll Have Ballot Access

Click, and open in a new tab, to enlarge images

Note:

I previously reported that Vermin Supreme was running a write-in candidate. That is incorrect.

He endorsed Jo Jorgensen, the Libertarian Party's nominee, at the party's national convention.

However, seven states (those shown in green) will likely accept write-in votes

for any American who's eligible to be seated in the White House.

Sources include:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_and_independent_candidates_for_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election

http://medium.com/@Chris_Powell/2020-alternative-party-ballot-access-updated-a87e3a8f4f3

Originally Created and Published on July 31st, 2020

Images Updated, Replaced,
and Additional Images Created and Published,
on August 14th and 20th, 2020,

and March 16th, 2021

Full List of Donald Trump's and Joe Biden's Sexual Assault and Harassment Accusers

Twenty-Six Adult Women Who Came Forward Against Trump Regarding Serious Sexual Crimes

Twenty-Five Women Who Directly Accused Trump of Rape, or Sexual Abuse or Harassment:
1. Kristin Anderson

2. Mariah Billado

3. Lisa Boyne

4. E. Jean Carroll

5. Rachel Crooks

6. Tasha Dixon

7. Jessica Drake

8. Jill Harth

9. Cathy Heller

10. Samantha Holvey

11. Juliet Huddy

12. Victoria Hughes

13. Alva Johnson

14. Karen Johnson
15. Ninni Laaksonen

16. Jessica Leeds

17. Mindy McGillivray

18. Jennifer Murphy

19. Cassandra Searles

20. Natasha Stoynoff

21. Bridget Sullivan

22. Temple Taggart

23. Ivana Trump (nee Zelnicova, Trump's ex-wife; alleged rape)

24. Karena Virginia

25. Summer Zervos

One Woman Who Indirectly Accused Trump:
1. Maria Farmer (did not allege direct abuse by Trump; only alleged involvement w/ Epstein)


One Woman Who Came Forward Against Trump As an Adult, Claiming Abuse While Underage

1. Katie Johnson (one of the former Jane Does)

[Author's Note: It was reported here earlier that Maria Farmer was underage when she was raped by Trump. However, that was incorrect. Farmer was about 25 when assaulted by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, and Farmer observed Ivana Trump riding in limos with Ghislaine Maxwell and herself (enough to know that the Trumps were involved in Epstein's activities), but Farmer did not directly accuse Trump of raping her. The Aquarian Agrarian regrets the error.]

Nine Adult Women Who Came Forward Against Biden for Unwanted Touching, Inappropriate Sexual
Conduct, and Forceful Fondling

1. Caitlyn Caruso

2. Allie Coll
3. Jessica Leigh Collins

4. Lucy Flores

5. D.J. Hill

6. Sofie Karasek

7. Amy Stokes Lappos

8. Alexandra Tara Reade

9. Vail Kohnert-Yount

Two Underage Girls Who Were Seen Being Touched Inappropriately by Biden, But Have Not Come Forward

1. Caroline Bennet (Colorado Senator Michael Bennet's daughter)
2. Maria Piacesi (Montana Senator Steve Daines's niece)

All images above were designed by the author of this blog.

Click, and open in new tab or window, and/or download,

in order to view in full resolution.

     The image below was not designed by the author. It is being included, despite the personal suspicion of the author of this blog (Joe Kopsick), that some or many of the claims involved might not be credible.

     The author felt it necessary to include the image here nonetheless, in the interest of promoting full disclosure regarding the whole range of claims and accusations which have been levied at Mr. Trump.

Original Lists Compiled Throughout 2020,
and Finally Compiled and Published on July 31st, 2020

First Two Images Created and Added on July 31st, 2020

Final Image Added, on February 9th, 2021

Images Edited on February 11th, 2021

Edited and Expanded on August 20th and 26th, 2020,

and February 9th and 11th, 2021

Door Hanger Advertisement: Write-In Joe Kopsick for U.S. House of Representatives on November 3rd, 2020 (Version #1)

Created and published on July 30th, 2020

Title Edited on August 26th, 2020

Advertisement: Write-In Joe Kopsick for U.S. House of Representatives on November 3rd, 2020 (Version #1)

Created and Published on July 30th, 2020

Second Image Created on July 30th, 2020

and Added on August 6th, 2020

Title Edited on August 26th. 2020

How the President is Actually Elected, and Where You Can Vote for Third Party Presidential Candidates in 2020

     Incumbent president Donald Trump of the Republican Party will almost certainly be his party's nominee for the presidency in 2020. The Republican Party Convention hasn't been held yet, but that's almost certain to be the case, as it has been decades (28 years) since an incumbent Republican president has faced a significant challenge during a re-election campaign.

     The Democratic Party, and presumptive nominee Joe Biden, face a similar situation. However, it's remotely possible that Biden could fail to secure enough delegates on the first round, which could result in the nomination of Bernie Sanders.

     Still, that the Democratic Party will nominate Biden, and the Republican Party will nominate Trump, seems inevitable.

     Many Americans are upset that the president is not elected democratically, and that the candidate with the most votes does not always win, and that this "Electoral College upset" has been the case more and more often over the last twenty years.

     In a recent interview for an internet podcast, Ralph Nader, the Green Party's presidential nominee in 2000 and 2004, made reference to the Electoral College, in a manner which, to me, suggests that he does not understand how it works. In the interview, Nader was referring to either the 2016 presidential election, or else all elections in which the Electoral College elected a candidate who did not win the popular vote. Nader said something like "the Electoral College kicked in" because the winner of the popular vote didn't win the majority of votes in enough states to become president.

     I suspect that Nader is either confused, doesn't fully understand the process, and/or has been distracted by his desire to build support for the Interstate Popular Vote Compact, to accurately portray how, and when, and under what circumstances, the Electoral College works. (Note: The Interstate Popular Vote Compact is a compact between states which desire to make it legally binding upon Electoral College electors that they must support whichever candidate received a majority of votes in each state.)

     By saying "the Electoral College kicked in" after the "popular vote winner" didn't win enough states, Nader is - intentionally or not - misleading voters into thinking that the Electoral College doesn't always meet, and that it only meets when the "popular vote winner" doesn't win enough states.

     Whether Nader understands how the president is elected or not, there is no such thing as a "popular vote winner" of the presidency. Or, at least, there is, if you want to measure things that way. But as far as constitutional law - the framework for our government, which outlines the structure of our elections - is concerned, the "popular vote winner" does not matter, and for all intents and purposes, does not exist. The Electoral College elects the president, not the people.

     If there were such a thing as a "popular vote winner", then Hillary Clinton would be President of the United States right now, or she would be some sort of bizarre co-president. Donald Trump was inaugurated on January 20th, 2017, because he won the Electoral College. The Electoral College that meets every four years - in early December, about a month after the election - regardless of who wins "the popular vote". 

     I'm not saying that things have to be this way, I'm simply saying that this is currently how the president is elected. We can amend the Constitution to change that process any time we want; any time we get enough public support to change presidential elections in some particular way. That will require time, effort, coalition-building, and political willpower. But if a significant majority of the people think that it's acceptable for the president to be elected by a narrow majority, or a narrow plurality, of popular votes, then that's fine; it just requires a constitutional amendment before presidential elections can be run that way.

     Just keep in mind that, if the popular vote elects the president, we will have a brand new problem (which is just the same old problem in disguise): the problem of pluralities. If four people run for president, and each receives 40%, 30%, 20%, and 10% (as was the case in the election of 1860), then the candidate who won 40% will become president without receiving a majority of the popular vote. And that, in its own way, is just as anti-majoritarian as the way the Electoral College allows states to override the majority. Which leaves us back at square one.

     Fortunately, thanks to Amendment XII to the U.S. Constitution, there is a process which allows a "third party" or "independent" presidential candidate to win the office, if both Biden and Trump fail to capture the 270 electoral votes needed to win the presidency.

     It is possible for a “third party” candidate to stop both Biden and Trump from getting the 270 electoral votes necessary to win the presidency, forcing a second round of voting in which each state would have one vote and could choose from among the top three electoral college vote-getters.

     We shouldn't even be calling these parties “third parties”, because of how many American voters keep insisting “third parties can't win”. “Third parties can't win”? Not with that attitude, they can't! Third parties can't win if you won't vote for them.

     Calling the Libertarian Party and Green Party “third parties” suggests that they're third-rate, or not viable. That is not the case. The proper term is “minor party”, meaning a party that has not yet received 5% of popular support in a previous election in any given area. If a party has ever gotten more than 5% of the vote in any county in a state, then it is considered a major party in that state.

     We cannot say that we have fair and open elections, if we don't allow a third, a fourth, and a fifth voice into the presidential debates (which are now controlled by the Commission on Presidential Debates, made up of the former heads of the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee).

     We need more options.

     Luckily, there is an even easier way to elect a Libertarian, a Green, a socialist, a Constitution Party candidate, etc., to the White House. Twelfth Amendment tactics are not necessary! It's simpler than you might think.

     All that a “third party” candidate for president has to do to win the presidency, is receive a majority of the votes in about 25 or 30 of the states in which they've achieved ballot access. That's it!

     And guess what: It's already possible for the Libertarian Party and the Green Party to win, because each of them has achieved ballot access in more than 30 states! Moreover, each the L.P. and G.P. will probably achieve ballot access in somewhere between 45 and 50 states between now and Election Day (November 3^rd, 2020), as they have done during the last several presidential elections.

     So there's still hope! If a Green or a Libertarian wins a clear majority in more than half of the states, or in about 20 of the higher-population states, then as long as the electors in the electoral college respect the majority's vote, that candidate will be elected president by the Electoral College.

     Below are two maps which show the states where American voters will be able to choose the Libertarian nominee (Jo Jorgensen) and the Green nominee (Howie Hawkins) for president at the ballot on November 3^rd, 2020.

The Libertarian Party presidential nominee

had ballot access in 36 states and the District of Columbia

as of the last week of July 2020.

Yellow = states in which Libertarian Party presidential nominee Jo Jorgensen will be on the ballotGray = states in which the Libertarian Party is still petitioning to get on the ballot 

Source:

http://www.lp.org/ballotaccess/

The Green Party presidential nominee

had ballot access in 25 states and the District of Columbia

as of the last week of July 2020.

Green = states in which Green Party presidential nominee Howie Hawkins will be on the ballot

Red = states in which the Green Party is still petitioning to get on the  ballot

Orange = states in which Howie Hawkins will be a write-in candidate

Sources: Green Party website

This information is presumed accurate as of the last week of July 2020.

.

     To be clear: I stated above that if a candidate receives the majority votes in enough states, then that person will probably become president. That is, if the Electoral College voters abide by that decision. They don't have to.

     You see, each state is allowed to run its presidential election the way it prefers, and to allocate its Electoral College votes in any manner it pleases. That includes each state's right to decide whether to allow, or else punish and impose a fine upon, “protest votes” in the Electoral College. Electors who cast such “protest votes” are called “faithless electors” (but only if they go back on their pledge to support a given candidate).

     There are currently 18 states which do not impose any fine or punishment upon faithless electors: Idaho, Utah, South Dakota, Kansas, Texas, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Illinois Kentucky, Georgia, West Virginia, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. In all other states, state laws may either require a delegate to keep his pledge, or provide for the replacement of a delegate who becomes a faithless elector, or provide for a fine to be imposed upon the elector for attempting to break his pledge.

     What this means is that, theoretically, Electoral College electors in all of those 18 states could decide that they want to “sabotage” the vote, by choosing some candidate who didn't win the majority in their respective states, and they couldn't get punished. That candidate would have to receive a majority of votes in only a couple states besides those 18, to win enough Electoral College votes to win the presidency. Such a candidate could pass 270 votes by adding together their “legitimate” votes to their so-called “illegitimate” - but nonetheless legal - faithless elector votes.

     And voilà! There's yet another way a third party candidate could become president.

     The power of states and the Electoral College, are not the only “threats” to the “majority popular vote” method which many desire for electing the president. The power of faithless electors to vote for a candidate who did not win the majority in that delegate's state, could, in fact, be perceived as a threat to both the “popular vote” and the “states' rights” approaches.

     But when both major party candidates are corrupt, we have to consider radical approaches, such as refraining from punishing faithless electors who refuse to cast their vote for someone they don't believe is competent to assume the office of the presidency (the highest executive office in the land).      And we have to consider radical approaches such as electing a “third party” candidate to the White House.

     Here are two maps about faithless electors. The first shows which states faithless electors can and cannot break their pledges without being punished. The second shows that five other candidates received Electoral College votes in 2016; in addition to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

Map showing the legality of faithless electors

(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector)

2016 Electoral College results,

showing that seven candidates

won Electoral College votes, not two

(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election)

     Has anybody ever seen this map before? Most Americans haven't.

     How is this possible, when all we saw on CNN and FOX and MSNBC were red and blue maps? They were reporting the popular votes in each state. The Electoral College - where the president is actually elected - met a full month later, and some electors were free to pick people who weren't even running. That's the truth!

     The major media networks don't tell us this, because 1) they think it's too complicated for the average voter to understand; 2) it's time-consuming to explain; and 3) they don't want to remind American voters that they're not the actual people who pick the president, we actually elect people who elect the president.

     All of this begs the question: How many of us can say that we were taught the whole truth, in school, about how the president is elected in this country? How many of us knew that the people don't elect the president; they elect people who elect the president? That the Electoral College meets every four years, regardless of what happens with the popular vote?

     How long will this country last, if our government is so complicated, that we can't even teach our children how it works, because it doesn't work?

     If enough Americans who can't stand Biden or Trump, can choose either Jorgensen or Hawkins or some other candidate to rally around, then it will be possible for that candidate to win the 30-45% of the popular vote which will be necessary to receive in most states, to pull off a clear victory. 

     That will be especially easy to do, if either Jorgensen, Hawkins, or some other candidate, garners much more public support than all of the other third party candidates, and blows their own competition for "lead third party candidate" out of the water.

     I have my own opinion about whom that candidate should be, but it is ultimately up to the public.

     One way or another, one of the candidates opposing both Biden and Trump must become president, or corruption will continue to reign, and the republic will risk being lost forever.

     This may be our last chance.

     Please visit thegreenpapers.com to find the full list of candidates running in races in your area (including the president).

     Research Libertarian Party nominee Jo Jorgensen, Green Party nominee Howie Hawkins, Party for Socialism and Liberation nominee Gloria LaRiva, Constitution Party nominee Don Blankenship, Prohibition Party nominee Phil Collins, independent candidates Vermin Supreme and Kanye West.

     Find out whether each of them will be on the ballot in your state, and then go to the polls on November 3rd, 2020 and vote your conscience. As former Libertarian Party presidential nominee Gary Johnson has said, "The only wasted vote is a vote for a candidate you don't believe in."

Addendum (added on August 6th, 2020):

     On Monday, July 6^th, 2020, N.P.R. reported that the United States Supreme Court upheld state laws that punish faithless electors (which are also known as Hamilton electors, named after Alexander Hamilton).

     However, the fact that the court made this decision, does not mean that states must pass laws that punish faithless electors.

     It is also important to note that, according to Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, each state legislature determines the manner in which delegates are selected and appointed:

     “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, [emphasis mine] a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.”

Written and Published on July 30^th, 2020
Updated on July 31st, 2020
Addendum Added on August 6th, 2020

Police Officers Can Legally Rape and/or Kill You in Every State Except Georgia and North Carolina

Click, and/or open in new tab or window, to expand

Learn more about these topics at the following links:

Sources on resisting unlawful arrest with force:

http://aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2020/06/resisting-unlawful-arrest-by-police-in.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Elk_v._United_States

Source on police "having sex with people in their custody" (a/k/a raping them,

and/or coercing them with a promise of release in exchange for sex):

http://www.google.com/search?q=states+police+sex+people+custody&safe=off&sxsrf=ALeKk032NrFYOu88C-cmZQfzB5VpkQxnUQ:1596774448372&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjw-J-uoIjrAhVM-qwKHWDRC6kQ_AUoAnoECAsQBA&biw=2048&bih=940#imgrc=S88ykzpFUoAQmM

More sources on rape by police:

http://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/albertsamaha/this-teenager-accused-two-on-duty-cops-of-rape-she-had-no

http://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/claudiakoerner/anna-chambers-nypd-rape-charges-officers-dropped

Original Images Created, and Published, on July 29th, 2020

Edited and Expanded, and Title Changed, on August 6th, 2020.
The original title was "Police Officers Can Legally Rape You
in Twenty-Two States and the District of Columbia."

Images Replaced on August 14th, 20th, 23rd, and 25th, 2020

Guide for Volunteers Circulating Petitions to Get Joe Kopsick on the Ballot for U.S. House

     This document was created by the campaign to elect Joe Kopsick to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2020. It was created to instruct campaign volunteers on how to approach potential voters and signatories to the petition to get Joe Kopsick on the ballot, by name, on November 3rd, 2020.

     The document has been published here, for two reasons: 1) to allow campaign volunteers to access this information for job training purposes; and 2) to show other independent and growing campaigns how to train signature gatherers for their own campaign's purposes.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Phase 1:

APPROACHING VOTERS POLITELY AND CASUALLY

and

FINDING OUT WHETHER THE PERSON YOU'RE TALKING TO IS A REGISTERED VOTER

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 1A:

     Decide, carefully, whom to approach. Avoid people who are using cell phones, talking to other people, or who appear to be in a rush. Take care not to bother people who may be busy.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 1B:

     Approach the person casually; do not come within 6 feet of them. Take care not to appear to follow people or intimidate them.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 1C:

     Avoid misgendering the person; do not use the phases “ma'am”, “madam”, “girl”, “sir”, “dude”, “man”, “my guy”, etc..

     Address the person in a gender-neutral fashion, using any one of the following icebreakers:
- “May I have a moment of your time?”
- “Do you have a second to talk about the election?”
- “Hi, are you a registered voter?” or “Excuse me, are you a registered voter?”

     If the person is interested, then proceed to Step 5 (determining whether the person is registered).

     If the person is not interested, then see Step 4.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 1D:

     If the person appears very reluctant to engage you, or says they're not interested, do not bother them any further. If they say something, say “Thank you for your time” if it's appropriate. Avoid inconveniencing and upsetting them, wait a moment, and move on to another person (i.e., go back to Step 1).

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 1E:

     If the person says “I don't know” (after Step 3), show them the QR code that lets them know whether they're registered, and which districts they live in. Tell them that they can enter their name, address, and birth date on that page, to get that information.

     If the person has time, invite them to do it on their cell phone, or use your own (if the voter is OK with that).

     If the person is not registered to vote, but they want to help, tell them that their signature will be counted as long as they register to vote by July 20^th, 2020.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Phase 2:

EXPLAINING THE CAMPAIGN AND INTRODUCING JOE KOPSICK

and

EXPLAINING WHAT THE PETITION DOES, AND WHAT THE SIGNATURE MEANS
_____________________________________________________________________________________________

     Step 2A:

     If the person is registered to vote, say either:

- “I'm working with a campaign to elect Joe Kopsick to the U.S. House. Do you know who you're voting for, for Congress, this year?”, or

- “I'm working with a campaign to start a Mutualist Party in Illinois. Are you satisfied by the current set of choices you have, in regards to political parties in America?

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

     Step 2B:

     If the person is interested, and wants to know more, then tell them the following:

- “I work for a campaign that's collecting signatures to get independent candidate Joe Kopsick on the ballot for U.S. House on November 3^rd. Every signature also helps establish a Mutualist Party in Illinois.”

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

     Step 2C:

     Offer them free campaign literature, whether they want to sign the petition or not. But do not make them take it if they don't want it.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

     Step 2D:

     If the person wants to know more about what they're signing, and what the petition does, tell them the following:

- “This petition helps get independent candidate Joe Kopsick on the ballot for Congress, and it helps establish a Mutualist Party in Illinois.”

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

     Step 2E:

     If the person wants to know more about the Mutualist Party, then give them the relevant literature, and explain the following:

- “Joe Kopsick has founded a Mutualist Party in Illinois, but he is currently the party's only candidate. Every signature that helps get Joe Kopsick on the ballot, helps the Mutualist Party get closer to 5% of the vote, at which point the party would be legally recognized as a major party in the State of Illinois.”

     If the person still wants to know what the Mutualist Party is about, explain the following:

- “The party supports making the economy fairer and more free at the same time, and wants the economic system of Mutualism to be a balancing influence between socialism (on the left) and capitalism (on the right).”

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 2F:

     If the person wants to know more about what they're signing, and what the petition does, tell them the following:

- “This petition helps get independent candidate Joe Kopsick on the ballot for Congress, and it helps establish a Mutualist Party in Illinois.”

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 2G:

     If the person needs more information about what the petition does, say the following:

     “It's for registered voters (or people who will register to vote by July 20^th) who want to see Joe Kopsick appear on the November 3^rd ballot for Congress. The full name of the position is U.S. Representative from Illinois's 10^th congressional district. Signing this petition helps Joe Kopsick get on the ballot by name.”

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 2H:

     If the person doesn't know whether they live in the 10^th district, then show them either or both of the following two things, to find out:

     1. The list of towns, with the district map on the other side (copies of which have been provided to you).

     Towns: Bannockburn, Beach Park, Buffalo Grove (portions), Deerfield, Des Plaines (portions), Diamond Lake, Fort Sheridan, Fox Lake, Fremont Center, Gages Lake (portions), Glencoe, Glenview (portions), Great Lakes, Green Oaks, Grayslake, Gurnee (portions), Hainesville, Highland Park and Kennedy, Highwood, Indian Creek, Indian Trails, Ingleside, Kildeer, Lake Bluff and Knollwood, Lake Forest and Mettawa, Lake Villa (portions), Lakemoor (portions), Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lindenhurst (portions), Long Grove, Long Lake, Mt. Prospect (portions), Mundelein and Ivanhoe and Sylvan Lake, Niles (portions), North Chicago, Northbrook (portions), Park City, Prairie View, Prospect Heights (portions), Riverwoods, Rondout, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Third Lake, Vernon Hills, Volo (portions), Wadsworth (portions), Waukegan, West Miltmore, Wheeling, Wildwood, Winthrop Harbor, Zion

     2. The QR code that allows voters to determine whether they're registered, and which districts they live in

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

     Step 2I:

     Ask the person to sign the petition. Say “Would you like to sign the petition?”

___________________________________________________________________________________________________








___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Phase 3:

CLOSING THE DEAL
_____________________________________________________________________________________________

     Step 3A:

     If they're already eager to sign, and you've skipped over some of the previous steps, and they want to know, quickly, what the petition does, then give them this concise explanation:

- “This petition helps get independent candidate Joe Kopsick on the ballot for Congress, and it helps establish a Mutualist Party in Illinois.”

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

     Step 3B:

     If the person asks “How many signatures do you need?”, tell them this:

     - “One thousand two hundred nine (1,209).”

     If they ask “Why is that?”, tell them this:

     - “It's one-half of a percent of the number of people who voted in the same race in the previous election, which was 2018”.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

     Step 3C:

     If the person asks, “What happens if you don't get enough signatures?”, say the following:

     - “If the campaign doesn't get enough signatures to get Joe Kopsick's name on the ballot, then voters will still be able to vote for him on November 3^rd; by writing his name into the write-in space on the ballot, which will be underneath the names of his opponents who get their names on the ballot.”

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

     Step 3D:

     If the person asks where you're getting this information from, say this:

     - “All of this information is available in the 2020 Candidate's Guide, which can be downloaded from the Illinois state Board of Elections website.”

     (That website is at www.elections.il.gov)

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

     Step 3E:

     If the person asks whether they will be obligated to do anything, or prohibited from doing anything, as a consequence of signing this form – or if they ask specifically whether they will be obligated to vote for Joe Kopsick on Election Day – then tell them the following:

     - “This form is not a binding obligation to support the candidate on Election Day; this is only saying 'I want another choice on the ballot for U.S. House, and I want that choice to be Joe Kopsick.' But if you sign this petition, then you may not sign a petition supporting any of his opponents' efforts to get on the ballot, for the rest of the signature gathering period.” (That period ends on July 20^th, 2020.)

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 3F:

If the person makes a mistake while filling the form out, ask them to start over again, and fill a blank line in correctly from the start. Remember which line they made the mistake on, so you can include that line on the list of deletions.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 3G:

     If the person asks whether they can leave a petition out for people to sign, tell them no. Petition circulators must be physically present while signatures are being collected.

     Tell them that they can help us collect signatures to put Joe Kopsick on the ballot, but only if they stay with the forms while collecting, to make sure that voters fill out the forms correctly.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 3H:

     Thank the person for their signature.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 3I:
     Offer them additional literature.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 3J:

     Point to business cards, or other information, to let them know how to get in touch with the candidate and the campaign.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 3K:

     Tell the person, “Would you like to stay updated about the campaign via e-mail, or help the campaign collect signatures?”

     If they say yes, then show them the sheet; ask for their name, town, and e-mail address; and ask them to indicate whether they'd like to receive e-mails, volunteer, or both.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Step 3L:

     Wish them a pleasant day (or week, or month; whatever is appropriate for the situation).

     Unless it would be rude, also remind them to register to vote by July 20^th, and/or to vote for Joe Kopsick on November 3^rd.

     If they leave the encounter still unsure as to whether they'll support Joe, remind them to vote that day in general.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

In order to sign petitions to help Joe Kopsick get on the ballot,
you must meet ALL FIVE of the below requirements:
___________________________________________________________________________________1. You must be an eligible voter.
(convicted felons' signatures will be counted, but undocumented immigrants' signatures will not)

___________________________________________________________________________________
2. You must turn 18 by Election Day (must be born on or before November 3^rd, 2002)

___________________________________________________________________________________
3. You must register to vote by July 20^th, 2020.
___________________________________________________________________________________
4. You must NOT have signed a petition for any of Joe Kopsick's opponents in the 10^th District race

[i.e., Brad Schneider (D), Valerie Mukherjee (R), David Rych (L), and Bradley Sigmund Heinz (I)]

___________________________________________________________________________________

5. You must be a resident of Illinois's 10^th Congressional District, comprised of the following towns:

Bannockburn

Beach Park

Buffalo Grove

(northern half only)

Deerfield

Des Plaines

(northern half only)

Diamond Lake

Fort Sheridan

Fox Lake

Fremont Center

Gages Lake

(central and southern parts only)

Glencoe

Glenview(western half only)

Great Lakes

Green Oaks

Grayslake

Gurnee

(southwest, southeast, and northeast corners only)

Hainesville

Highland Park

(incl. Kennedy)

Highwood

Indian Creek

Indian Trails

Ingleside

Kildeer

Lake Bluff

(incl. Knollwood)

Lake Forest

(incl. Mettawa)

Lake Villa

(southern half only)

Lakemoor

(northeast
quarter only)

Libertyville

Lincolnshire

Lindenhurst

(all parts except portions

of northeast)

Long Grove

Long Lake

Mt. Prospect

(eastern half only)

Mundelein

(incl. Ivanhoe

and Sylvan Lake)

Niles

(extreme northwest corner only)

North Chicago

Northbrook

(areas northwest

of Shermer Rd.)

Park City

Prairie View

Prospect Heights

(southern half only)

Riverwoods

Rondout

Round Lake

Round Lake Beach

Round Lake Heights

Round Lake Park

Third Lake

Vernon Hills

Volo

(central and
north only)

Wadsworth

(eastern half only)

Waukegan

West Miltmore

Wheeling

Wildwood

Winthrop Harbor

Zion

______________________________________
1,209 signatures will be required (0.5% of the number of people who voted in the 2018 election)

and must be collected and turned in before July 20^th, 2020.

If you'd like to volunteer to canvass / collect signatures for Joe Kopsick for Congress,

email jwkopsick@gmail.com (or call 608-417-9395) to request petition forms!

Illinois's 10th congressional district

Written and Originally Published on July 3rd, 2020

Expanded on July 4th, 2020