Quick Analysis of Trump Victory in South Carolina: Does the “Old Guard” Coalition calculate that they can’t take Trump down believably so they are allowing some margin of victory?

Please, Everybody!, don’t take your eye off the ball. If those controlling the ES &S computers (no paper ballots) in South Carolina thought they could get away with it, they could have had Cruz or Rubio “defeat” Trump 27% to 23%, or whatever, tonight. Since there are no hand counts of paper ballots by neighborhood people, then we must take the published computer election results on BLIND FAITH.

These easily-rigged computer election results are unacceptable, and unconstitutional, and illegal. Did Trump get 54% instead of 32.5%? Did Rubio and Cruz get about 6% each instead of 22%? Did Ben Carson get 15%, but have his votes switched to Cruz and Rubio? The point is that I don’t know. And neither do you. And neither does anybody else except those running the ES &S computer election programs in South Carolina tonight. All the above scenarios are just as plausible as the TOTALLY UNCHECK-ABLE published results.

Are so many people now aware of the way the Election Night Gatekeepers work — that the Gatekeepers are worried about being exposed and perhaps indicted if they try to make candidates that can’t draw over 200 people to a rally “defeat” the guy who regularly, and so far always, attracts thousands and tens of thousands to his rallies?

After all, our youtube video, “Trump must challenge secret computer counts in NH and SC” has achieved 8,786 views in two weeks as of this minute. And this video has been watched by some people “in high places” — high places when compared to those of us publishing this website.

And many others are working to restore honest, transparent elections, both by spreading Watch The Vote information, and information compiled by election fraud investigators unrelated to us.

If Trump were “losing” in NH and SC — we would probably have 100,000 views of that video instead of just under 9000 views. All this could be holding the Old Guard back from robbing Trump blind. After all, as “Votescam” author Jim Collier used to say, even after the computers are installed – the published results must be BELIEVABLE.

Until we have gotten the computers totally thrown out — until we have restored honest transparent elections (paper ballots, counted by neighborhood people BEFORE the ballots leave the public sight) — we’ve got a problem. A problem we must deal with and fix.