Here is the bottom line: the Washington bureaucracies can be controlled only by one thing, which is budget cuts. Nothing else scares them. Nothing else affects them. Only if their budgets are cut will their influence be reduced. We will see with Trump's proposed budgets over the next four years how committed he is to changing the system. If there are no budget cuts, there is not going to be a revolution. It's very simple.

Ultimately, the Speaker of the House is the dominant figure with respect to the federal budget. The United States Constitution places initiatory authority over the budget in the House of Representatives. I realize that the federal government pays no attention to this any longer, but legally speaking, this is the law. Paul Ryan is the guy who holds the hammer. The Ways and Means committee is where the decisions ought to be made with respect to the federal budget. But, these days, the President of the United States is the one who submits the budget.

Donald Trump knows nothing about this. Hardly anybody knows much about this. This will determine what happens over the next four years. If he takes a blue pencil to the budget, he really can change the country. He is not going to do it. The powers that be, which this week are not yet the powers that be, will make sure that the flow of information to his desk is tightly controlled. Garbage in, garbage out. Keynesianism in, Keynesianism out.

All I know is that the alt-right, the conservative (both the neo and the paleo) the liberal and all their respective sub groups have guns pointed at me along with other real lovers of liberty. We'll see the anti-war left all of a sudden wake up, the Oath Keepers go to sleep, further eroding of whatever is left of the 4th Amendment, more police militarization and so-called "anti-war" "libertarians" make excuses for Trump's eventual Middle East warmongering to name a few.

In other words, 76 percent of eligible voters did not vote for the winner.

If the smug style can be reduced to a single sentence, it's, Why are they voting against their own self-interest? But no party these past decades has effectively represented the interests of these dispossessed. Only one has made a point of openly disdaining them too.

Abandoned and without any party willing to champion their interests, people cling to candidates who, at the very least, are willing to represent their moral convictions. The smug style resents them for it, and they resent the smug in turn.

Finally, whether the US elites can accept this or not, the US Empire is coming to an end. With Hillary, we would have had a Titanic-like denial up to the last moment which might well have come in the shape of a thermonuclear mushroom over Washington DC. Trump, however, might use the remaining power of the USA to negotiate the US global draw-down thereby getting the best possible conditions for his country. Frankly, I am pretty sure that all the key world leaders realize that it is in their interest to make as many (reasonable) concessions to Trump as possible and work with him, rather than to deal with the people whom he just removed from power.

If Trump can stick to his campaign promises he will find solid and reliable partners in Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping. Neither Russia nor China have anything at all to gain from a confrontation or, even less so, a conflict with the USA. Will Trump have the wisdom to realize this and use it for the benefit of the USA? Or will he continue with his anti-Chinese and anti-Iranian rhetoric?

Only time will tell.

The fact that politicians pretend that votes provide approval for a candidate's agenda, however, remain a convenient fictions for candidates — especially presidential ones — who , despite routinely garnering votes from under 30 percent of the eligible voters — and under 20 percent of the population overall — nevertheless claim to have the approval of "the people."