As I try to stay away from politics—for now—during this highly contentious election year, I’m going to bring up a subject nearly as controversial: the movie critic, Armond White.

To anyone who doesn’t know him, Mr. White is a movie critic well renowned for his apparently contrarian viewpoints on most popular movies. He even had a brief feud with one of America’s best-loved film reviewers, Roger Ebert. During their brief feud, Mr. White called Mr. Ebert, “the worst thing that’s ever happened to film criticism”, and Mr. Ebert eventually sided with the Internet at large in calling Mr. White a troll.

That aside, there are a number of things fanboys, the Internet, and Armond White haters have wrong about him: he isn’t stupid; he isn’t ignorant; and, he isn’t a troll. He is, in fact, quite intelligent and, unlike the majority of film reviewers on and off the Internet, Mr. White is quite well educated in cinema, having a Master of Fine Arts in film from Columbia University. Unlike most Internet film reviewers, he doesn’t care what other people think about his reviews; his role model was Pauline Kale, who never, ever surrendered to hype.

Because of his education and his passion for film, his sometimes vicious attacks on films and filmmakers that do not meet with his approval are legendary. Additionally, as a consequence of being a black American who does not subscribe to the accepted and expected liberal agenda for journalists and people of color, Mr. White’s opinions often rub people the wrong way, such as his derisive and very public criticism of Twelve Years a Slave and its director, Steve McQueen.

Like him or loathe him, Armond White’s reviews are almost always worth reading because of the unique insight and depth of knowledge he often brings. Unfortunately, he doesn’t bring that insight to all movies. His greatest flaw, I believe, is his growing prejudice. Oh, not anything so crass as racial. But, as he has gotten older, he apparently has selected a number of filmmakers who can do no wrong, and a much larger number who can do no right. It seems as though he decides to love or loathe many movies before he sees them, and spends his time while screening them figuring out how to justify his opinions.

On his “good” list is Stephen Spielberg, one of the finest directors currently working. While I love most of Spielberg’s movies, even he knows he screwed some of them up (he publicly apologized for Temple of Doom). Not according to Mr. White, who not only raves about all Stephen Spielberg’s movies (with a single exception), he also vociferously proclaimed the nearly universally reviled Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull to be “the best” of the series.

Another filmmaker on Mr. White’s “good” list would seem to be a mystery: Michael Bay is not regarded as a great director by anyone other than Mr. White. It’s clear Mr. White finds Michael Bay’s visual style quite appealing, and so forgives any minor flaws, such as terrible scripts and wooden actors. He even said as much in at least one of his Bay reviews.

Filmmakers he detests include some popular and well-regarded directors such as Christopher Nolan, Stanley Kubrick, and Ridley Scott. While I don’t like everything from any of these directors (and detest at least something from all of them), Mr. White hates everything they’ve produced. He even uses his coined verb “kubricking” to describe a movie ruined in a particular manner.

He also detests output from certain studios. For years, the number one studio on his hate list was Pixar; Mr. White claimed Pixar had “completely ruined animation”. I think Marvel Studios recently has replaced Pixar in Mr. White’s eyes. In fact, since Pixar lost its shine after a few failures, Mr. White actually gave an almost positive review to their most recent original film, Inside Out. Perhaps he really hates studios that are too successful and feels the need to slap them into humility.

My final observation deals with Mr. White’s seeming immunity to stupid plot holes and inconsistencies in movies he approves of, as demonstrated by his strong approval of Michael Bay movies. Most recently, he gave a loving review to Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, praising its morality, and how it “brought soul back to superhero movies”. While I was watching BvS, I was annoyed and amazed by plot holes and non-sensical behavior of the characters. However, I was stunned by Batman’s sudden and bizarre switchover, from an enemy who vowed to kill Superman, saving the world from an alien menace with God-like powers, into a friend and partner based on… What? Both their mothers had the same first name? Suddenly, Superman is no longer a dangerous, god-like, alien threat because his mother’s name was Martha?? Neither this, nor any other plot problems were mentioned by Mr. White, because he already planned to love the movie before he even saw it—why he planned to love it is a subject for another time. Inconsistencies and plot caverns were beneath his notice.

Mr. White’s critiques seem most relevant when applied to small films, independent or otherwise. As an example, I read his reviews of ‘Joy’ and ‘Anomalisa’ and found myself agreeing with most of his points on both movies, and he brought up ideas that hadn’t occurred to me.

I will continue to read his reviews. Despite his eccentricities, he has more to say than almost any film critic or reviewer out there. I simply take his reviews with a grain of salt—or maybe the entire shake—depending on the subject of his review.

“If voting made any difference, they wouldn’t let us do it.”  Mark Twain

Let’s be clear. I don’t want Trump as president. Based on things he’s said and done, he’d be almost as bad as Obama has been, although in very different ways. No, I don’t think Hillary will be any better. The truth is, our selection for president has never been based on such a terrible assortment, at least, not in my lifetime. And another sad truth is, there are powers aligned that will not allow The People to choose any but an approved candidate.

We have, as probably our best choice, Bernie Sanders, who has promised he’ll give everything away for free to people who choose not to work, increase personal income tax by 47% for people who work, and increase debt by $19 trillion over 10 years. He wants to open the US borders wide, allowing anyone and everyone in, and he’ll provide them with free everything, including voting rights. And this is our best choice? He appears to be our best choice, only because he seems sincere in his desire to turn the US into his version of heaven: a socialist country where the people are taken care of by the government, and so, need little control over their own lives and choices.

The other Democrat, the one most likely to win, has promised much of what Sanders has. But, unlike Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton doesn’t promise these things because she thinks it’ll be good for the country. She’s promising them because she’ll do anything for power, and once she has it, she’ll do anything to keep it. There’s no point in going into specifics about her past: either you dislike her and believe every bad rumor about her, or you support her no matter what. In any event, she’s an arrogant megalomaniac with delusions of grandeur and dreams of ruling the world.

All Republicans save one are pretty much out. Donald Trump is charging through the primaries, crushing his competition in landslide after landslide. No one else is even close. He has broad based support, not only among whites, but also among blacks and latinos. The media paints him as a racist, misogynist warmonger who’ll drop nukes on Mexico, declare war on Islam, and turn the world into a smoldering cinder as he marches toward world domination. He is, in fact, an arrogant, megalomaniac with delusions of grandeur and dreams of ruling the world, just like Hillary. The difference is, he hasn’t been a politician long enough to know when to filter his baser ambitions through some imitation of common sense.

However, none of that matters. Trump will never be president. He may sweep the primaries and become the undisputed, Republican nominee. He may dominate the polls as the only candidate who seems to want American to remain a sovereign nation. He may even leave Hillary so many points behind in polls, that it seems hopeless.

It doesn’t matter. He will never be president. There are too many people who wield enormous fortunes and irresistible power to allow such an event. Let’s take a few examples.

George Soros will pump entire fortunes into above-board and behind-the-scenes schemes to derail Trump. Whether or not Trump would work to protect the nation, he stands in the way of Soros’ plans for the country. If George Soros supports candidates, that’s because he already owns them.

Hillary Clinton will pull out all the stops. She’s run dirty campaigns before, but all will pale compared to what she’ll do to Trump. On the other hand, unlike other Republicans, Trump will strike back. He’s not afraid to ‘hit a girl’, and he doesn’t believe in political correctness. This will be ugly on a scale not seen in our lifetimes, entertaining, but ugly.

Barack Obama, who is also famous for playing dirty, will be entirely in Hillary’s camp on this one. He wants to be a Supreme Court Justice, after all, where he can make law from the bench, just as he has been making law as president. He even has the resources of the Federal Government to command. Does anyone really believe that conservative organizations were targeted by the IRS by chance?

And then, there’s the Media. Infuriated that their chosen candidates failed in 2000 and 2004, they dove into selecting the US president in 2008 and 2012 without reservation. Their bias was no longer hidden, as they softballed the completely inexperienced and unqualified junior senator from Illinois, who had a questionable background and even more questionable backers. And they so thoroughly assassinated the character of a previously well-thought of Alaskan governor that she remains a joke to this day, with her every word still ridiculed in movies, scripted television, talk shows, and by ‘unbiased’ news readers. Interestingly, not only is Trump hated by the usual, anti-Republican propaganda outlets, but even Foxnews has been attacking him mercilessly. In the last Republican ‘debate’, the moderator trotted out graphic aids in her attacks on Trump, something an actual ‘moderator’ wouldn’t dream of doing. ‘Fair and balanced’, indeed.

So, what will happen to Trump? What will prevent him from being president?

The hope by the media is simple: through their combined efforts, plus money from Soros and Friends, and concentrated attacks by Hillary, Trump will lose the primary to…anyone. At this point, it seems unlikely this will happen, but it’s still possible.

Behind the scenes, prominent Republicans are working to find loopholes in convention rules, perhaps even change the rules to prevent Trump from winning. Then they will install the good little establishment Republican of their choice, one who will make noise about controlling government spending, and then spend, spend, spend while railing against abortion, birth control, and trying to establish a state religion.

If the Powers that Be in the Republican Party fail, and Trump wins the primary, there’s a good chance Trump won’t survive until the general election. He could get sick, he could die of natural causes, he could have an accident, he could be assassinated by some freedom loving, anti-hater from the liberal camp who believes he has the right to choose who our president cannot be. They have already set a violent precedent, which is being blamed on Trump by the unbiased media. After all, if the preponderance of the population chooses the wrong candidate, then clearly, they are too stupid to be allowed to choose at all.

Trump could make it to the election, and, trailing in the polls, lose to Hillary. This is likely, given the forces lined up against him.

Trump could lead in the polls, right up to the election, then lose spectacularly. After all, polls aren’t always right, and there are many, many dead people and illegal aliens who could cast votes in Hillary’s favor. Those who claim voter fraud doesn’t exist are always those who benefit from voter fraud.

Trump could dominate the polls, and riots could ‘spontaneously’ break out across the nation, spreading violence and chaos everywhere, ‘forcing’ President Obama to declare martial law and suspend elections until order is restored. By the time order is restored, President Emperor Obama would no longer be worried about Trump, because Trump will have vanished in the chaos, along with vast numbers of racists, misogynists, climate deniers, and other non-liberals who disagreed with the need to turn the country into a police state.

Do I actually think the Prez will declare martial law and take over the country? No. I think Trump will be eliminated, one way or another, before it comes to that. But Trump will never be allowed to be president.