It doesn’t take a majority to get results

It just takes a very determined minority.

It doesn’t take a majority to get results

Keith C.

“If the people in the 13 colonies behaved like they do today they would be just like the British are today.” To me, that statement implies that taking action may require a majority of citizens, and I don’t think that is true.

Many people today do actually act as the majority of colonists did then. There was a very positive outcome despite this, however.

Some basic numbers and facts to make a point – i.e. it didn’t take nearly a majority in order to initiate change (Revolution then, Evolution(?) now).

Historians have generally used the Adams’ account of events, or the 1/3 observation: 1/3 of the population was for the Revolution, 1/3 were neutral, and 1/3 were Loyalists and, therefore, belligerent to revolution activities (I would suggest that this is likely similar breakdown of today’s political landscape.) The support for Revolution didn’t include a majority of citizens at all – nor did it include a majority to fight to attain victory.

Adams, according to some accounts, may have actually overestimated the number of supporters of the Revolution.

Some historians have suggested that as much as 40-45% of the population was against the Crown – this was likely, however, estimates of support when the fighting actually began and more likely represents support toward the end of hostilities.

Observations/statistics gaining more popularity are that only 20% or so of the colonists were actually initially enthusiastic enough to join the cause. Why is this important? It’s proof that it doesn’t take a majority to get results, it just takes a very determined minority.

Also, we see that all of this wasn’t/isn’t possible without a very determined leadership. There were only 53 signatories to the Declaration of Independence. Some were tortured and hung, many had their farms raided and burned to the ground, some lost sons to the war, and others went bankrupt. But, they knew the consequences and accepted them anyway so that we could gain our independence and live free of English tyranny.

It will take real leadership/personalities, some group of men and women with the “audacity” to put everything on the line to lead the rest of us to action in order to retain our Republic. Pence maybe in his role as President of the Senate on Jan 6 , Gen Flynn?! Lt. Col. West?!

We don’t need a majority of citizens, or even a majority of the (likely) 80M+ Trump voters to effect change. We just need that determined minority led by an unselfish, patriotic leadership.

4 thoughts on “It doesn’t take a majority to get results”

  1. President Trump’s sea of red counties votes was impressive and could quite easily block roads to supplies in those smaller blue cities.

  2. A transgender “trans activist and science writer” is calling for the mandatory prescription of puberty blockers for children until they can “consent” to their bodies’ natural development and choose a gender for themselves.
    ht tps://
    ht tps://
    ht tps://

    Crazy Town USA

    This was written over a year ago… a ‘nice call’ by Mike Adams.
    The lawlessness and de-humanizing TYRANNY of the establishment Left is teaching patriots what’s at stake when the civil war begins.
    ht tps://
    Tuesday, November 19, 2019

  3. With the exception of the Trump family, don’t expect such leadership and courage from Republicans. They are spineless, happy losers accepting their role of secondary losers so long as they occupy the realm as “loyal opposition”. It is time to form a new party that actually is willing to fight, like Trump, for what they believe. I’m sick of wimps!

Comments are closed.