February 3, 2017

Feb 03 00:57 Progressive foolishness
Feb 03 04:15 PC wimps at UC-Berkeley
Feb 03 12:55 Bad candidates = bad results

Prior Months: Jan

Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016



Progressive foolishness


Eugene Robinson's latest article is proof that there aren't many great strategists left in the Democratic Party. A topnotch political strategist wouldn't say "In the two weeks since, Trump has only piled outrage upon outrage, as far as progressives are concerned. He took the first steps toward building his ridiculous wall along the southern border, but with U.S. taxpayers' dollars, not Mexico's. He squelched government experts who work on climate change. He weakened the Affordable Care Act in the hope that it would begin to collapse, which would make it easier for Congress to kill it."

That's because they'd know that the ACA started collapsing a year ago. Its collapse is inevitable because it's terrible legislation. A relatively healthy person is better off not buying insurance because the ACA's out-of-pocket expenses (premiums plus deductibles) in some states are so high that families are better off paying the penalty rather than buying the insurance. As I've written before, the ACA is catastrophic coverage at Cadillac plan prices.




And I can't help thinking back to 2009. Republicans made an all-out effort to stop the Affordable Care Act. Their motives were purely political; some GOP senators railed against policies they had favored in the past. Ultimately, they failed.  Obamacare became law.



But this losing battle gave tremendous energy and passion to the tea party movement -- which propelled Republicans to a sweeping victory in the 2010 midterm election. It is hard not to see an analogous situation on the Democratic side right now.


Democrats haven't learned the TEA Party lesson, which is that politicians better listen to We The People or else. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi didn't listen to people and lost 12 seats and 63 seats respectively. Chuck Schumer isn't listening to the people, either. The chances of Democrats picking up Senate seats is remote at best.






Democrats cannot stop Gorsuch from being confirmed. But they can hearten and animate the party's base by fighting this nomination tooth and nail, even if it means giving up some of the backslapping comity of the Senate cloakroom. They can inspire grass-roots activists to fight just as hard to win back state legislatures and governorships. They can help make 2018 a Democratic year.


This is delusional thinking. Democrats will lose more governorships and legislative seats because they're owned by special interests. They haven't talked about doing what's best for the people. President Trump constantly talks about putting people first. Democrats reflexively side with environmental activists, which has alienated blue collar union rank-and-file.








Democrats in Illinois haven't pressured Rahm Emanuel to actually crack down on Chicago's crime-infested streets. New York City's City Council hasn't blasted Bill De Blasio's sanctuary city policies. In both cities, people don't feel safe. Former President Obama insisted that terrorism wasn't a threat while ISIS killed people in shopping malls and at Christmas parties. The Obama administration insisted, too, that the borders were secured. Voters knew that wasn't true.

Voters won't vote for the party that won't protect them. Right now, people don't trust Democrats to handle the basic government functions. Until that happens, people won't trust Democrats.

Posted Friday, February 3, 2017 12:57 AM

Comment 1 by Lady Logician at 03-Feb-17 08:39 AM
Of COURSE, the NYC City Council can't look at De Blasio's sanctuary city policies.....they are all (De Blasio included) too busy trying to get rid of those terroristic carriage drivers in Central Park!

LL

Comment 2 by JerryE9 at 03-Feb-17 10:00 AM
I keep waiting for Trump to simply drive a stake through the heart of the Warmist religion, using their own numbers against them. A) The range of predictions from the climate models runs from "Oh, horrors" to "Never mind." [In other words they are all over the map and unsuitable as a guide to policy.] B) The /average/ of those predictions is not very far from what the Paris partiers have said is OK, C) That average is WAY above what has actually been observed, even as CO2 continues to rise, and in fact EVERY climate model predicts higher than the real data. D) Finally, BY THEIR OWN MODEL predictions, drastic reductions in manmade CO2 will only reduce temperatures by something like 0.02 degrees! For those doing the math, that's below the measurement error, and not worth doing even if true.

Comment 3 by JerryE9 at 03-Feb-17 02:26 PM
Hopefully Trump can protect us from Democrats rioting in the streets, or maybe just exhaust and outlast them.

Comment 4 by eric z at 05-Feb-17 09:03 AM
The TEA Party lesson is you can fool some of the people all of the time.

Comment 5 by JerryE9 at 10-Feb-17 09:46 AM
If you are saying the Tea Party has pointed that out about Democrats, you would be correct. Democrats count on the fact that some people simply do not learn.


PC wimps at UC-Berkeley


By now, tons of ink has been spilled talking about the riot that happened prior to Milo Yiannopoulos's performance at UC-Berkeley. Hopefully, this post will talk about something that hasn't been talked about. I hope this takes a bit more of an historic perspective than those other articles. I hope this article exposes the wimpiness of the anarchist/Soros/progressive movement.

In the late 1960s and early 70s, UC-Berkeley gained notoriety for celebrating some of the greatest debates imaginable. The exchanges were testament to the intellectual heft of the students and personalities that participated in those debates. Today's reporters, by contrast, talk about the students' First Amendment rights to protest. Shame on them for that wimpy, obvious drivel. Nobody's disputing the fact that students have the right to protest. That 'reporting' is missing the point, though.

The anarchists that inflict bodily harm on other students are the point that the MSM is missing. The point is that these anarchists aren't interested in putting together a coherent argument, much less win a substantive debate. These rioters' first instinct is to injure defenseless people. This is a perfect example of that:



People that pepper spray a student like that should be arrested, convicted and thrown in prison for lots of years. Period. That rioter's intent was to harm and/or terrorize that young lady. There's no justification for that.

BONUS QUESTIONS: Q1: Why do the anarchists show up wherever the Soros-funded protesters protest? Q2: Is Soros funding both operations?

Keeping the protesters and the rioters separate is important because the protesters, aka snowflakes, are intellectual wimps. They're also fascists without knowing it. The snowflakes and anarchists don't vote for Republicans. That word sets them off. If the Democratic Party wants to rebuild itself, they need to utterly repudiate these fascists' actions. Otherwise, Democrats will become known as the party that won't stand up to fascist or stand for the rule of law.



Posted Friday, February 3, 2017 4:15 AM

Comment 1 by eric z at 05-Feb-17 08:56 AM
Same guy cancelled a scheduled Gay Pride march appearance in a predominately Muslim Malmo, Sweden neighborhood.

Can't stand the heat.

Should stay out of the kitchen.

Breitbart people, if you scratch the surface, are feckless.


Bad candidates = bad results


This article highlights the fact that money isn't everything in politics. According to statistics reported by Minnesota's Campaign Finance Disclosure Board, "party groups and political action committees supporting DFL candidates outspent their Republican opponents in 2016, according to end-of-year finance statements that were due Tuesday with the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board from every candidate, party and committee. Despite totals that far exceed recent elections and sometimes massive imbalances in spending, both seats went to Republicans on election night."

In fact, the article said "Outside groups spent more than $588,000 in 2016 to support Jensen or bash Jasinski through TV, radio, print and online advertising and other support. The Minnesota DFL Central Committee alone spent $330,000 on pro-Jensen advertisements and another $105,000 against Jasinski. Despite such heavy spending, Jasinski won the vote 59 percent to Jensen's 41 percent . Of course, Jasinski was not without his own third-party support. The Minnesota Action Network PAC and Freedom Club State PAC together spent almost $23,000 in his support and $128,400 against Jensen. Even so, the combined $150,700 spent on his behalf was barely a quarter of what was spent by Jensen supporters ."












This is proof that terrible candidates with a terrible message don't automatically win. Apparently, that principle applies equally to national and local races. Hillary had tons of money and lost to President Trump. The point is that Democrats don't have an appealing message. They have an organization that's shrinking and some wealthy donors but that's it. That's as true in Minnesota as it is nationally.




Not far behind Senate District 24 in independent expenditures was House District 24B, in which Republican Rep. Brian Daniels faced a rematch with former Rep. Patti Fritz, both of Faribault, whom he had defeated two years before. On Election Day, he retained his seat by a margin of 58 percent to 41 percent.


Then there's this:






All told, independent expenditures from Fritz allies came to almost $388,000, with another $299,000 spent on behalf of Daniels. Combined, the district drew about $687,000, a 916 percent increase from two years before.




Posted Friday, February 3, 2017 12:55 PM

Comment 1 by eric z at 05-Feb-17 08:54 AM
Freedom Club State PAC?

Cummins candidates!

Popular posts from this blog

March 21-24, 2016

October 31, 2007

January 19-20, 2012