Connect with us

Democrats

52% of Americans are politically irrelevant

Published

on

Donald J. Trump is the President of the United States. But which Americans does he really care about? If you think it’s his super-duper-hardcore-die-hard supporters, I contest that you are 100% wrong.

Don’t misunderstand — I’m sure he likes them well enough, he’s probably grateful to them, and in a way he relies on them to give him a good public image when he gives rallies and such, but that’s not what I’m talking about. When Donald Trump is trying to decide what to do and whom to please, his adoring fans are NOT his target audience. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that Trump isn’t worried about how a majority of his voters feel about him — even a majority of the country.

Now how can that be? Doesn’t he want to keep up his approval rating? Of course, but if you want your numbers to go up, you have to know which crowd deserves your attention.

I’ve previously discussed public opinion of Trump and the lack of accountability in government — now it’s time to combine the two.

Regarding public opinion, I addressed a recent poll which shows that 60% of Trump voters, or roughly 24% of Americans, claim that there is nothing the president could possibly do or not do to lose their support. Contrariwise, short of resigning, 28% of voters can’t think of anything Trump could possibly do or not do in order to gain their favor. That means that there are 52% of Americans whose votes are set and nothing Trump can say or do will change their minds.

That 52% is now totally irrelevant to the political conversation.

Back in 2012, Mitt Romney caught significant backlash for his comments that “there are 47% of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. … And so my job is to not worry about those people.” This is the classic case of something that is true but you should never say it, particularly when you’re running for president. Everyone knows that you never say that the dress makes your wife look fat, that your child’s recital sounded like a wounded animal, that your newborn baby looks slightly abnormal, or that half of your potential voters view themselves as victims and are dependent on government. These are just the basic axioms of life.

But, Romney was absolutely right. He had no chance of winning over those voters, so he had to focus on middle America — not geographically but ideologically.

So for us, this means that Trump only cares about pleasing 48% of Americans. And whoever runs against him in 2020 will have the exact same strategy. 28% are guaranteed to vote against Trump, and 24% are pledged to vote for him, so why bother with either group?

This is simple campaign strategy, but it has intensely negative implications when it comes to accountability while in office.

Many have expressed concern with Trump’s failure to deliver on key campaign promises, most notably Ann Coulter, who went from authoring In Trump We Trust to calling his tenure “a nightmare” after his showing no success in negotiating, passing a solid budget, or building the legendary (soon to be mythological) wall.

But through it all, Trump doesn’t seem to care. And to be honest, that’s probably because he doesn’t. He doesn’t necessarily need to deliver on those promises in order to stay in power, which is all that matters to him (and most politicians).

Does the 24% crowd want a wall? Sure! But who cares? If not enough of the 48% want it, then there’s no wall, and his base still won’t abandon him. Will he please the 28% by bloating entitlement programs and stumping for universal healthcare? Probably not. But who cares? Whatever a majority of the 48% want, that’s what Trump will do. Same story for the Democratic candidate. Same for your congressman. That’s just how politics works.

If you’re hoping for Trump to keep (or break) his promises, he needs to know that enough people want him to. He’s looking to please 26% + 1, and whoever gets his attention will guide the agenda.

Richie Angel is a Co-Editor in Chief of The New Guards. Follow him and The New Guards on Twitter, and check out The New Guards on Facebook.

Democrats

An open letter to those who are truly Liberal

Published

on

By

An open letter to those who are truly Liberal

First of all, a sincere apology for your treatment from those on the Right who use the term Liberal as a pejorative.

Despite the fact that there is a vast difference between the words Liberal and Leftist, many on both sides still confuse the terms. So, by way of an introduction, let us run through the basics to clarify our terms.

1. The fundamental debate in politics is between individualism and collectivism.

The individualist considers the rights and freedoms of everyone on an individual level. The collectivist considers rights and freedoms in terms of the collective ‘good’. The individualist favours individual Liberty as in the right to ‘Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness’. The collectivist is only concerned about these values in terms of groups or collectives. The individualist values each and every person in and of themselves, the collectivist values each person by what they can contribute to the collective.

By example, the individualist considers the right of self-preservation an individual right. The collectivist considers this to be – you guessed it – a collective right.

2. Politics is also a division between those who desire control over others and those who do not.

This was expressed by author and Engineer Robert A. Heinlein as follows:

“Political tags – such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth – are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” – Robert A. Heinlein

There are those who do not care about controlling others, while there are others who lust for this power.

The first general category simply want to live their lives with minimal interference from the government. The second general category are those who want to manage others and control their lives. It logically follows that Individualists would fall into the first general category, while collectivists would fall into the second category.

3. Freedom is trampled as government expands.

As Thomas Jefferson [and founder of the Democratic Party] stated it:

“The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground.” Thomas Jefferson

It should be self-evident that as government grows in size and power, individual Liberty decreases. The historic record shows this to always be the case. It logically followers that those truly imbued with the precepts of Liberty would oppose government expansion.

Individualists have little desire to control others, preferring Limited government to protect Liberty.

Collectivists want control others preferring the destruction of Liberty with expanded government.

How do these three points compare with the definitions of the words Liberal, Conservative and Leftists?

By definition, Liberals favour ‘individual rights and freedoms’ and ‘individual liberty, free trade’ are individualists. They have lot in common with Conservatives who favour ‘free enterprise’ and ‘private ownership’.

Conversely speaking, Leftist political philosophies are collectivist. By definition, those favouring ‘socialist views’ [Collectivism] are on the Left.

So why is this important?

Simply put, those who are truly Liberal have much more in common with Conservatives than the Left. True Liberals and Conservatives are individualists by nature, without much in the way of a desire to control others. These are people who want the government to be limited since that is the only way to maximise Liberty.

Leftists on the other hand, are collectivists by nature, desirous of control over the people who prefer expanded government over Liberty.

It is important to point out these fundamental principles since they clearly differentiate Liberals and Conservatives as on the political right from those on the political Left. Everyone needs to understand these precepts with regard to where they truly belong. For far too long, the Left has co-opted the term Liberal – a word based in freedom – for their designs in power. As is the case with their many other labels and talking points, their exploitation of that label is 180° Degrees out of phase with reality.

Those of you who are truly Liberal need to rejoin your allies in Liberty on the Right.

Frankly speaking, the Left has been lying to you over the decades. While they talk a good game about freedom and civil rights, they act in the opposite manner. Consider their actions:

  • They have worked tirelessly to undermine our individual Liberties of free-speech, freedom of the press, the right of self-preservation and even due process and the presumption of innocence.
  • Meanwhile they have asserted more and more sovereignty over the lives of ordinary Americans down to strict controls on their property to the types of drinking straws they can use.
  • This while they seek to expand government power to unheard of levels with total control over your health care and other ‘free stuff’ that will only serve to set everyone in their servitude.

The Left is the biggest threat to the cause of Liberty at present, those who value this important cause are realising this to be the case and are jumping ship, hence the burgeoning #WalkAway Movement. While many in that movement talk of leaving Liberalism the case presented shows that this isn’t entirely the case. Leaving the Left actually means rejoining the Liberal cause.

Ask yourself: Do you want to stand with the ochlocracy of the Left or the rationality of the Right?

The #WalkAway movement has seen many leave the Left for good, having become fed up with it’s irrationality and mob rule. Do you want your name to be connected to the increasingly violent rhetoric, If not actual violence from the Left?

Recent studies have shown that far-Left activists are a small percentage of the population, while the overwhelming majority are tired of it’s antics. Rejoining those who value Liberty will put you in the majority, instead of with a small segment of the population who value collectivism, political power and expansive government that is destroying Liberty.

Despite their overwhelming advantages in dominating the culture, media and government indoctrination [Public education] system the Left has been on a losing streak. They are down to the desperate measures of trying to control speech along with other Liberties – despite their labeling as well as threatening violence.

Do you condone these actions? If you do not, then you should #WalkAway.

If you truly value individual rights and freedoms, as well as free trade, then you belong with those who have these in common. The Far-Left political minority does not hold these values as important, so why should anyone be a part of it?

Continue Reading

Democrats

Three terrible decisions this week exemplify why Democrats keep failing

Published

on

Three terrible decisions this week exemplify why Democrats keep failing

Keep in mind, it’s only Tuesday. We still have three awful decisions by Democrats to discuss. In fact, “awful” or “terrible” just aren’t strong enough to describe how bad these decisions were.

It’s been my contention that since the mid-90s, Democrats have been trending away from sensibility and towards unhinged lunacy. At the time we thought the Clinton administration was going too far, but let’s be fair. Outside of his sexual deviations, they weren’t pushing the crazy ideas of today’s Democratic Party. Socialism wasn’t even a consideration. The 2nd Amendment was relatively safe, Brady bill aside. Economic growth was strong (in large part because of the internet). Crime was low.

No, I’m not defending Bill Clinton’s presidency. I’m simply suggesting we thought it was so far to the left at that moment, but his actions were clearly moderate compared to the far-left lurch we’re seeing today.

It isn’t just the policy shifts. Their styles of campaigning and governing have gone completely bonkers ever since Barack Obama took office. Since Sunday, we’ve seen three glaring examples of extremely poor decisions that are indicators of two undeniable truths.

They are lost in their leftist lunacy and they don’t even know it.

Here are the decisions that exemplify the path of today’s Democratic Party.

Sunday: 60 Minutes “interview” is a bickering battle

There’s one thing leftist mainstream media hasn’t learned for some reason. If they let the President answer questions, as they did during the 2016 primary season, he will say things that either don’t match reality or that paint him into a corner. It seems like every set of questions, whether at a press conference or interview, turns into an attempt by the “journalist” to debate the President rather than let him answer the question.

Lesley Stahl on 60 Minutes Sunday was no exception. If anything, it was a shining example of how the press handles the President. Not a question went by where she didn’t interrupt his answer or challenge him in some way. It was a stark contrast to the first time President Obama took was interviewed in the Oval Office.

There’s one glaring difference between 60 Minutes’ interviews with Presidents Obama and Trump

http://noqreport.com/2018/10/14/theres-one-glaring-difference-60-minutes-interviews-presidents-obama-trump/“Journalist” Lesley Stahl spoke over the President multiple times. If you watch the entire interview, you’ll see that this happened throughout. She would ask a question, most of which were attempts at “gotcha” responses, then would interrupt the President any time he didn’t give the answer she was wanting.

Now, compare that to the interview in the early days of the Obama administration.

Some may attempt to argue that mainstream media is not part of the Democratic Party. To this, I eloquently reply, “LOLOLOLOLOLOL.”

Monday: Someone told Elizabeth Warren releasing her DNA test was a good idea

It started off as a real winner for the Democrats when headlines started popping up that Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) had released a DNA test conducted by an award-winning scientist that demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that she had substantial Native American heritage. Mainstream media started pushing the story immediately. Leftists cheered.

Then, things started coming to light. First, the initial report required a correction because their math was off. This highlighted the possibility that she is only 1/1024th Native American, which is actually below the national average. Then, it was revealed that the test couldn’t confirm actual Native American heritage, but that the results could have revealed a distant ancestor from South America.

Things were looking pretty bad as social media started taking her bold declaration and mocking it profusely.

Elizabeth Warren releases DNA proof that she’s at least 1/1024th Native American. Twitter responds appropriately.

http://noqreport.com/2018/10/15/elizabeth-warren-releases-dna-proof-shes-least-11024th-native-american-twitter-responds-appropriately/The test shows she is at most 1/32nd Native American if she is six generations from her Native American ancestor. That’s her best-case scenario. At worst, her ancestor was as far back as ten generations which would make her 1/1024th Native American. To put that into perspective, if she were to honor her heritage by engaging in 1/1024th of a four-hour Native American Sweat, she’d be in and out of the lodge in 14 seconds.

Okay, so it may not have been a great idea to release the results. Instead of backing her claims in the past that she’s part Native American, they seemed to refute them. Democrats started pointing in other directions, including the President’s promise to give $1,000,000 to a charity of her choice if she could prove she had Native American ancestors.

It was a good ploy, but then the hammer dropped on the whole thing.

Cherokee Nation responds to Senator Warren’s DNA test

https://www.cherokee.org/News/Stories/20181015_Cherokee-Nation-responds-to-Senator-Warrens-DNA-test“A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Current DNA tests do not even distinguish whether a person’s ancestors were indigenous to North or South America,” Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin Jr. said. “Sovereign tribal nations set their own legal requirements for citizenship, and while DNA tests can be used to determine lineage, such as paternity to an individual, it is not evidence for tribal affiliation. Using a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong. It makes a mockery out of DNA tests and its legitimate uses while also dishonoring legitimate tribal governments and their citizens, whose ancestors are well documented and whose heritage is proven. Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage.”

Someone gave Warren really bad advice by telling her this will get her in the spotlight and help her launch her presidential campaign. Whoever it was should probably give up on being an adviser. This was a bad idea that could be seen from a mile away.

Tuesday: Heidi Heitkamp outs sexual assault victims in an ad without getting their permission

The singular purpose of an ad placed in the Bismarck Tribune was to showcase that Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) was sensitive to victims of domestic violence, sexual abuse and rape. Moreover, it was intended to show that her competitor, Kevin Cramer, was not.

Her campaign wanted it to appear they had reached out and were assisting these 127 survivors of abuse. The problem is they weren’t helping these survivors and they didn’t reach out to many of them. Some went to social media to voice their outrage of being outed by a United States Senator to the public. A few claimed they weren’t even victims. At least one said she’d never heard from Heitkamp nor did she support the Senator.

This should have been extremely easy. Do what you claim by reaching out, getting feedback, and offering support to women. 127 is a lot of people to contact, but it must be done if that’s what your ad claims you’re doing. Instead, the campaign failed to do the most basic tasks of actually contacting the people they claimed they contacted. It’s turned into a major debacle.

Heidi Heitkamp just blew her reelection hopes to smithereens

http://noqreport.com/2018/10/16/heidi-heitkamp-just-blew-reelection-hopes-smithereens/“Sexual assault is a serious crime – and one that too many North Dakota women have experienced,” Heitkamp said. “In an attempt to bring awareness to this issue and push back against dismissive comments toward sexual assault survivors by Kevin Cramer, our campaign worked with victim advocates to identify women who would be willing sign the letter or share their story.”

This should be the end of her campaign. In a sane world, you can’t do something like that and still keep your job. This is the political world where sanity is not required, but hopefully the people of North Dakota will hear about this and be rightly disgusted.

Her chances of reelection were slipping away, but now they should be essentially zilch.

Today’s Democratic Party

It’s only Tuesday. There are plenty of days left in the week to make a bigger mockery of the party of failure.

My biggest concern isn’t that the party keeps failing. That’s actually a good thing, especially considering how far to the left their ideologies have become in recent years. The real concern here is that they’re becoming more of a wounded dog than a fighter, which means their activists are becoming more and more likely to engage in extreme measures to make their points heard.

When their leaders continuously fail them, the leftist activists will have no choice but to become more vocal, more defiant, and more violent. Party leadership can’t get anything done, so the far left in the trenches are becoming more of a threat than ever before. If they can’t legislate their agenda, they’ll attempt to force it upon us. That’s troubling.

The modern machinations of the Democratic Party are marked by mistake after mistake. They seem like a party without a cause other than trying to stop the President. Even in this singular goal, they’re failing miserably.

Image via The Nation.

Continue Reading

Democrats

Heidi Heitkamp just blew her reelection hopes to smithereens

Published

on

Heidi Heitkamp just blew her reelection hopes to smithereens

Things weren’t looking good for Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) in her race against Republican Kevin Cramer. Her no-vote on Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation made her poll numbers fall, but there was still hope at the incumbent’s camp that she could turn it around in the last three weeks.

Those hopes just blew up in their faces.

An ad posted to the Bismarck Tribune by her campaign attempted to shame Cramer by listing the names of dozens of victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, or rape who allegedly stood with her. Here’s the problem. Some of the women listed are coming forward saying they didn’t give permission to use their names, do not support Heitkamp, or weren’t victims as indicated by the ad.

By trying to pretend she was the sensitive one, Heitkamp outed victims against their will.

Women Say Heitkamp Campaign Identified Them as Sexual Assault Survivors Without Their Permission

https://www.sayanythingblog.com/entry/women-say-heitkamp-campaign-identified-them-as-sexual-assault-survivors-without-their-permission/In a separate Facebook post, Eve Lancaster of Bismarck also indicates that her name was included in the letter without her permission. She describes herself as “disgusted” and “furious.”

I’ve communicated directly with two of the women who say they were misidentified and I’m working on getting more information from them.

I’ve reached out to the Heitkamp campaign for comment about this ad, asking how it came to be and how the names were chosen for the ad, but the Senator and her Senate/campaign staff don’t typically respond to me.

The irony here is that the ad was supposed to portray a thoughtful and proactive Senator who was willing to hear the concerns of victims. It demonstrated the exact opposite, demonstrating that neither she nor her team took the time to actually reach out to the women they were allegedly trying to support.

She has issued an apology of sorts.

“Sexual assault is a serious crime – and one that too many North Dakota women have experienced,” Heitkamp said. “In an attempt to bring awareness to this issue and push back against dismissive comments toward sexual assault survivors by Kevin Cramer, our campaign worked with victim advocates to identify women who would be willing sign the letter or share their story.”

Too little, too late.

My Take

This should be the end of her campaign. In a sane world, you can’t do something like that and still keep your job. This is the political world where sanity is not required, but hopefully the people of North Dakota will hear about this and be rightly disgusted.

Continue Reading
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report
Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report