Connect with us

Opinions

3 reasons I believe the GOP will retain control of the House

Published

on

3 reasons I believe the GOP will retain control of the House

Every election year, the final pushes by both parties are designed to get the base juiced up and less-interested voters scared enough to go to the polls. The second part, fear, drove the GOP to victories in 2010, 2014, and 2016, that swayed control of the House, then the Senate, then the White House.

The White House isn’t up for grabs in the midterms and the Senate is looking increasingly secure for Republicans to hold onto a slim majority. The House of Representatives, on the other hand, is loaded with toss-ups. There are currently 192 seats that are considered solid or likely to go to Democrats and 194 seats solid or likely for Republicans. That leaves 49 contested seats, 46 of which are currently held by Republicans.

It’s no wonder most analysts are giving Democrats 70%+ chances of taking over the House. In fact, the certainty that these analysts hold for a majority switch in the lower chamber is nearly as high as the certainty they had in 2016 that Hillary Clinton would be elected President.

We all know how that one worked out.

Because the House is reshuffled every two years, it usually comes down to passion. Anxiety and fear about Obamacare drove voters to give the GOP the House in 2010 and has allowed them to keep it for eight years. Unfortunately for the GOP, that same fear has been turned against them as Democrats and their mainstream media cronies have spun perceptions to make Republicans appear to be the danger when it comes to healthcare. How they convinced Americans that Democrats are the best choice to fix the healthcare system they demolished with the Affordable Care Act is actually quite amazing. If it weren’t so devastatingly damaging to the country, I’d actually give them kudos for such a strong propaganda-driven subterfuge with widespread fruits of their labors.

Democrats have the money. They have the passion; hatred for President Trump is just a bit higher than support for his agenda at this time. Again, the media has played their part in making him the most polarizing President in modern history.

Lastly, Democrats have this final week in which media outlets from the smallest blogs to the biggest news agencies will be nearly unified in their vilification of every vulnerable GOP House candidate they can find. They’ll be painting the Republican as a Trump-inspired right-wing extremist while painting the Democrat as a common sense centrist.

This may all seem grim for Republicans, but there are three factors that can (and in my opinion probably will) deliver the House majority to the GOP for a fifth straight election:

  1. Silent Trump supporters. Love him, hate him, or feel indifference towards him. Regardless of how you feel about Steve Bannon (I don’t care for the guy), you must acknowledge that he knows how elections work. He infamously told then-candidate Trump that he was 100% certain he’d win when ever his closest allies were saying his chances were pretty good while quietly fearing the worst. Bannon recently noted that the polls do not reflect the silent Trump supporters, the growing army of voters who will back him and Republicans every time while never taking a moment to do a silly poll.
  2. Caravan chaos. Despite the most devious machinations of mainstream media, the general feelings towards the invading force of the migrant caravan heading towards our southern border is not pleasant. Attempts to paint them as a group of feeble women and children looking for a better life are easily debunked by looking at pictures of the caravan. Mostly comprised of young, healthy adult males, it is clearly not what leftists want us to believe. Americans see this. They talk. They have their doubts. As it marches forward and grows, it raises the tension level and gets more people to want a wall built. With a Democratic majority in the House, there will be no wall.
  3. Big stories that don’t really hurt Republicans. From Jamal Khashoggi to Cesar Sayoc to Robert Bowers, the news leading up to election day has stories that paint the President in a negative light. Mainstream media loves it. Democrats love it. Somehow, they’re missing one important point. These are not stories that will sway voters. It’s not news that the President says politically incorrect things, nor is it news that he will campaign and attack the press and Democrats even when tragedies strike. Those who take offense to his recent handling of these events weren’t voting Republican either way. Those who support him are equally unswayed. Those on the fence have issues that strike closer to home that will drive them to vote one way or the other.

Anyone who tells you they know how the election is going to go is a fool who probably still can’t believe Hillary lost in 2016. The moral of this story is you shouldn’t listen to anyone. Just vote. Get friends and family to vote. Do your part and pray for the best.

Federalists

What Stacey Abrams gets right about moving forward from the Georgia election

Published

on

What Stacey Abrams gets right about moving forward from the Georgia election

Democrat Stacey Abrams possesses some pretty radical political ideologies. I completely disagree with her far-leftist rhetoric or the agenda she hoped to bring to Georgia as governor. Republican Brian Kemp is the next governor, which even Abrams admits.

But she refuses to concede that she actually lose the election. She’s clear that Kemp is the governor-elect, but she falls just short of saying that his victory is illegitimate.

That’s all political theater. Here’s what she gets right. Georgia and many states need to clean up their election practices. Laws should be passed. Other laws should be removed. Ballot access for American citizens must be protected and the process must be made as easy as possible without jeopardizing accuracy or opening the doors to fraud.

Most importantly, this must be done through a combination of the legal system and the state legislature. At no point should she or anyone else try to turn this into a federal issue.

People on both sides of the political aisle seem to be leaning towards fixing election problems at the national level. This would be a huge mistake. The states must clean their own houses. The residents of the states must be the catalyst. Keep DC out of it.

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theory

Many Democrats support Mueller investigation without knowing what it’s about

Published

on

“Trump stole the election!”

Two years and two elections ago, something happened that has Democrats scratching their heads even today. Hillary Clinton lost. She wasn’t supposed to lose. She was cheated some way, somehow.

This is what they hope to be proven by special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian influence in the 2016 elections. The problem is a majority of Democrats think the Russians did something that Mueller’s team isn’t even investigating because there’s absolutely no hint of a possibility that it could be true.

67% of Democrats believe “Russia tampered with vote tallies in order to get Donald Trump elected President.”

Let that sink in.

Robert Mueller Poll

If you believe Russia attempted to influence the elections by using social media and other venues to spread anti-Hillary rhetoric, you’re almost certainly correct. In fact, the Mueller investigation has assumed that to be true from the beginning. The question isn’t whether or not Russia tried to influence the elections in this way. It’s whether or not Americans helped them, in particular members of the Trump campaign.

What’s not being considered is whether or not Russia tampered with vote tallies. They did not. It’s not even a consideration in Mueller’s investigation, yet two-thirds of Democrats believe it to be true.

67% of Democrats can’t wait for Mueller to prove their theories correct even though he isn’t even investigating vote tally tampering at all. It’s reminiscent of the days after Obamacare was launched when Democrats asked, “Wait, it’s not free?”

Continue Reading

Entertainment and Sports

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs would be terrible if the Coen brothers didn’t make it

Published

on

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs would be terrible if the Coen brothers didnt make it

Directors often get too much credit for making movies great. That’s not the case with the Coen brothers. In their latest release, their presence in the director’s chairs and behind the writing desks took what should have been a mediocre Old West anthology and made it clever enough that most viewers will enjoy it. Others, like me, will hate it despite their presence.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs is a Coen brothers film made for Netflix that doesn’t take itself too seriously, which is why 91% of critics reviewed it favorably on Rotten Tomatoes. But the thumbs-up/thumbs-down approach by Rotten Tomatoes makes the rating a bit misleading. Many of the “positive” reviews I read were essentially homages to the Coen brothers. There were many complaints about the six-part anthology that were followed by “… but it’s the Coen brothers, so…”

That’s the big plus in the movie. The Coens were able to tell the six stories the way only they could with such attention to detail that I almost watched it a second time even though I hated it. The critic in me detested what the movie tried to do. The fan in me loved how the Coens tried to do it.

Unfortunately, that means the only valid reason to watch it is to see the Coens do their thing. That’s enough of a reason if you’ve already seen all of their other extraordinary works. If you’ve missed any of them, I’d start there before using The Ballad of Buster Scruggs as a filler to get you through until their next masterpiece.

I normally don’t do spoilers. In fact, I make a point to not even spoil important components like mood or tone. Since this is a case where I’m not only going against the grain of other reviewers but I’m also trying to dissuade certain people from seeing it, I’ll go ahead and warn that there are spoilers ahead.

As noted already, this movie doesn’t take itself seriously. There are six completely separate stories tied together by two things: death and the historical Old West. We’ll deal with the death aspect shortly, but one good thing I can say about the movie is that I’ve never seen one capture the beauty of the period like this one. Even on a small screen, the sets are stunning. It’s a shame that such amazing cinematography will have so few see it on the big screen.

Now, let’s deal with death. It’s the overarching theme throughout, and it’s noteworthy that none of the reviews I read seemed to catch onto the specificity of the deaths. In order from first to last, the deaths are whimsical, ironic, undeserved, deserved, and tragic. This is done in a very particular order to keep the audience engaged. It’s an emotional ebb and flow that the Coens have mastered over three decades of filmmaking.

The opening story shares its title with the movie itself. It’s a live-action cartoon with stunning aspects that make the viewer laugh, marvel, and finally scratch his or her head. Buster Scruggs’ death is as quick and unexpected as the death the character dishes out throughout his story.

The second story, Near Algodones, demonstrates the inevitability of death for one who chooses a life of crime. Both times the lead character is captured and set to hang are comical and ironic, as if saying Death won’t be cheated by death. His final scene is the last real laugh we get in the movie.

As is common for the Coen brothers, there’s no attempt to ease in to a drastically changing mood. From beginning to end, Meal Ticket makes us feel melancholy and turns it up near the end of the third story. The only temporary relief is seeing an orange chicken mesmerizing a simple-minded crowd with its ability to do basic math on command, a not-so-subtle allusion to President Trump and his adoring fans.

The star of the anthology is the fourth story, All Gold Canyon, as Tom Waits delivers on multiple connections. He touches nature as both an intruder and its defender. He talks to his goal, “Mr Pocket,” like a friend about to deliver the good news of riches heading his way. The best line of the movie comes out in a dialogue between Waits and the pocket of gold when he says, “I’m old, but you’re older.” All of this combines for a deep connection we’re able to feel with his character. We may like or dislike other characters, but we actually connect with this one. Any of the stories could be fleshed out to be a standalone film, but this one would probably yield the best one.

The fifth story, The Gal Who Got Rattled, is another one that could easily expand. It made me think someone could make an interesting series about life on the Oregon Trail that followed the guides back and forth in their exciting journeys. Instead, we get a glimpse at the trail, another glimpse of irony surrounding an annoying dog that survives both of its masters, and then a fleeting glimpse of real action as Grainger Hines fearlessly takes on a group of Commanche who want his scalp and the young lady he’s protecting.

The Mortal Remains rounds out the movie. It’s the only story that doesn’t end in death, though it’s predicated by death; two of the five characters in this story are bounty hunters with the body of their most recent prey strapped to the top of the carriage they’re riding.

There are different interpretations for this segment of the movie. Some say the self proclaimed “reapers” are taking the souls of the other three passengers to their resting place. This theory lends to the apprehension and dread they demonstrate when they finally get there. Others say they simply fear that death may come to them soon, which is why they hesitate to enter the hotel. I lean towards the first interpretation. The three in the carriage with the bounty hunters/reapers died normally while the body on the roof had to be hunted down, which is why he has to be carried to his final resting place instead of walking there like the other three.

Who knows? The Coens.

The stories in this movie were accumulated over 25 years. It’s very possible that there is a much deeper underlying meaning to all of this that the Coens may or may not ever reveal. It could be personal, like their own private joke about Hollywood; watching Meal Ticket definitely lends itself to the notion that the highest level of art can’t be as popular as a counting chicken. There may be nothing to it at all. The Coens know, and unless they’re changing their style, they aren’t telling us their secrets.

An uncanny number of reviews I read noted a variation of the idea that the whole was less than the sum of the parts.

The bottom line: Lots of people loved this movie for everything the Coen brothers bring to the table. Some, like me, hated it because it’s six stories that individually could have been great but compressing them into one movie didn’t do them justice.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report