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.

Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Democrats

Leftist media pushes back on Green New Deal criticism

Published

on

Leftist media pushes back on Green New Deal criticism

It’s been an up-and-down couple of weeks for proponents of the Green New Deal. Before details were released, it was already being heralded as the greatest thing since President Obama’s election. Then, the details came out and even many on the left were taken aback by the ambitious and incoherent provisions of the deal as detailed in a FAQ section on Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s government web page.

But that was just a draft. They took it down. At least that was the story.

Unfortunately for proponents, they were caught a little flat-footed as questions started pouring in about, well, all of it. Even if we dismiss the less-draconian concepts such as eliminating air travel or the less-sane ideas like taking care of those who are unwilling to work, the left is still stuck with a proposal that the most frugal estimates put at costing around $7 trillion while other’s consider the decade-long cost to be in the HUNDREDS of trillions of dollars.

This is, of course, ludicrous. There’s not enough money in the entire world to pay for the proposal if its cost is somewhere between the lowest and highest estimates, but that hasn’t stopped leftist media from regrouping. Now that the dust has settled a little bit, they’re doing everything they can to recommit to this concept. It’s not that they suddenly believe in this fairy tale. It’s that they don’t want this to be the issue Republicans attack in the 2020 elections.

One article in particular that I read from CNN (yes, sometimes I need to see what the other side is thinking) really struck me for its honesty about the situation. Though I stopped reading it in paragraph two when it referred to “non-partisan” PolitiFact, I went back to it just now to digest the awfulness fully (see the sacrifices I make for our readers!).

To be clear, much of what this article says is correct. It asserts the GOP will take the tenets of the Green New Deal and use it to scare voters into thinking it’s even worse than Obamacare. From 2010 through 2016, Republicans attacked Obamacare incessantly and it worked, giving them the House in 2010, the Senate in 2014, and the White House in 2016. Unfortunately, they stopped there and didn’t actually go after Obamacare with the same fervor they held in their campaign rhetoric and now the Democrats have turned the issue on its head.

But here’s the thing. Obamacare may have been bad, but the Green New Deal truly is worse. It’s not even close. Even if we take at face value the notion that the Green New Deal is simply an ambitious framework around which real legislation can be forged, we have to look at the core issues entailed in order to see the true damage it can do. This is a socialist document. It’s a call for the same levels of insanity that drive the Medicare-for-All movement. Within its frivolous attempts to change perceptions of air travel, cows, and job creation is a deep-rooted desire to convert Americans to needing more government.

NOQ Report needs your support.

The Green New Deal represents the far-left’s desire to make more American dependent on government. At the same time, it aims to increase the levels of dependency for those who are already in need of assistance. It wants Democrats to latch their wagons on the notion that if we become a militantly environmentalist nation, that will serve the dual purpose of giving us fulfillment while saving the planet.

I believe most leftist journalists understand this, but they see in the ridiculous framework a path through which Republicans can be defeated wholesale in 2020 as long as the left can control the narrative surrounding the Green New Deal. They fear another Obamacare counterinsurgency that would wipe out the anti-Trump gains they made in 2018, so they’ve adopted a stance that the Green New Deal isn’t as bad as Fox News says it is. Meanwhile, they’re doing everything they can to say, “look over here and not at the Green New Deal.”

The politics behind what the Green New Deal represents is more in play than the tenets of the proposal itself, at least in the eyes of leftist media. It’s not that they want to promote the concept. They simply don’t want the concept to derail their party in the next election.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Louis Farrakhan refers to Ilhan Omar as ‘sweetheart,’ prompting zero outrage

Published

on

Louis Farrakhan refers to Ilhan Omar as sweetheart prompting zero outrage

Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan referred to Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) as “Sweetheart” as he addressed her during a speaking engagement on Sunday. He apparently caught his faux pas and immediately justified the remark, but at that point the moniker which many consider to be sexist or misogynistic had already been noted.

Nevertheless, it didn’t cause the stir one might expect. As a far-left progressive, Omar is known for being a feminist icon on Capitol Hill even though she hasn’t been in office for a full two months yet. As our EIC noted, the lack of a rebuke was because of the source, not because she now feels it’s okay to refer to her as “sweetheart.”

The statement came as Farrakhan was telling Omar she shouldn’t be sorry for the statements she made last week about Israel, AIPAC, and Jewish influence in Washington DC, particularly over Republicans.

In a world where consistency was still considered a virtue, followers of Omar would be wondering why she’s not expressing outrage over the belittling reference from a powerful man. But the world isn’t consistent and Farrakhan always gets a pass.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Democrats

Kamala Harris stutters through non-answer when asked about her Jussie Smollett Tweet

Published

on

Kamala Harris stutters through non-answer when asked about her Jussie Smollett Tweet

In one of the most cringeworthy moments of Senator Kamala Harris’s new presidential campaign, the California Democrat found herself hesitant and uncertain about her feelings towards Jussie Smollett’s apparent hate-crime hoax. This is in stark contrast to her bold and racially charged accusations of a “modern day lynching” allegedly perpetrated by two Nigerian actors at the request of Smollett himself.

Above, you can see her attempt to calm the situation and state that facts are still emerging about the case. Of course, this is three weeks after the alleged incident, which is strange since her response the moment the news broke seemed to express zero interest in waiting for facts to emerge.

“. is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know. I’m praying for his quick recovery. This was an attempted modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate.”

This is the latest minefield Democrats find themselves traversing after quickly reacting to false claims. It happened with the Covington Catholic School boys. It’s happened far too many times since President Trump ran for President in 2016.

The anti-MAGA hoax epidemic

http://noqreport.com/2019/02/18/anti-maga-hoax-epidemic/There’s a trend that’s been quietly, consistently rearing its ugly head against the President of the United States and his supporters since before the 2016 election. We’ve seen it among unhinged journalists, virtue-signaling celebrities, and Democratic politicians. We’ve seen it manifest in the ugliest form of hatred – the common hate-hoax – and it’s doing more to divide America than the source of the perpetrators’ anger.

They hate President Trump. They hate the people who got him elected. The hate the idea of making America great again because as much of the MAGA agenda comes to pass, they’re learning they’ve been wrong the whole time. I know first hand. I’ve been proven wrong myself.

It doesn’t take a skilled orator or ethical paragon to say, “I reacted too quickly before. I should have waited for all of the facts to come out before reacting emotionally.” Of course, doing so requires humility, which Kamala Harris apparently does not have.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report