Connect with us

Federalists

As certain as SMOD, the GOP is dead

Published

on

As certain as SMOD the GOP is dead

If we looked in a telescope and saw a 300-mile-wide asteroid headed right toward Earth’s orbit to smack us in the kisser, we could do the math and determine if it’s really going to hit us. And if we knew it was going to hit us, we could predict with nearly 100 percent accuracy that all human life on the planet would end.

It’s called an Extinction Level Event (ELE).

The GOP looked into a telescope in 2015 and saw Donald Trump. The difference is that the GOP didn’t have to follow an orbital path toward its own destruction. But it did, in a deadly dance with destiny. Mathematically, they knew this was coming: The GOP’s ELE.

I wrote in December 2015:

The final Whig president of the United States was Millard Filmore in 1853.  He marked the death of the Whigs, and the rise of the Know-Nothings.  Today the GOP faces its own death, and the continued success of Donald Trump in the polls reflects the fact that the Republican Party is staring into its own grave.

I wasn’t being prophetic, or demonstrating some Gnostic power to foretell the future. I was just looking in a telescope, the same as anyone else could have done.

Donald Trump’s message resonates with many Republicans because he speaks what most of us know, and doesn’t hold his tongue or make excuses for our elected representatives’ failure to deal with immigration problems over the last three decades our failure to end the rise of Islamic terrorism, and our failure to keep the American economy growing.

But Trump’s promises are nothing but Styrofoam—light-weight and filling lots of volume.  When heat is applied to Styrofoam, it evaporates, leaving a void.  If nothing fills the void, the party will fall of its own weight.  It’s nobody’s fault but our own if Trump destroys the GOP—and he very well could (take this seriously).

I am not the only one who saw it. Susan Wright also observed ELE coming to smack the GOP in the kisser.

I have a different take. The Democrats have already won. They played the game masterfully. Republicans would have never of thought of sending in one of their own, a lifelong conservative, with a solid record of backing socially and fiscally conservative causes and candidates, to register as a Democrat and then run on the Democrat ticket.

And now we know. It has come to pass.

Now is the time for a conservative third party option to emerge. The time has come and to not take this leap of faith may very well consign our nation to certain ruin. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

I only disagree on one point. It’s not desperate to move to a third party. It’s rational, like evacuating from the path of a Category 4 hurricane bearing down on your home. Even GOP legislators are starting to abandon the party. It’s bad, and I believe it’s unrecoverable. It’s an ELE.

The Trump SMOD ELE was perfectly predictable for the GOP. It’s time to move to a different party before everything dies.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
5 Comments

5 Comments

  1. Rob

    September 8, 2017 at 2:21 pm

    Some knob has reported every page on your site as unsafe. It must be killing traffic.

  2. Jack Krevin

    September 8, 2017 at 6:49 pm

    Well Happy Trails then, Mr. Berman. I sincerely wish you luck in finding a party a better fit for you political/morally.

    As for myself…where Trump leads us I follow. For good or ill. I owe him that much at least since when I, and others, needed a voice he was the only one who showed up.
    -Respectfully, Jack Krevin

    • Steve Berman

      September 9, 2017 at 4:38 am

      Jack…it’s not me who left the GOP, it’s the GOP who left me. I cannot, could never, follow Trump for Trump’s sake. If he speaks for you on one issue that’s all good and fine. But what happens when he starts speaking against you?

      • Jack Krevin

        September 10, 2017 at 12:09 pm

        I would never ask you, or anyone, to follow Trump against their principals. I spoke only for myself without arguing for or against either position.

        As for if/when Trump “starts speaking against” me? I believe a man must own the result of his actions. Good or bad. I made what I considered the best choice to achieve my goals as I saw them. I still do. If that brings me glory or failure I accept that.

        -Respectfully, Jack Krevin

Leave a Reply

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

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

Federalists

Be careful about calling for more national election laws

Published

on

Be careful about calling for more national election laws

We’re starting to hear rumblings, mostly from Republicans, calling for national standardization of elections. It’s understandable that people are frustrated by what’s happening in Florida. Arizona and Georgia also have some questionable happenings. But it’s imperative as conservatives that we allow the states to fix the problems no matter how bad they may seem.

The biggest reason: the more the federal government gets involved in just about anything, the easier it will be for voter fraud, counting mishaps, and election official corruption to occur. Take, for example, calls ringing out again for national voter ID. Would it make it harder for non-citizens to vote? Perhaps. But it also runs the risk of catastrophic failure when we centralize and/or digitize the voting system itself. Not only will all of our eggs be in one basket that becomes a single point of failure, but it also slows the process of adjusting against threats. Sophisticated vote manipulators in or out of the country would love nothing more than a federalized voting system.

Taking away the states’ responsibility to administer their voting protocols takes away their accountability as well. Calls for centralization of nearly every other component of administration, from education to the environment to healthcare, has resulted in horrific results that greatly overshadowed the localized problems they were intended to fix.

Some states are having major problems with elections. These states must fix their problems. When the federal government gets involved in sweeping changes that force solutions for isolated cases on the rest of the country, more problems arise. The benefits are greatly outweighed by the detriments.

Broward County Election Supervisor Brenda Snipes is incompetent, corrupt, or both. She needs to be replaced and the voting process in Florida needs to be fixed. Let Broward County and Florida replace her and fix their voting process. It may be hard to have faith in the county and state, but do we really have more faith in Washington DC? Should we be calling for more centralized voting laws and protocols because of a few persons’ gross negligence?

No.

It’s frustrating when local officials can affect national elections, but that’s why people can vote them out and force reforms. Where it’s broken, let those states fix it. Bringing in a DC solution will give us DC results, and that’s almost never a good thing.

Continue Reading

Federalists

Bipartisanship has two major downsides

Published

on

Bipartisanship has two major downsides

The GOP losing control of the House of Representatives completely changes the course Washington DC will take over the next two years or more. For whatever reason, most Americans don’t seem to understand the repercussions. Most know this means the Democrats can start doing more things against President Trump even if they don’t quite understand the power of subpoena. They know this will slow down the President’s agenda, but probably don’t understand the degree of deadlock this creates.

Democrats won’t be able to get legislation through because of the Senate, and even if they could they’d be blocked by veto. Republicans can’t get any legislation through because of the House. Anything that is not bipartisan such as infrastructure will not even be attempted for at least two years. Since there are very few possible pieces of legislation that can be considered bipartisan, we can expect very little to be done.

That’s the good news.

There shouldn’t be much done. That’s how DC is supposed to operate. It’s supposed to be slow and methodical. The founders envisioned a federal government that could basically only push forward legislation that both sides of the political aisle agreed to, at least in part. Remember, the didn’t like a party system and they definitely didn’t want a two-party system, but that’s how our government has evolved. Perhaps it was inevitable for two parties to split power incessantly, but the founders hoped we would avoid such a mess.

While it’s good for things to move slowly in DC, there are two big problems with it and we’re about to face both of them. The first can best be described as half-measures. The solution to a problem that can get bipartisan support is almost always loaded with political backscratching. One of the reasons the bureaucracy is so big is because politicians have been packing things into their bills for decades. It’s like a bribe – “We’ll include a sugar subsidy in the bill in exchange for your support of our tax hike, Mr. Florida Senator.”

The second problem is the tendency for bipartisan projects to be gargantuan and expensive. The aforementioned infrastructure fix is the perfect example. President Trump, Senators Schumer and McConnell, and possible future Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi have all discussed infrastructure at one point or another in the past couple of years. Rumors and leaks have indicated such a bill would cost over a trillion dollars. There’s also much talk about attempting a public-private partnership to make it work.

As we face a trillion dollar deficit next year, any thought of spending more money is ludicrous. However, it’s appealing to politicians on both sides because it would create jobs and represents a tangible benefit people can actually experience in their daily lives. It’s not a question of whether both sides can come together on it. The only question is how they’ll divide up credit for it.

In the end, taxpayers will feel the pain. The budget deficit will rise. The national debt will continue to grow at an untenable pace. All the while, Mr. President and Madam Speaker will be giving each other fist bumps.

We don’t need bipartisanship. We need nonpartisanship. The real solutions America needs all point towards limiting government, cutting spending, and pushing more power to the state, local, and individual levels.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report