There is still plenty to debate about the effectiveness of political endorsements by entertainers. 2016 demonstrated that a unified Hollywood was not able to make a dent in President Trump’s momentum. Some say their incessant crying actually riled up more Trump supporters than Hillary Clinton supporters.

The latest major entertainer to throw her hat in the political endorsement arena is singer Taylor Swift. She stayed focus on her home state of Tennessee by endorsing Phil Bredesen for Senate. That was a week ago. How has the endorsement played in the polls?

Let’s just say the Bredesen campaign is trying to stay positive by pointing to internal polling since public polling is abysmal.

There has been plenty working against Bredesen since an October 3 poll put him at down by 5-points. He faced backlash for claiming he would have voted for Brett Kavanaugh to be confirmed. Then, an undercover video by Project Veritas revealed his staffers and volunteers claiming he didn’t really mean it. The combination of lies, bad press, and Swift’s endorsement have made his poll numbers plummet.

Two weeks ago, @MarshaBlackburn had a 5-point lead over Phil Bredesen.

Last week, Taylor Swift endorsed Bredesen.

Today's poll gives Blackburn a 14-point lead.

America thanks you, Taylor Swift.

— JD Rucker (@JDRucker) October 15, 2018

Entertainers should entertain. They are entitled to their opinions, of course, but attempts to use their clout to sway politics is only effective if they take the time to get directly involved. Most do not.

Hollywood’s latest anti-American biopic, First Man, was poised to be a box office hit. There was tons of buzz, great critical reception, and the winning combination of actor Ryan Gosling and director Damien Chazelle who dazzled us with the Oscar-winning La La Land. When it failed miserably to meet its first weekend’s modest expectations at the box office, Hollywood started making excuses.

The one cause they still refuse to accept is the choice they made to not include the iconic planting of the American flag on the moon. Their excuse: the moon landing was a human achievement, not an American achievement.

Despite backlash from conservative journalists and moviegoers alike, Hollywood continues to scratch its collective head. They had the right mix. They had the right topic. They made the movie well. Surely it must be something other than the blatantly obvious, right?

They point to The Right Stuff, a 1983 space biopic that also failed to be as successful as they expected. They ignore Apollo 13, which was a smash hit.

Some are attributing First Man’s failure to the success of Venom and A Star is Born, but there’s a problem with that excuse. They knew these movies were coming out when they made their estimates. Both had been successful the week before, so they even adjusted expectations for First Man down to compensate. It still wasn’t enough.

They’ll blame everything they can imagine, but they’ll never accept that patriotic Americans who were interested in seeing Ryan Gosling playing American hero Neil Armstrong lost interest when they heard about the rewriting of history the movie did for purely political reasons.

I’m one of them. As an avid moviegoer who loves Armstrong and is proud of OUR accomplishment to put him on the moon, I would have seen it on opening night had it not been for the unpatriotic snub.

Don’t tell that to the Hollywood spin machine. They’re still unwilling to accept it.

Let’s hope Hollywood someday learns their role in this world is to entertain and sometimes even inform. It doesn’t behoove them to rewrite history to match their globalist, anti-American worldview.

Rachel McKinnon. a transgender woman who was born male and possesses all the physical advantages of a man, won the 2018 UCI Masters Track Cycling World Championships in Los Angeles. It’s the latest event that draws questions about the fairness of biological males competing in female events.

Despite outcry by biological females and men alike, it is being billed by some as a victory for the LGBTQ community and transgender men or women around the world. Critics point out that biological males have an unfair advantage over biological females when it comes to activities that require physical strength, speed, or endurance. That doesn’t seem to deter those competing in these events.

My Take

Unlike some of my colleagues, I have no problem with transgenderism. What I have a problem with is the unfairness of women’s competitive sports being infiltrated by those who have clear and scientifically demonstrable biological advantages over their competitors.

If performance enhancing drugs are frowned upon in sports, what could be more performance-enhancing than growing up with the musculature and hormone advantage of a man, then competing in women’s sports?