Connect with us

Politics

Mike Pence may be needed for Brett Kavanaugh vote

Published

on

Brett Kavanaugh found himself nominated for the Supreme Court during an election year. This is sure to rally the butthurt among Democrats who bemoan the Merrick Garland nomination. This was the case back in 2017 when President Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch to the bench. Only this time, the circumstances are less favorable for Republicans.

Fewer Republicans

Breaking it down, the GOP lost a seat held by Senator Strange to Doug Jones, courtesy of the disaster that was Roy Moore. Jones victory resulted in a -1 for the Republicans and a +1 for the Democrats in this vote. Though, he may be a wild card. Inconveniently, the GOP will be -1 again with the absence of John McCain. McCain, being too ill to perform his duties to the State of Arizona, is selfishly clutching the Senate seat and the crucial vote in a gridlocked Senate. Perhaps the nomination by Trump will result in increased pressure on McCain to resign. This is possible seeing that Brett Kavanaugh was a major insider to the second Bush administration. John McCain could, though unlikely, make the flight just for the vote. Though McCain is an untrustworthy Senator, for Conservatives, the ties to the Bush administration make it more likely he would support the nomination and fly out to do so. Otherwise McCain could retire and the Arizona governor would appoint a temporary replacement.

But assuming there is none of this and present circumstances remain in place, this is a -1 for the GOP. This of course means that there will be 99 votes consisting of 50 Republicans and 49 Democrats (current Independents counted as Democrats). The simple majority favors the Republicans, but that is too simple for politics in DC.

Insert Wildcards

On the Republican side we have multiple wildcards. The least concerning of which is Senator Rand Paul. Rand Paul will raise concerns but is likely to vote in favor of the nomination. So far, he’s had this much to say:

John McCains seat is another GOP wildcard. The most concerning of wildcards may be Senators Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins, who are among the most leftist Senators in the GOP. Murkowski is most likely to defect. But looking at history, they both voted in favor of the Gorsuch nominations. Similar to the Gorsuch nomination, if Murkowski and Collins had voiced their oppositions, the three Democratic defectors may have stayed with party lines. It’s a tough gamble to expect them to vote nay, but it is possible out of defiance they would not vote.

In confirming Neil Gorsuch, three democrats defected: Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota and Joe Donnelly of Indiana. All three are in red states. All three are facing an election. Manchin’s election prospects are dim as he is facing a very formidable opponent. Heitkamp is also facing an opponent who can win a statewide election. The same cannot be said of Joe Donnelly in Indiana. Doug Jones is perhaps a wild card, if only because he wasn’t around to vote on Gorsuch. But I don’t consider him one in the next roll count.

But to count again, excluding wildcards we are at 48 Republicans, 46 Democrats, 5 Wildcards and 1 Absentee. Again a simple majority bodes well for the GOP, if the five wildcards split nicely. Democrats would need 4/5 of the wildcards to vote no. Upfront, the most likely is Donnelly. But perhaps the others will accept their political demise and vote no anyway. Perhaps they abstain and an even number results in a tie. In which case, Mike Pence will do the honors of casting a vote for Brett Kavanaugh.

For the Kananaugh nomination, expect bitter politics, and don’t be surprised if we wait until January

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Guns and Crime

Intellectual ammunition, part 3: Armed with logic and a mistake by SCOTUS

Published

on

By

Intellectual ammunition part 3 Armed with logic and a mistake by SCOTUS

Is nuclear annihilation less of a threat than purchasing a lower parts kit?

In the third part of a multipart series, Gardner Goldsmith @gardgoldsmith of MRCTV addresses the issues surrounding Liberty Control, destroying some of the prevalent mythologies in the process.

Which is more intimidating: purchasing an inanimate object or the threat of gun confiscation?

In the beginning of the video, he asks the very pertinent question:

“Who engages in threats of gun violence, the civilian who owns, or attempts to own, a firearm, or the civilian or politician intent on passing ‘gun control’ statutes?”

Which is quite an interesting point in light of the comments from Representative Eric Swalwell (D-CA) who wants the government to make gun owners an offer they can’t refuse on their freedom. Rejecting said offer could see them and millions of other die in a thermonuclear style gun confiscation.

That threat being just the latest of the long list of over 70 instances of Leftists demanding gun confiscation. Note that number could easily be doubled or tripled if one were to account for the number of times those demands were syndicated or excerpted in other publications.

The video details the point that it is the people wanting to impose controls on freedom that are threatening violence – up to and including nuclear genocide. But perhaps if one if of the Liberty grabber set on the Left it’s possible that someone having a scary looking rifle is far more of an issue than the wiping out of an area via nuclear incineration with fallout contaminating everything down wind.

The illogic of so-called ‘Gun-free’ zones.

Further on he addresses question of whether the passage of more and more restrictions on freedom and setting up ‘gun-free’ zones keep people safe? Consider the scenario he proposes in how a mass murderer might select is his target:

And what of the idea that, practically, passing gun statutes will make areas safer? In Part One of this series, we looked at the real-world numbers on that question, but here is a logical argument to pose to gun-grabbers.

Suppose you are in a paintball game. You have a paintball gun, and you will win $10,000 if you enter one of three houses and, in five minutes, hit ten people with pellets. If you get hit by a pellet, you will have to pay $200,000… There are forty people in each house. In House One, you know that there is no one with a paintball gun. In House Two, you know that there are a few people with paintball guns, and in House Three, you know that there are many, many people with paintball guns.

Which house would you choose?

The answer is obvious. Let’s not be foolish about pretending that we would choose anything other than House One.

The logic of self-protection through firearm possession and use is irrefutable. The statistics of it are clear. The history of despots disarming citizens prior to destroying their lives is also clear, as is the history of what the Founders thought when they wrote the Second Amendment.

 

Continue Reading

Democrats

Kamala Harris pushes fraudulent ‘petition’ to build her 2020 fundraising spam list

Published

on

The worlds of marketing and political campaigning have many things in common. Their intention is to persuade people. They’re both selling something. They employ tested colors, designs, and buzzwords to get people excited. One of the keys to their success is something called “list-building.”

With ballots from the 2018 elections still being counted, Senator Kamala Harris is wasting no time building her 2020 list. To do it, she’s employing a deceptive technique, promoting an online “petition” that’s really nothing more than a way to get people to willingly give her campaign their contact information. These people will be targeted with campaign fundraisers later.

No official announcement has been made about her 2020 presidential run, but it’s hard to believe she’s not running after purchasing 1,100 Facebook ads to promote these “petitions.” A Facebook ad doesn’t have a set cost, but we can assume big money is being put into these list-building ads because of the sheer volume. To put it into perspective, Beto O’Rourke spent around $5 million on Facebook ads for his Senate campaign. Presidential campaigns can easily spend 25 times as much as an expensive Senate campaign.

Unlike a valid petition people often sign to get a candidate or proposition on a ballot, these list-building petitions don’t actually do anything. People are told they’re demanding this action or that, but in the end they’re just giving over information. Some go so far as to ask for everything, including name, address, phone numbers, email, and occasionally even income. These lists grow much more slowly because of the depth of the information requested.

A more common technique is to ask for minimal data to encourage people to fill it out. At the end of the day, all a campaign really needs is an email address they can later use in fundraising campaigns. Here’s an example of an ad Senator Harris’ campaign recently put out:

Kamala Harris Petition

The meta data reveals the page was titled, “Acquisition: 180822 Mueller FB.”

“FB” means it was a Facebook campaign. “Mueller” was the topic. “180822” is the tracking number for A/B testing. “Acquisition” is the goal. Anyone who signed this “petition” has just had their contact information acquired. Mission accomplished. They will soon be receiving emails asking them to donate to the Kamala Harris 2020 presidential election fund.

As for the results of the “petition,” they will go nowhere. There won’t be a Congressional action that is enabled by the thousands of people who “signed” it. You won’t see Kamala Harris standing in front of the White House reading off the names of the people who participated in the “petition.” She couldn’t do that even if she wanted to because the “petition” only asks for a first name. Are there really people out there who believe signing a petition only requires a first name?

Senator Harris is promoting fraudulent petitions with the sole purpose if building her 2020 fundraising spam list. Anyone who “signs” it believing they’re demanding protection for Robert Mueller is a sucker. That’s exactly who she wants to target.

Continue Reading

News

Florida update: Rick Scott almost certain to win

Published

on

Florida update Rick Scott almost certain to win

By now, Rick Scott should be transitioning into the Senate and Bill Nelson should be looking for a new job. Instead, we’re having to wait a few more days until it all gets sorted out in the election-challenged state of Florida.

The good news for Scott, the current Republican governor, is that when the dust settles, he will be declared the winner.

Over 4,000 ballots are in bad-signature limbo, meaning they are currently being rejected over signatures that do not match what’s on record in 45 Florida county election offices. No word on how many ballots were rejected in the 22 other Florida counties.

Currently, Nelson trails Scott by around 12,500 votes.

With half a dozen lawsuits crossing the state over every voting issue imaginable right now, there will be legal proceedings that go well beyond the election’s final results. As it stands now, we won’t get those final results until a manual recount. The state’s threshold following a machine recount is .25%. Scott’s lead is currently at .14%.

My Take

It’s better to get elections results right than to get them swiftly. Both sides have used legal maneuvers to promote their causes, and while this can be an annoyance to voters while forcing the rest of the nation to collectively scratch our heads, it’s imperative that they see this all the way through to the end.

Republicans are wrong to be in a hurry to certify results because in such a close race, we as Americans should hope every valid vote is counted and every invalid vote is rejected. They’re in a hurry because there’s nothing to gain for the party by prolonging a race they’ve won. It’s understandable, but misguided.

Democrats are wrong on multiple levels. First, it’s becoming more and more clear that someone, whether it be election officials like Brenda Snipes, secret groups with ballot access trying to cheat, or a combination of the two, is trying to tip the scales in favor of Democrats. Second, some of their delay techniques and legal maneuvers won’t do anything to change the election results but are intended to taint the GOP wins. Third, their attacks through the media on Republicans, including Scott and governor-elect Ron DeSantis, have been unnecessarily brutal.

While it’s very likely Rick Scott will be declared the winner… someday… this latest series of incidents highlights two things: Florida’s election incompetence and forces working on behalf of Democrats to steal elections any way they can.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report