Connect with us

Democrats

3 tsunami-sized effects of the Republicans holding a House majority

Published

on

3 tsunami-sized effects of the Republicans holding a House majority

There will be political, economic, and social shockwaves felt after Tuesday’s election. One might say that this is true every election, and it was definitely the case last election. But there’s more at stake with this particular election than any other midterm in recent history.

Analysts are singing in gleeful unison about how the Democrats are going to win control of the House of Representatives. Their chants of triumph are almost as loud as they were ahead of the last election when the same analysts gave Hillary Clinton even greater chances of winning the White House. We’re all aware how that turned out.

But this election isn’t as complicated as the last. Back then, it came down to getting the right people in the right states to vote. This time, it’s about making sure every Republican and right-leaning Independent votes in their individual House races. Unlike a presidential election where only votes in swing states have a significant impact on the results, this midterm means votes are important in a much wider range of districts. I couldn’t make an impact getting friends in California to vote in 2016, but I can definitely make an impact in this election. So can you.

There are always big issues that will be swayed by the results of the election, but there are three things the people may not be aware of that will be dramatically influenced. If the GOP can retain control of the House and Senate, these three things will happen:

Nancy Pelosi will be done

This election will determine whether or not Nancy Pelosi will have a seat at the table for the Democratic Party. If they win control of the House, she’s very likely to be Speaker of the House again.

If the Democrats do not win control, then she won’t just be relegated to House Minority Leader. She will be removed from that role altogether. She already faced challenges in the past when her leadership was questioned. If they don’t win, especially after she essentially guaranteed it, then her role as a leader in the party is done. She’ll just be a long-time outspoken representative who will probably get primaried in two years if she even runs again.

Mainstream media will be neutered

2016 was an awakening for mainstream media. It was the first election in which they didn’t even pretend to be unbiased. They were unabashedly against President Trump and weren’t shy about expressing their discontent when he won. Some raged. Some cried. It was a glitch in their matrix that they’re still trying to understand today.

If it happens again with Republicans retaining majorities in the House, Senate, and governorships, there will be a seismic upheaval in the way they go about their jobs. Some in the media will actually blame others in the media for causing this through their vitriolic style of reporting against anyone with a letter (R) next to their name.

If Democrats win a majority, mainstream media will feel vindicated. They’ll feel they did the right thing and helped contribute to the downfall of Republican representatives around the country. It will be an empowering moment for them, one that will drive them to push the limits even further heading into the 2020 election.

They need to be neutered. I’ll admit that of the three effects of a Republican victory on Tuesday, this is the one I crave the most.

The agenda moves forward

What most Americans don’t seem to understand is the effect the Congress has on a President’s ability to fulfill their agenda. It’s directly tied; there is either a symbiotic relationship or a contentious one between the White House and Capitol Hill. How that relationship manifests is determined by which party has control of both chambers of Congress.

President Trump can only move forward with his agenda if Republicans have control of both the House and the Senate. It’s that simple. He needs both. All a President can do is sign bills given to him by Congress. Those bills must make it through both chambers. When there’s gridlock, progress comes to a standstill.

Whether or not we will be building the wall, defunding Planned Parenthood, getting more tax cuts, improving job numbers, and fixing the healthcare system are all directly attributed to whether or not Republicans can retain control of both the House and Senate. Keeping the Senate will not be enough. President Trump needs both chambers.

We always hear how every election is “the most important election of our lifetimes.” I’m not going to use that scare tactic. However, any right-thinking American who doesn’t believe it’s important enough to vote this time is gravely mistaken.

Democrats

How the left is redefining ‘quid pro quo’ to make it seem ominous

Published

on

How the left is redefining quid pro quo to make it seem ominous

Did you know you engage in “quid pro quo” every day? As you drive away from Starbucks with a latte in hand, you’re leaving the scene of your latest quid pro quo. When you tell your kids you will ground them if they don’t do their homework, you’re committing quid pro quo. When cover someone’s shift at work so they’ll work for you Saturday night, that’s blatant quid pro quo.

Literally, it’s Latin for “something for something.” It’s an exchange. You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours. It’s part of literally every negotiation between any two countries ever. Without quid pro quo, there would be no treaties, no trade agreements, and wars would always go on indefinitely. It’s not a bad thing.

When something inappropriate is offered as part of quid pro quo dealings, that’s when politicians get into trouble. Accepting gifts from lobbyists in exchange for favorable votes is an example of illegal quid pro quo. Or, as House Democrats are trying to prove, if a President holds back aid to a foreign government unless they investigate a political foe so dirt can be found on them for an upcoming election, that is bad quid pro quo.

Yesterday, acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney famously told the press to “get over it” when it comes to quid pro quo. His words were careless, not because they weren’t true but because in the current political atmosphere, his acknowledgement there was quid pro quo over the ongoing 2016 election corruption investigation muddies the waters. Democrats and the media have painted the common action of quid pro quo between two governments as negative by conflating their impeachment inquiry topic – Ukraine investigating the Bidens – with the other aspect of the phone call between President Trump and President Zelensky, the CrowdStrike’s involvement with the DNC hack in 2016.

The first is truly impeachable. The second is part of everyday business between two countries. Mulvaney admitted to the second, which is neither illegal nor impeachable. But the media pounced by conflating the two.

Democrats and mainstream media are trying to redefine quid pro quo as a negative thing worthy of impeachment. They’re doing this by confusing the language behind the action with the topic of the impeachment inquiry. Unfortunately, they’re doing this to an American public that is easy to confuse and easier to distract.

We’re witnessing a disingenuous attempt to make Americans believe quid pro quo in and of itself is bad. This is ludicrous, or course, but they’ll do or say anything to make President Trump look bad.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

The 5 biggest lies from the Democrat debate

Published

on

The 5 biggest lies from the Democrat debate

Liz Wheeler and her production team took on a very difficult task. They sifted through over three hours from the Democratic debate this week in an effort to try to identify the five biggest lies told on stage that night. We should applaud their Herculean efforts; it must have been like trying to determine which types of vegetables taste the worst when they’re spoiled. There aren’t enough Pinocchio images on the internet to cover all of the lies told at the debate.

Undaunted, the team at One America News show Tipping Point took on the challenge and came up with a list of five infuriating lies told on the debate stage Tuesday night.

  1. Elizabeth Warren’s big lie came through omission as she refused to answer the yes-or-no question about raising middle class taxes. This was around the 500th time she’s done this (we lost count at 342), choosing to redirect her answer to focus on “costs” rather than taxes.
  2. Cory Booker, Julian Castro, and Kamala Harris claimed abortion is a constitutional right. It is not. Even the majority brief from the Supreme Court admitted this in their ruling on Roe v. Wade.
  3. Beto O’Rourke pretended like his proposal for confiscation of “assault rifles” would not mean law enforcement will come to people’s homes to collect their firearms. His claim that law-abiding citizens will comply is not only false, it’s also a scary prospect. If law abiding citizens are the only ones forced to comply, what about criminals? They aren’t known for abiding by laws, especially ones that prevent them from committing their crimes.
  4. Elizabeth Warren made it on the list a second time with her claim that the wealth tax would pay for a myriad of socialist policies she intends to implement. This would be true if it weren’t for math. Unfortunately for her (and everyone else if she gets elected), the wealthy simply don’t have enough money to tax in a way that would pay for her plans. Moreover, every time a wealth tax has been tried elsewhere, it has failed miserably. But hey, at least she takes a lot of selfies.
  5. Impeachment. This is the ongoing lie of the day for both media and Democrats. All 12 candidates on stage supported impeachment (though Tulsi Gabbard was clear she only supported it if the House Democrats made a proper case for it), but only Bernie Sanders actually gave a reason why. Even his singular reasoning was false, though.

I’ll add another for the list – Kamala Harris kept saying, “When I’m President…” This is a big lie. It’s doubtful she even believes it herself judging by the direction she’s been heading in the polls.

There were enough lies told in the last Democratic debate to fill three hours of television, which is exactly what CNN did. Thanks to Liz Warren and the folks at One America News, we now know the five biggest one.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

Will Texas become a blue state?

Published

on

Will Texas become a blue state

If you listen to mainstream media, you’ve probably heard multiple times over the last few months that Texas may turn blue in the next election. That’s been a drumbeat by the left for a while as an influx of people escaping California and the rising Hispanic population is supposed to mean more Democrats in the Lone Star State.

The first piece of their puzzle is true. As Californians realize their state’s policies and cost of living are untenable, more of them turn to Texas where they bring their generally progressive views. But assuming that Hispanics are going to vote Democrat is false. Studies and polls show an increased preference for Republican policies, including the border and illegal immigration policies that are allegedly turning Hispanics off.

Laura Ingraham tackled the topic last night after the President had a massive rally in Dallas. She and her panel made important points that make sense as the idea of Texas turning blue seems more like a leftist pipe dream than a real risk.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending