Neither Barry Goldwater nor Ronald Reagan Could Get Elected by Today’s GOP

Emphatically stating that well respected Republican leaders of the past like Senator Barry Goldwater and President Ronald Reagan could not get elected in the current climate of the GOP, conservative consultant Vic Gold says that neither would even try.

Goldwater was a true classical liberal who wrote this in his book “The Conscience of a Conservative“:

“I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is “needed” before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents’ “interests,” I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.”

This Constitutionally based ideal is lost on those who call themselves the Republican establishment.

Gold — who served as a press secretary to Barry Goldwater in 1964 and has a long, distinguished history in conservative political circles — discussed the current state of the party and how things have gotten to the point they are at now in a Focus Washington interview (see the video below) with Chuck Conconi.

“The breakdown of the republican party starts with Newt Gingrich and the 104th Congress in 1994.” The party’s polarization started when Gingrich and Republican members of Congress spent their time focused on government shut downs and impeaching Bill Clinton. According to Gold that injected a venom into the party that has snowballed into vicious partisan politics.

Venom, polarization and partisan politics are code words for political correctness, something the American people are tired of.

Gold has lived through 24 elections, however it is questionable that he knows a classical liberal (e.g. conservative) stands for. In referencing the current candidates he says, “[T]hese people are not conservatives… they are practically anarchists.” Gold is correct in that there is a political insurgency sweeping across America. And that the insurgency is being led by the Republican Donald Trump. An insurgency that is focused on stopping an out of control federal government.

The Founding Fathers created a Constitutional  Republic, which is just to the left of anarchy. The Constitution of the United States was designed to protect the people against a democratic form of government. This is because democracy inextricably leads to mob rule and tyranny.

Gold labels the current crop of Republicans as largely “anti-liberals” who have have little in common with traditional conservatives. Gold has it wrong as many Republicans are in fact “classical liberals” following the ideas of notable individuals whose ideas have contributed to classical liberalism including John Locke, Jean-Baptiste Say, Thomas Malthus, and David Ricardo. Classical liberalism drew on the economics of Adam Smith and on a belief in natural law, utilitarianism, and progress..

This is where the establishment in both political parties have lost their way.

Gold questions how the Democratic party could only come up with Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, as candidates. He laments, “Where are the Democratic leaders today?”

Moreover, Gold asserts that each party has contributed to the rise of Donald Trump and his domination of the GOP. The political system used to let politicians enter the presidential race despite financial status and now democrats such as Joe Biden don’t enter because he “doesn’t have the money”. He points to Bernie Sanders’candidacy as an ideal scenario for elections, “He doesn’t have the money but he [runs] anyway—we used to have that.”

It appears that Gold favors are return to the time when money was not the driving factor in elections. We agree, that is why Donald Trump is self-funding his campaign and people love him for it.

The political atmosphere is like non the American people have witnessed since the candidacy of Barry Goldwater. It was then that the GOP establishment helped defeated Goldwater giving the election to Lyndon B. Johnson. Will history repeat itself? That is the question.

Watch the full interview:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Republicans Are Addicted to Increasing Federal Spending

Gimmicks Are Preventing Congress From Honestly Balancing the Budget

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of United States Senator Barry Goldwater (left) meeting with then Governor Ronald Reagan during the 1972 Republican National Convention in Miami, Florida. Photo: White House via CNP/Newscom.

Latino opinion polling initiative launched by Florida Atlantic University

MIAMI, Florida /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — With the number of Hispanic voters in the U.S. topping 27 million this year – and immigration playing a pivotal role in the national debate – the impact of this rapidly growing demographic on the 2016 election is expected to be decisive.

To better gauge public opinion of the Latino population – and its impact on the U.S. political process – FIU’s Steven J. Green School of International and Public Affairs has launched the Latino Public Opinion Forum – the first university initiative in Florida to systematically study the growth and impact of the Latino population.

On Thursday, the forum will unveil its first national poll results – focusing on Latino opinions about Republican frontrunner Donald Trump – in a special media webcast scheduled for 2 p.m. The webcast will feature Eduardo Gamarra, a professor in FIU’s Department of Politics and International Relations and a founder of the initiative, Brian Fonseca, director of the Jack D. Gordon Institute for Public Policyand Andres Arias, senior vice president of product and operations for Adsmovil, a mobile advertising company that specializes in reaching the U.S. Hispanic population.

To view the webcast, please click webcast.fiu.edu. For live coverage of the event follow us on Twitter@FIUNews and @FIU_SIPA. Submit questions using the hashtag:  #LatinoTrumpPoll.

Using first-party data and the latest digital marketing techniques, the first poll reached more than 9,000 U.S. Hispanics through their mobile phones.

“Latino voters will be critical to the outcome of this U.S. presidential election, as well as many other races,” Gamarra said. “Disproportionately high rates of smartphone adoption and usage among Hispanics mean that mobile polling is necessary to achieve a fuller understanding of this demographic.”

“Mobile holds the key to reaching U.S. Hispanics at scale,” said Arias of Adsmovil. “Compared to other ethnic groups, Hispanics over-index in smartphone ownership as well as mobile web and app usage, which leads to unusually high levels of poll participation on mobile devices.”

FIU pioneered this area of study two decades ago with its Cuba Poll, the longest running research project tracking the opinions of Cuban-Americans in South Florida, creating the most complete picture of Cuban-American political attitudes over time.

The Latino Public Opinion Forum will build upon this work by broadening the scope of inquiry to other rapidly growing Latino populations, including Central Americans, Mexicans and Puerto Ricans.

“Over the past two decades, the size of these other Latino populations in Florida has grown significantly,” Gamarra said. “The Latino Public Opinion Forum is aimed at building on the strength of our research in public opinions of Cuban-Americans and closing the knowledge gap about other Latinos.”

FIU’s Kimberly Green Latin American and Caribbean Center, Cuban Research Institute, Metropolitan Center, Department of Politics and International Relations and Department of Global and Socio-Cultural Studies are also partners in the project.

Are Ted Cruz and Hillary Clinton now co-chairs of the #DumpTrump campaign?

On Tuesday, March 15th, Donald Trump won Florida, Missouri, Illinois and North Carolina. He lost to Governor Kasich in Ohio. Ted Cruz won no states outright.

florda primary votes by countyNo candidate for the GOP presidential nomination has ever failed to win the sunshine state. The same holds true in the general election.

The GOP must win Florida early in order to put a Republican in the White House on November 8th.

Click here for the 2016 Delegate Count & Primary Results

I received an email titled “One-on-one race” from the Ted Cruz campaign stating:

Tonight, there is no ambiguity.

I’m the only candidate that has defeated Trump outside my home state, that can unify all conservatives, and who has a pathway to win the delegates necessary to earn the nomination.

It appears that Ted Cruz has, along with Hillary Clinton, joined with those behind the #DumpTrump campaign. Among those groups that have made it their mission to dump Trump are Moveon.org, Black Lives Matter, La Raza, George Soros, the Republican establishment, the main stream media and the elite politicians inside the Washington D.C. beltway.

But can they dump Trump?

Neil Munro, from Breitbart in his column Three-Quarters of GOP Voters Back Donald Trump Nomination, if He Gets Most Delegates”  writes:

Three out of four Republicans believe the party establishment should support Donald Trump if he gets the nomination, whose voter support also has broken through the 50 percent mark, up from 44 percent in late February, according to a new poll from YouGov.

Only 13 percent of the party supporters — or just one in eight voters — say the establishment should oppose Trump if he is nominated, says the March 10 to 12 survey.

“If Trump should win … Republican voters, including those supporting other candidates, want the establishment to support him,” YouGov reported.

I have written in my column “Donald Trump is a ‘Christian Nationalist'”:

Donald Trump went from running a campaign, to heading a movement and is now leading an insurgency. Until today I could not define what was driving this insurgency. I may now have the answer.

Karl Marx wrote: “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people“.

Donald Trump is viewed by his followers as the heart of a heartless world, the soul fighting a soulless government and he understands that it is morals that drives him and the American dream. It is religion that is inextricably linked to politics in America. It is something citizens have not seen since the American Revolution.

Senator Ted Cruz does not have the momentum of Donald Trump. If Senator Cruz’s goal is to have just enough delegates to force a brokered convention then he may do more harm to the Republican Party, than good.

Hillary Clinton, the Democrat establishment candidate, has effectively stopped the Bernie insurgency. Should Senator Cruz continue to try to stop the growing Trump insurgency? By doing so will he alienate those who have voted in large numbers for Trump and cause the GOP to split?

It appears the GOP establishment, Hillary Clinton and Senator Cruz want a Republican house divided. Is that a winning political strategy for Republicans November? It certainly is for Democrats.

Time will tell if Donald Trump achieves the needed delegates to win the nomination outright. He is over half way there. As some have said, nothing can seem to stop the Trump Train.

RELATED VIDEOS:

Donald Trump Super Tuesday Press Conference After Winning FL, IL, NC (3-15-16)

Curly Haugland, an unbound GOP delegate from North Dakota, on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” questioned why primaries and caucuses are even held. Haugland states, “We choose the nominee, not the voters“:

RELATED ARTICLES:

We choose the nominee, not the voters: Senior GOP official

The GOP Sellout Continues

Why Washington’s Political Class Is Losing Control

ICE: 124 illegal immigrants released from jail later charged in 138 murder cases

BEYOND DISTRUST: How Americans View Their Government – PEW Research

The ‘Compassionate’ Bullying of the Left

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump © Mike Stone / Reuters.

Profiles of Arizona and Utah Holding March 22nd Primaries and Caucuses

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The following tip sheet was released today by the U.S. Census Bureau:

In advance of the March 22 primaries and caucuses, the U.S. Census Bureau presents a variety of statistics that give an overall profile of each participating state’s voting-age population and industries. Statistics include:

  • Voting-age population and estimate of eligible voters (i.e., citizens age 18 and older).
  • Breakdown of voting-age population by race and Hispanic origin.
  • Selected economic characteristics, including median household income and poverty.
  • Selected social characteristics, including educational attainment.
  • County Business Patterns (providing information on employment by specific industries).
  • Statistics on voting and registration.

Profiles are provided for the following states:

Arizona
Utah

cb16-tps45_graphic_voting_arizona

cb16-tps46_graphic_voting_utah

Why Students Give Capitalism an ‘F’ by B.K. Marcus

bernie sanders half of a sign socialismNot only are young voters more likely to support Democrats than Republicans, they are also more likely to support the most left-wing Democrats. In recent polls of voters under 30, self-declared democratic socialist Bernie Sanders beats the more mainstream Hillary Clinton by almost six-to-one.

Former professor Mark Pastin, writing in the Weekly Standard, acknowledges some of Clinton’s flaws as a candidate, but concludes that “the most compelling explanation” for young Democrats’ overwhelming preference for Sanders “is that young voters actually like the idea of a socialist revolution.”

I’m embarrassed to confess that when I was a young voter, I probably would have been among the “Sandernistas.”

I don’t think Pastin is right about the revolution, though. Much of Sanders’s success in defanging the word socialism is in pairing it with an emphasis on democracy, as George Bernard Shaw and the Fabians did in an earlier era. Democratic socialists — at least among my comrades — preferred the idea of evolutionary socialism, and we tried hard to distance ourselves from the revolutionary folks.

Whether by evolution or revolution, however, what we all sought was less competition and more cooperation, less commerce and more compassion. Above all, we wanted greater equality.

“When I asked my students what they thought socialism meant,” Pastin writes, “they would generally recite some version of the Marxist chestnut ‘from each according to ability and to each according to need.'” That sounds about right, but add to that the assumption that it’s government’s job to effect the transfer.

My father, gently skeptical of my politics, pointed out a problem confronting American socialists: we tended to imagine ourselves on the receiving end of the redistribution — rob from the rich and give to the rest of us. “However poor we may think we are in the United States,” he told me, “we would have to give up most of what we now have in order to make everyone in the world equal.” This was strange to hear from someone always behind on the rent and facing ever-growing debt.

Pastin makes a related point: “I’ve always thought that socialism appealed to students because they have never not been on the receiving end of government largesse.”

As an informal test of his students’ egalitarian beliefs, Pastin “would offer to run the class along socialist principles, such as the mandate to take from the able and give to the needy.” Specifically, he proposed subtracting points from the A students and transferring them to those who would otherwise earn lower grades.

Even the most ardent socialist students balked at this arrangement. In fact, according to Pastin, the highest-performing students were both more likely to be self-declared socialists and more likely to meet his proposal with outrage: grading, they argued, should be a matter of merit.

Is it pure hypocrisy on the part of these rhetorical radicals, or is there a logical consistency behind this apparent contradiction in their values?

Trying to recall the details of my own callow political folly, I seem to recall three main issues behind my anti-capitalistic mentality:

  1. “Capitalism” was just the word we all used for whatever we didn’t like about the status quo, especially whatever struck us as promoting inequality. I had friends propose to me that we should consider the C-word a catchall for racism, patriarchy, and crony corporatism. If that’s what capitalism means, how could anyone be for it?
  2. Even when we left race and sex out of the equation, our understanding of commerce was zero-sum: the 1 percent grew rich by exploiting the 99 percent.
  3. For whatever reason, none of us imagined we’d ever be business people, except on the smallest possible scale: at farmer’s markets, as street vendors, in small shops. Those things weren’t capitalism. Capitalism was big business: McDonald’s, IBM, the military-industrial complex.

I don’t know how many of today’s young socialists hold these same assumptions, but a question recently posted to Quora.com sounds like it could have been written by one of my fellow lefties in the 1980s: “Should I drop out of college to disobey the capitalist world that values a human with a piece of paper?” (See Praxis strategist Derek Magill’s withering advice to the would-be dropout.)

Even if a different array of confusions drives the radical chic of millennial voters, what is clear is that they see American capitalism as rigged. “Crony capitalism,” from their perspective, is redundant — and “free market” is an oxymoron. They’re not necessarily opposed to meritocracy; they just don’t see what merit has to do with the marketplace.

Grading that would penalize the studious to reward the slackers is obviously unfair, and a sure-fire strategy to kill anyone’s incentive to do the homework. It’s not that the socialist students are applying the principle inconsistently; it’s that they don’t see what merit has to do with commerce. Some of that may be intellectual laziness, some is the result of indoctrination by anti-capitalist faculty, but much of it is also based in the reality of America’s mixed economy.

Not only have young voters spent most of their lives sheltered from the productive side of the commercial world, schooled by men and women who are themselves deliberately insulated from the marketplace, but time spent in the reality of the private sector is hardly an education in what the advocates of economic freedom have in mind when we talk about the free market.

If my own experience is any guide, today’s democratic socialists will have to spend a lot of time unlearning much of what they’ve been taught.

Pastin’s informal experiment is an illuminating first step, and it’s a powerful way to expose the conflict between his students’ understanding of merit and the socialists’ understanding of equality. But there’s also a danger in comparing the economy to the classroom. By offering his grade redistribution as an analogy for socialism, Pastin seems to imply that the merit-based grade system better resembles a free market. But that’s silly.

For one thing, studying hard for your next exam may improve your own GPA, but it probably doesn’t help your classmates. In contrast, an unhampered marketplace makes everyone better off, however unequally.

More significantly, in a free economy, there is no one person in the role of the grade-giving professor. In the absence of coercion, power has a hard time remaining that centralized. Yes, wealth can be seen as a kind of grade, but in the free market, an entrepreneur’s profits and losses are like millions of cumulative grades from the consumers. A+ for improving our lives. F for wasting time and resources.

That kind of spontaneous, decentralized, self-regulating prosperity is every bit as radical as the visions of young socialists, minus the impoverishing effects of coerced redistribution. It’s almost certainly not what they imagine when they say they oppose “capitalism.”

B.K. MarcusB.K. Marcus

B.K. Marcus is editor of the Freeman.

Who’s Driving The Trump Train?

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Wondering who the key players are in the Clinton, Cruz, Kasich, Rubio, Sanders and Trump camps are? Qorvis MSLGROUP’s “Influencer2016” digitally shows the connections between the candidates and his or her staff.

“Hate them or love them, the 2016 presidential candidates have proven to be some of the most fascinating personalities we’ve ever seen,” said Michael Petruzzello, president of Qorvis MSLGROUP, “We think voters are curious about the people behind the scenes and, with Influencer2016, you can see who’s involved in the campaigns, where the spheres of influence are, as well as the extent of those links.”

CLICK HERE TO LEARN WHO IS BEHIND EACH OF THE CANDIDATES FOR PRESIDENT CAMPAIGN.

About Qorvis MSLGROUP

Qorvis MSLGROUP is the Washington, D.C.office for MSLGROUP, the flagship strategic communications and engagement consultancy of Publicis Groupe.

With more than 3,000 people across close to 100 offices worldwide, MSLGROUP is also the largest PR network in Europe, fast-growing China and India. The group offers strategic planning and counsel, insight-guided thinking and big, compelling ideas – followed by thorough execution.

About Publicis Groupe

Publicis Groupe [Euronext Paris FR0000130577, CAC 40] is a global leader in marketing, communication, and business transformation. In a world marked by increased convergence and consumer empowerment, Publicis Groupe offers a full range of services and skills: digital, technology & consulting with Publicis.Sapient (SapientNitro, Sapient Global Markets, Sapient Government Services, Razorfish Global, DigitasLBi, Rosetta) – the world’s largest most forward-thinking digitally centered platform focused exclusively on digital transformation in an always-on world – as well as creative networks such as BBH, Leo Burnett, Publicis Worldwide, Saatchi & Saatchi, public affairs, corporate communications and events with MSLGROUP, ad tech solutions with VivaKi, media strategy, planning and buying through Starcom MediaVest Group and ZenithOptimedia, healthcare communications, with Publicis Healthcare Communications Group (PHCG), and finally, brand asset production with Prodigious. Present in 108 countries, the Groupe employs more than 76,000 professionals.

Mainstream Media’s Dirty War on Trump

The more I listen to Donald Trump’s refrain about how dishonest the media is, the more I am beginning to agree with him.

The media should be thoroughly embarrassed by their coverage last week of North Carolina’s now infamous punch throwing incident at a Donald Trump rally.

Rakeem Jones was being led out of Trump’s rally by Cumberland County officers at Fayetteville’s Crown Coliseum for attempting to disrupt the event. As Jones was being led out, John McGraw sucker punched him in front of the police; but it was Jones who was thrust to the ground, handcuffed, and arrested. McGraw continued to watch the rally without so much as being questioned by the police.

That was the news story from this incident, not Trump being universally accused of stoking racial fears and violence.

Oh, did I mention to you that Jones is a 26 year-old Black man and McGraw is a 78 year-old White male? This had nothing to do with race. This was a plain old assault, pure and simple.

But, for the liberal, biased media, it was manna sent from heaven.

You had the perfect setting for liberals to do what they do best—use the race card.

The backdrop of the event taking place in North Carolina was part of the old Confederacy of the Deep South; you had a 26 year-old Black male; and a 78 year-old White male straight out of central casting for a KKK movie; and if that wasn’t enough, you had a bigger than life personality named Donald Trump running for president as a Republican.

For the liberal media, this was like winning the lottery. What are the odds of having all these dynamics converge together in one place?

In one event, the media continued their attempts to tarnish Trump, call all Republicans racists, make McGraw the face of the Republican Party; and give Black liberals another opportunity to blame Republicans for every problem the Black community faces (God forbid that they would actually blame Obama’s policies for some of these issues.).

Without question, Trump needs to tone down some of his rhetoric, but to blame him for McGraw’s actions is akin to blaming a rape victim for how she was dressed.

Trump is not and cannot be held responsible for the illegal actions of a 78 year-old man. Period.

If Trump was speaking to a group of teenagers, then I would be more inclined to accept his culpability in them engaging in some illegal activity. Teenagers, by their sheer lack of maturity, are impressionable and can easily be persuaded into acting irresponsibly and illegally, but I am not willing to be so understanding when it comes to adults.

The media has all but ignored the fact that Jones was assaulted right in front of several policemen and the perpetrator was allowed to remain free. Time after time we have seen a Black be the victim of a crime, but yet somehow the victim seems to be the one arrested and not the perpetrator.

In previous columns I have asked and I will continue to ask, what is happing in America that police continue to ignore crimes committed against Blacks even when they are witnesses to the crime?

There has been little discussion in the media as to why it took almost 24 hours before the Fayetteville police questioned and arrested McGraw.

But instead, the media used this occasion to continue their smear of Trump and all things Republican.
The media’s coverage of this event is bordering on journalistic malpractice. This is totally irresponsible and playing to the racial fears so prevalent in our country.

If you don’t agree with Donald Trump, then don’t go to his rallies. You have absolutely no constitutional right to attend someone’s rally with the sole intent to disrupt it.

The media has been derelict in its obligation to report the news accurately and impartially.

The media has refused to report the fact that radical liberal financier, George Soros, has given multiple millions of dollars to groups like MoveOn.org to disrupt Republican events.

MoveOn.Org orchestrated the disturbance at Trump’s rally last week in Chicago.

Why has the media not reported on this fact? The groups don’t even deny the fact that they are creating these protests in order to embarrass Trump with the full knowledge that the media is in the tank for them.

So, to the media and the all the political pundits out there blaming Trump for this supposed violence, I want you to also blame all the rapes against women on the fact that they wear short dresses or drank too much alcohol.

When you do this, then I will be the first one to criticize Trump on his hyperbolic language.

RELATED ARTICLE: Kasich co-chair on Trump: ‘You’ve got to take him out with a head shot’

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Black Press USA. The featured image is courtesy of TPM.

Donald Trump is a ‘Christian Nationalist’

I have written that Donald Trump went from running a campaign, to heading a movement and is now leading an insurgency. Until today I could not define what was driving this insurgency. I may now have the answer.

Karl Marx wrote: “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people“.

Donald Trump is viewed by his followers as the heart of a heartless world, the soul fighting a soulless government and he understands that it is morals that drives him and the American dream. It is religion that is inextricably linked to politics in America. It is something citizens have not seen since the American Revolution.

Mahatma Gandhi said, “Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is.”

Gandhi also said, “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

Michael Savage in his column “Here’s how to define Donald Trump” writes:

And I want to define something for you.

Here’s something important. People don’t know how to define Donald Trump.

I’ve defined him as a moderate nationalist. But I’m going to redefine Donald Trump for everyone listening to this show around the world on “The Savage Nation,” because I’m the idea man. I’m known as the idea man.

And here’s your idea. Take it, run with it, drop it, reject it, debate it.

Trump is a Christian nationalist.

No one’s said that.

He’s proud to be a Christian. He is a proud Christian, and he’s a proud American nationalist.

This is anathema. This is anathema to the media. This is anathema to the university America haters. This is anathema to the thuggish left who has taken over everything in this country and threatens everybody by threatening your advertisers if you dare speak out about their communism and their desire to control every aspect of our life from top to bottom, telling us what we’re supposed to think about sexuality.

Everything; they tell us what we’re supposed to think.

Well, finally we have someone who said: “Drop dead. We’re not your slaves. We’re not slaves of the radical left. We’re not gonna eat this garbage anymore, and we’re fighting back.”

And he is the man carrying the banner of this Christian nationalism, and that is why he’s ruffling feathers around the world, because they’re used to stamping on us.

They have disrobed the Statue of Liberty and molested her. The radical left has disrobed her and rolled her in mud, and the Statue of Liberty is crying, and Donald Trump wants to clean her and clothe her again! [Emphasis added]

Read more.

Trump is a church militant. The Church Militant comprises the souls on Earth engaged in battle against the forces evil. The evils that Trump and the insurgency are battling are: political correctness, political power, collectivism, Communism, socialism and radical Islamism. All of which are forces of evil.

I can now define the insurgency as a “Christian insurgency” and Donald Trump embodies the core of it.

This is why Trump is winning.

RELATED ARTICLES:

How a Suspected Murderer and Criminally Convicted Illegal Immigrant Avoided Deportation

Why Washington’s Political Class Is Losing Control

ICE: 124 illegal immigrants released from jail later charged in 138 murder cases

BEYOND DISTRUST: How Americans View Their Government – PEW Research

The ‘Compassionate’ Bullying of the Left

Islamic States’ Crimes Against Christians Detailed in New Report

#ChicagoThugs, #PatheticInChicago, #ChicagoFailure

Who can forget the clueless thugs protesting last May in the streets of Ferguson, Missouri, holding up their brand new shiny placards––hmm, where did those pricey things come from?––and expressing rage at….what?

  • Not at the lack of esteem they believed white America owed to the black-lives-matter movement.
  • Not at the shooting a year earlier of Michael Brown (for which police officer Darren Wilson was exonerated by a Grand Jury) or the phony “hands-up/don’t shoot” mantra.
  • Not at the devastating fact that under Barack Obama the unemployment figures for African-Americans were––and remain––at record sky-high levels. According to Larry Elder at Townhall.com, “By every key economic measurement, blacks are worse off under Obama…in some cases, far worse off.”
  • Not at the tragic fact that black-on-black crime was––and remains––the single biggest killer in the black community (other than abortion).

Oh no. They were protesting because the anarchic, hate-America moneybags who bribed or rather enticed them to show up and act out didn’t pay them! Reportedly, some of the protesters “who looted, rioted, burned buildings and overturned police cars….were promised up to $5,000 per month to join the protests.”

That’s right, according to Newsmax.com, “Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment (MORE), the successor group to the now-bankrupt St. Louis branch of ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), stiffed the protesters.”

So much for the high-minded ideology that drove these unemployed know-nothings into the streets!

OLD BOTTLE, SAME WINE

This is exactly what we just witnessed in Chicago on Friday night, March 11th, as a bunch of protestors––both black and white––were convinced for a pittance or for a pile of dough to act like hyperactive children off their Ritalin in order to disrupt a massive rally, anticipated to be attended by over 25,000, for presidential-frontrunner Donald J. Trump. It was hilarious to see the protestors, when asked by reporters why they were there, robotically announce, “I’d rather not give my reasons.” Translation: I have no clue why I’m here, but I’m making a few bucks, so what the hey!

The venue was perfect, wasn’t it?––the home of the arch community organizer Barack Obama, who before his ignominious, race-baiting, hate-whitey, loathe-the-opposition tenure in the White House, specialized in fomenting the same kind of protests, almost all of them to bring down “the man.” The goal, of course, has always been to extort money from individuals or corporations perceived to be “racist,” to create or reinforce in the protestors the notion that they are perpetual victims, and to convince them to vote for Democrats who promise to address their grievances––but never do. The net result: The cities in America with the highest crime rates share one thing in common––each one has a Democrat mayor!

In Democrat-run Chicago, the rich, hate-America radicals behind the anti-Trump protest, including MoveOn.org ––as well as behind Occupy Wall St., Black Lives Matter, etc.––were trying to take down the ultimate man, the Big Kahuna, the billionaire the protestors all long to be like but instead can’t help envying.

Is this the very definition of stupid? Mr. Trump is offering America a way out of poverty, a return to a rich, vibrant, successful, flourishing America, but these mal-educated protesters––thank you Common Core and all the other dumb-America-down liberal education programs of the past 50 years––would rather stick to their self-defeating ways than to wake up and smell the coffee.

According to radio host and writer Douglas V. Gibbs, the “Chicago protests were not about Trump” but were rather “an attempt to silence opposition to liberal left politics.” If Cruz had been the frontrunner, Gibbs says, he would have been the target.

Gibbs explains that in the style of the career agitator, socialist Saul Alinsky, the protestors “want violence…they want riots…they think it is chic. These people remind us of the agitators [who] brought about the French Revolution, or the Bolsheviks who brought about the Russian Revolution…angry, violent, and trained to believe the same poppycock that has brought down a long list of republics in history––and failed every time.”

Gibbs compliments Trump’s refusal to “feed the beast” by cancelling the event, no doubt driving the unruly horde to gather in another venue to count the money they made for the night and to indulge in an event commensurate with their maturity level, such as group thumb-sucking.

To his everlasting shame, Senator Ted Cruz joined the hysterical ranks of the Republican- establishment has-beens in blaming Donald Trump for the mob’s sideshow. So much for Mr.-I-Stand-for-the- Constitution defending Mr. Trump’s freedom of speech!

THANK YOU, VINCENTE

Last June, at the outset of his campaign for President of the United States, Mr. Trump said that one of the first things he would do was build a wall to keep illegal aliens from violating our southern border and invading our homeland––and that Mexico would pay for it! On cue, his rival candidates expressed their outrage, although now they’ve all appropriated this strategy for themselves.

Just a few weeks ago, the former president of Mexico, Vincente Fox, weighed in on that pronouncement. No way, he said, would Mexico pay “for that effing wall!”

When asked his reaction to Fox’s statement, Mr. Trump said “the wall just got 10 feet higher!”

In the same vein, a lot of Mr. Trump’s campaign promises have been met with anger, scorn, derision, vilification, and patronization, in fact most of the marginalizing tactics suggested by Saul Alinsky in his book, Rules for Radicals. The theory is that when people are insulted, they feel diminished, they lose their strength, they fade into the woodwork, sort of what Mitt Romney has done, not after being insulted but after insulting the formidable Mr. Trump. What Alinsky followers today don’t realize is that truth both negates and conquers liberal lies.

When Mr. Trump cites the massacres by Muslims on 9/11 and in France and San Bernardino and all over the world and then says we have to temporarily keep Muslims from entering the country “until we understand what’s going on,” the average person understands and agrees.

Only the politically-correct media wusses appear not to get it. But they join in the Trump bashing because their bosses order them to do so. Why? Because those same bosses have massive business dealings in the Arab world and so forbid their underlings to say anything that could hurt a burgeoning bottom line. Follow the money!

When Mr. Trump says that “I think Islam hates us,” his interviewers are stunned that someone running for public office actually realizes that the mullahs in Iran and the terrorists from Hezbollah and Hamas and the president of the so-called “Palestinian” Authority have inscribed in their mission statements the vow to eliminate the Great Satan, America, and the Little Satan, Israel. But the average person ––left, right, Democrat, Republican, black, white, Hispanic, young, old, et al––gets it and agrees with it.

That is why with every protest to Mr. Trump’s candidacy, not only does the wall get 10 feet higher, but the votes increase by the millions!

#TriumphOhio, #TriumphFlorida, #Hope.

trump protest sheet

Trump protest Q&A sheet.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Kasich co-chair on Trump: ‘You’ve got to take him out with a head shot’

ICE: 124 illegal immigrants released from jail later charged in 138 murder cases

Here’s how to define Donald Trump

EDITORS NOTE:  During the Obamacare protests, the Democratic controlled Congress amended Federal law H. R. 347 to make it illegal to protest at Federal campaign events. ALL of these anti-Trump rallies, be they violent or not, are FELONIES under this law that the U.S. Congress passed.

You may read the full text of H.R. 347 here: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr347/text

March 11, 2016 Trump Rally: Chicago Style Drive by Shooting of the 1st Amendment

Donald Trump was scheduled to do a rally in Chicago as part of his presidential campaign. After conferring with police authorities he decided to cancel his appearance. Mr. Trump’s primary concern was for the safety of those attending the rally. But that was not enough for the anti-Trump protestors like Portia Boulger, an activist from Ohio and supporter of Bernie Sanders. Boulger attended the Chicago rally in a Trump for president t-shirt and gave the Nazi salute.

Portia Boulger giving Nazi salute on left, and as a Woman for Bernie activist on the right.

This protest was well planned to do what it did, stop freedom of speech in Chicago. It can be characterized as a Chicago style drive by shooting, with the target being the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Immediately after this near riot Hillary Clinton, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and John Kasich denounced Trump for his “inflammatory rhetoric.” None blamed the protestors who appear to be made up of illegal aliens, Muslims, Moveon.org, members of Black Lives Matter, Democrats and other people like Portia Boulger a supporter of Bernie Sanders (see the raw video of the protest below).

This is akin to blaming the victim rather than the rapist.

This is political correctness gone wild. This is why Donald Trump is so popular, he is not politically correct and the people love him for it.

Watch how the Trump rally in Chicago nearly turned into an all out riot with confrontations between the protestors and Trump supporters,  video by Fox News KTVU Channel 2:

Political correctness is what Trump is all about. Donald Trump made the following statement on Fox and Friends:

President Obama is a great divider. That’s what you’re seeing here. President Obama has greatly divided this nation.

There is division between black and white. There is division between economic groups.

He has done a terrible job in terms of unifying our country. President Obama should have been — and had the advantage of being African-American– of really bringing the country together. And I thought that was what was going to happen. I didn’t know if he was going to be a good president. You can never tell.But I could tell you one thing I thought he was going to be a unifier. He has turned out to be a terrible unifier. he has turned out to be a divider.

A lot of what you saw last night [in Chicago] was Obama.

Here are some interviews after the clash in Chicago:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Kasich co-chair on Trump: ‘You’ve got to take him out with a head shot’

One of the groups organizing against Trump in Chicago was a “refugee rights” group

We Warned You: Chicago Trump Shutdown Is Just the Beginning

Trump: “A Lot Of What You Saw Last Night Was Obama” | Video | RealClearPolitics

Barack Obama and Donald Trump Collide in Chicago

Trump Surrounded by Secret Service as Man Tries Rushing Stage

EDITORS NOTE:  During the Obamacare protests, the Democratic controlled Congress amended Federal law H. R. 347 to make it illegal to protest at Federal campaign events. ALL of these anti-Trump rallies, be they violent or not, are FELONIES under this law that the U.S. Congress passed.

You may read the full text of H.R. 347 here: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr347/text

Dear Presidential Candidates: The National Debt is your Running Mate

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — With voters going to the polls in several key primary and caucus states on March 15, The Concord Coalition reminded all candidates today that regardless of party affiliation or ideology the rising national debt will affect the feasibility of their policy proposals.

“The debt is your running mate,” said Concord Co-Chairs Bob Kerrey (D-NE) and Jack Danforth (R-MO) former U.S. senators, and John Tanner (D-TN) and Mike Castle (R-DE), former U.S. House of Representatives members.

Their full statement.

Our nation’s budget policies simply don’t add up. And judging by what the leading 2016 presidential candidates are promising on the campaign trail, this sobering fact has not sunk in.

Republicans are proposing major tax cuts and higher defense spending. Their proposed spending cuts are nowhere near as large or specific. Democrats are proposing an array of expanded domestic programs that even if paid for with higher taxes would leave large and growing deficits.

This may seem like good campaign rhetoric, but it calls for a hard reality check. Whoever is elected president in 2016 will face a deep fiscal hole.

Failure by the new president and the next Congress to take quick and effective action on this fundamental problem could hurt the economy, lower American living standards, strangle investments on national priorities like infrastructure and medical research, leave critical entitlement programs on unsustainable paths, and put our position of global leadership at risk.

Even more shameful, we would be passing on the unfair burden of an enormous government debt to our children, grandchildren and future generations.

Projections by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), based on current law, demonstrate that the government is in an increasingly difficult position:

  • The budget deficit is projected to begin rising this year reaching $1 trillion (4.4 percent of GDP) by 2022 at the end of the next president’s first term.
  • Debt held by the public is projected to grow from 76 percent of GDP this year to 86 percent over the coming decade, far above the 39 percent average for the past half-century.
  • According to CBO, “Beyond the coming decade, the fiscal outlook is significantly more worrisome,” with debt rising further to 155 percent of GDP by 2046.

Population aging and rising health care costs mean that spending growth on the major entitlement programs is outpacing revenue growth, squeezing out other programs and adding to the debt. Under current law:

  • The CBO projects that most of the spending growth over the next 10 years will be driven by major health care programs (32 percent of the increase), Social Security (28 percent of the increase), and interest on the debt (23 percent of the increase).
  • Mandatory spending — which grows on autopilot and includes the major entitlement programs — along with interest on the debt will consume 99 percent of all revenues by 2026.
  • The projected rise in interest payments on the debt, from $255 billion in 2016 to $830 billion in 2026, is attributable to growing government borrowing and interest rates gradually increasing to more typical levels.
  • Social Security and Medicare continue to pay out more than they take in from their designated revenues, putting a growing strain on general revenues. The programs’ trustees warn that, “Social Security as a whole as well as Medicare cannot sustain projected long-run program costs under currently scheduled financing.”

Owing in large part to tight caps agreed to in the Budget Control Act of 2011, discretionary spending — which includes defense, education, transportation, justice, environment and certain veterans’ benefits – will actuallydecline from 6.5 percent of GDP in 2016 to 5.2 percent in 2026. By that year, discretionary spending and the deficit will both amount to roughly $1.4 trillion.

That means that cutting “waste, fraud and abuse,” as so many candidates advocate, is not the answer; Congress would have to eliminate all discretionary spending to balance the budget that year (assuming there were no entitlement cuts or tax increases).

The next President and Congress will not have the luxury of putting off the hard choices. Voters must ask some tough questions about the totality of the candidates’ fiscal plans and whether they add up. Candidates must do more than rail against the debt; they must give voters credible plans to rein it in and put the country’s finances on a sustainable path.

So our message to the candidates is this: The debt is your running mate. It will be there when this year’s winning candidate takes the Oath of Office. Your campaign promises need to reflect that reality. So far, they don’t.

ABOUT THE CONCORD COALITION

The Concord Coalition is a nonpartisan, grassroots organization dedicated to fiscal responsibility. Since 1992, Concord has worked to educate the public about the causes and consequences of the federal deficit and debt, and to develop realistic solutions for sustainable budgets. For more fiscal news and analysis, visit concordcoalition.org and follow us on Twitter: @ConcordC

Why Bernie Sanders [and Donald Trump] Matter

why bernie sanders matters book coverWASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Bernie Sanders’ appeal to young, often first time voters, is not a mystery to Harry Jaffe, whose recent book “Why Bernie Sanders Matters” was the subject of a Focus Washington interview with Chuck Conconi. Jaffe said the youthful voters are “attracted to” the VermontSenator’s authenticity.

In that, Jaffe explained, Sanders has “a commonality with (Donald) Trump” in that neither are part of the establishment. The comparison between the two maverick candidates, however, Jaffe points out is that Sanders is a “Populist Socialist,” while Trump is “Populist Fascist.”

In a comparison with the campaign style of Hillary Clinton, with whom he is vying for the Democratic Party nomination to run for president, Jaffe said Sanders says what he thinks and if you don’t agree with it, don’t vote for him. Clinton, on the other hand, he continues, first factors what her handlers think, then what her husband, former President Bill Clinton, thinks and then what she thinks before making a statement. Jaffe said younger voters can detect that difference.

Jaffe also said that the black vote is not monolithic and that southern African Americans — largely rural, more religious and conservative — are quite different from their northern counterparts, who are urban and prioritize good jobs and making a living. The contention is that while Clinton runs exceptionally well with African Americans in the southern states, she might not do as well among northern blacks in the upcoming Ohio and Illinois primaries.

A Washington Magazine editor at large, Jaffe, who has worked on books by educator Michele Rhee and former congresswoman Gabby Gifford, said that pollsters and much of the media were surprised by Sanders upset victory in the Michigan primary. Jaffe said he wasn’t surprised and doesn’t think Sanders was surprised either. He contends that Sanders will also do well in the upcoming Ohio and Illinois primaries because Sanders, who consistently votes against international trade agreements, has always been a spokesman for the working class who see their jobs outsourced overseas, and that they are not getting paid as well as they once were. They like his opposition to trade agreements, a factor that political pundits said was a major part of his Michigan victory.

Harry Jaffe provides interesting insights on democratic voters, upcoming primaries and even some surprises about the candidate himself as a college student during the 1960s. Bernie Sanders champions voters who feel like they don’t matter in Washington; and because he lets them know that they do matter, Bernie Sanders’Presidential bid matters.

See the full interview: http://www.focuswashington.com/2016/03/11/why-bernie-sanders-matters/

To learn more about the author, see his website at: http://www.harryjaffe.com/

About MSLGROUP

MSLGROUP is Publicis Groupe’s strategic communications and engagement group, advisors in all aspects of communication strategy: from consumer PR to financial communications, from public affairs to reputation management and from crisis communications to experiential marketing and events. With more than 3,000 people across close to 100 offices worldwide, MSLGROUP is also the largest PR network in Europe, fast-growing China and India. The group offers strategic planning and counsel, insight-guided thinking and big, compelling ideas – followed by thorough execution.
www.mslgroup.com
| Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube | Slideshare | Pinterest

About Publicis Groupe

Publicis Groupe [Euronext Paris FR0000130577, CAC 40] is a global leader in marketing, communication, and business transformation. In a world marked by increased convergence and consumer empowerment, Publicis Groupe offers a full range of services and skills: digital, technology & consulting with Publicis.Sapient (SapientNitro, Sapient Global Markets, Sapient Government Services, Razorfish Global, DigitasLBi, Rosetta) – the world’s largest most forward-thinking digitally centered platform focused exclusively on digital transformation in an always-on world – as well as creative networks such as BBH, Leo Burnett, Publicis Worldwide, Saatchi & Saatchi, public affairs, corporate communications and events with MSLGROUP, ad tech solutions with VivaKi, media strategy, planning and buying through Starcom MediaVest Group and ZenithOptimedia, healthcare communications, with Publicis Healthcare Communications Group (PHCG), and finally, brand asset production with Prodigious. Present in 108 countries, the Groupe employs more than 76,000 professionals.

Trump and Clinton Likely Winners in Florida Primary Races

SAINT LEO, Fla. /PRNewswire/ — In Florida, Donald Trump is maintaining his lead among GOP presidential candidates, getting the support of 41.4 percent of likely Republican primary voters surveyed this week by the Saint Leo University Polling Institute.

Florida’s own Marco Rubio trailed behind, attracting just 22.8 percent of the 500 Republicans surveyed in the online poll. As for other GOP candidates, 12.4 percent favored U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, and 10.8 percent will vote for former Ohio Governor John Kasich. Another 12.6 percent said they are undecided.

The poll also surveyed 500 likely Democratic Florida primary voters and found U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton strongly in the lead, with 59.4 percent selecting her over U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Sanders supporters amounted to 27 percent of those polled, meaning he was more than 32 points behind Clinton. The proportion of undecided Democrats was 13.6 percent.

Political science instructor Frank Orlando said that Marco Rubio is under intense pressure in his home state. “If he loses Tuesday, he’s effectively done,” said Orlando. “Even if he wins, the road is still very difficult, but one could see him gaining some momentum back and surviving the process. He needs to use Thursday night’s debate performance and all the ground game he can manage to change the tide in a hurry.”

Trump’s results showed broad appeal, but more so among men, particularly among white males. In the poll, 47.3 percent of males said they would vote for Trump compared to 34.2 percent of females. “If he does end up being the [Republican] nominee, we might witness the greatest gender gap in recorded history,” said Orlando.

On the Democratic side, Orlando sees Clinton’s poll results foreshadowing victory in the Florida primary. “Being down by 32 is quite a mountain to climb,” Orlando said. “Also, Florida has a higher minority population and a larger proportion of older voters. Both of these things help Clinton.”

ABOUT THE SAINT LEO UNIVERSITY POLLING INSTITUTE

The Saint Leo University Polling Institute survey results about Florida and national politics, public policy issues, Pope Francis’ popularity, and other topics, can be found here: http://polls.saintleo.edu. You can also follow the institute on Twitter @saintleopolls.

RELATED ARTICLES:

One of the groups organizing against Trump in Chicago was a “refugee rights” group

RNC Launches Website Dedicated to Clinton’s Email Scandal

Here Be Dragons: How the 2016 Election is Shaping Up

The 2016 election is upending normal political standards and practices, so as the ancient cartographers would say, ‘here be dragons!’

RELATED ARTICLES:

Rockefeller Republicans Fear Losing Their Power More Than They Fear A Hillary Clinton Presidency

Trump the ‘unifier’, Trump the individualist, Trump the Republican

The Trump Insurgency

Trump: “There’s something going on” with Islam

Profiles of March 15 Primary states: Florida, Illinois, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio

WASHINGTON, March 8, 2016 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — In advance of the March 15 primaries, the U.S. Census Bureau presents a variety of statistics that give an overall profile of each participating state’s voting-age population and industries. Statistics include:

  • Voting-age population and estimate of eligible voters (i.e., citizens age 18 and older).
  • Breakdown of voting-age population by race and Hispanic origin.
  • Selected economic characteristics, including median household income and poverty.
  • Selected social characteristics, including educational attainment.
  • County Business Patterns (providing information on employment by specific industries).
  • Statistics on voting and registration.

Profiles are provided for the following states:

Florida
Illinois
Missouri
North Carolina
Ohio

cb16-tps40_graphic_voting_florida

cb16-tps42_graphic_voting_illinois

cb16-tps43_graphic_voting_missouri

cb16-tps41_graphic_voting_nc

cb16-tps44_graphic_voting_ohio

In addition, the Census Bureau is providing a similar profile for the District of Columbia, which holds a convention on March 12.

cb16-tps39_graphic_voting_dc