This is Why the GOP Can’t Win Black Votes without Trump

The party establishment can’t fathom the thought of Trump being our nominee, despite him playing by the very rules that the establishment, who are trying to sabotage his campaign, created. Go figure.

I am stunned that many in the establishment ran over each other to denounce Trump over the David Duke and KKK issue, which I found kind of bizarre.

Most people are criticized for what they say, not for what they didn’t say. Many of these people that denounced Trump over what some have said was him stoking racial fears among voters all of a sudden became filled with righteous indignation over what they deemed to be a racist act by Trump.

But where were these same people when… South Carolina congressman Joe Wilson shouted to Obama “you lie” during a joint session of Congress.

Colorado congressman, Doug Lamborn said, “now I don’t want to be associated with him [Obama], it’s like touching a tar baby.”

Sarah Palin once wrote on her Facebook, “President Obama’s shuck and jive shtick with these Benghazi lies must end.”

This feigned righteous indignation over Trump is nothing more than a political stunt, because the Republican establishment is scared crapless of the possibility of a Trump nomination.

The other thing that I noticed was the lack of any Black Republicans representing any of the Republican institutions in the media. This shows once again, how tone deaf the party is when it comes to the Black community and optics.

You rarely, if ever, see the party avail a Black staffer to deal with an issue of race that involves the Black community. Part of the reason is that the few Blacks that work for the party have absolutely no standing or credibility within the Black community when it comes to issues of race.

The other reason is that most Black Republicans constantly tell their superiors that they “don’t” want to speak on issues that pertain to the Black community; they want to be an employee, not a Black employee of the party.

The party is totally oblivious to the optics of only trotting out Whites to speak out on issues perceived to be racists towards the Black community.

Where are Black Republican civil rights icons like Bob Brown or Bob Woodson? Where are people like Shannon Reeves, lifetime member of the NAACP and former board member?

Because Republicans have no Blacks with any type of authority or knowledge of PR and communications, they continue to dig themselves into a deeper hole.

Let me say for the record, there is not one shred of evidence in Trumps body of work that he has any racist tendencies whatsoever. If I have to judge a man by his words or his actions; his actions will win out every time.

But isn’t it amazing that the only person running for president that has shown an ability to build a coalition of Blacks, whites, Hispanics, blue collar, and white collar workers is the very person the party’s establishment is trying to discredit?

Trump is the only campaign that has Blacks on TV and in newspapers officially representing the campaign. Last Tuesday at his post SEC primary press conference, Trump looked directly into the camera and said that he will get 25 percent of the Black vote.

Regardless of your thoughts of Trump, he laid down his marker with the Black vote. Twenty five percent of the Black vote for Trump is not unreasonable.

I challenge my readers and members of the Republican Party to name me the last time you saw a Black person actually officially representing the party on TV, newspaper, or radio.

When was the last time a Black was empowered to negotiate on behalf of the party an appearance before a Black group like the NAACP or the National Urban League?

Trump has done more to engage with the Black community in nine months than the party has done in nine years.

Trump is the only presidential candidate that seems to think the Black vote is worth pursuing. He has verbally asked Blacks to vote for him; he has hired Blacks in extremely high-level positions; and he has showcased Blacks on stage with him on multiple occasions.

When was the last time you saw a Black with credibility in the Black community on stage with any Republican leader?

Republicans showcase more Black Democrats than they do Black Republicans.

So, before the party establishment throws Trump to the side, maybe, just maybe, that should look at what he is doing right.

If Donald Trump is a racist, then maybe the Republican Party needs to become more racist.

RELATED VIDEO: Black Pastor’s reflections on Donald Trump at Cleveland Rally:

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in BlackPressUSA.com. The featured image was taken during a political rally in Laconia, New Hamsphire in July 2015. (Micahel Vadon/Wikimedia Commons)

Donald Trump has the New World Order [Communists & Muslims] trembling

We are getting closer to returning this nation back to a free market, capitalist money making, freedom loving, flag waving, glorious place to live.

Donald Trump, U.S. presidential candidate and free market capitalist, is turning the New World Order Foreign diplomats on their heads. YAY! My kind of dude.

They are getting mighty nervous about what they state are “inflammatory” and “insulting public statements” by the steam roller Republican presidential front-runner Mr. Trump.

All this according to senior U.S. officials who at this juncture in our history are either Muslims, homosexuals or members of the Communist Party.

Mid-level New World Order dictators from Europe, the Middle East, Latin America and Asia have complained about Mr. Trump said three U.S. officials, who all declined to be identified. Which means they are scared and have zero backbone.

Exclude the republic of Colombia because that free market capitalist nation would not give Obama the time of day. You have more freedom in Colombia right now than here in the USA.

We are talking about Ecuador here. Venezuela is fighting for its freedom and will soon be back!

To the folks at the Venezuelan Embassy.. arrest your Communist president and prosecute him! Do it. Be free again like your neighbor Colombia. Get bread back on your shelves.

Senior government New World Order high rollers in countries like the Islamic State of Britain, Taco Tuesday Mexico, white flag surrender France, and Ted Cruz’s Canada — have already made public comments criticizing Trump’s positions.

Now I don’t dislike Ted Cruz, but he is from Canada. He should stick around and stop bashing Mr. Trump. There will be a place for him in the Trump cabinet. Perhaps as Attorney General?

Marco Rubio needs to step aside and start being nice to Mr. Trump too. He would be a good asset as ambassador to Cuba. He wants to help Cuba then step aside and get behind Mr. Trump. Do it!

All this while the Socialist German Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel the Muslim embracing nation destroyer has branded Mr. Trump a threat to peace and prosperity in an interview published on Sunday.

This after Germany has banned all pork sausages to appease the Muslim take over of their country. Germany is on its way to being an Islamic state. They need to start getting the building permits ready for all the mosques.

Japan’s embassy declined to make any comment against Mr. Trump. They remember Hiroshima so they really don’t want to piss off future President Trump, best to say nothing at this juncture. Nagasaki also comes to mind.

The Indian and South Korean embassies did not respond to requests for comment.

The Indians did bring us superb curry recipes and South Korean’s the Hyundai so they are being quiet too.

Taco Tuesday Mexico did say its top diplomat Claudia Ruiz Massieu has accused Trump of being ignorant and racist and that his plan to build a border wall to stop illegal immigration was “absurd.”

mexicos-southern-border-fenceBut what the Mexicans fail to understand is that we have all the taco sauce we need, so indeed a WALL will be built to protect the sovereignty and security of the United States. Much like the wall the Mexicans built between their country and Guatemala.

Perhaps we will implement, under a Trump presidency, the same immigration policies Mexico has against illegal immigrants found in their country. See how that flies. Perhaps add a Trump Money gram tax of 2000% on all money wire transfers from the USA to Mexico.

Some of these New World Order wombats are also very upset by the anti-immigrant anti-Muslim rhetoric that Mr. Trump is pushing according to the Muslims and Communists currently running the U.S. government.

This country the United States is run on Constitutional law not Sharia law. So of course these folks are running scared by the protections Mr. Trump will put in place as President of the United States.. That’s his job as President to protect the border and ensure free trade.

The European Communists and the Middle Eastern governments are screaming enough already in regards to the alleged anti-Muslim declarations by Trump, that they say are being used in recruiting pitches by the Islamic State and other violent jihadist groups.

Folks, Muslims have been trying to decimate and kill Christians since Mohammed took power and went on a rampage across the once Christian nations of Saudi Arabia, Syria and Lebanon and the entire Arab peninsula. Mecca sits atop a Christian church destroyed my Mohammed.

So honestly we don’t really care what Muslims think. Everything we needed to learn about Muslims was shown to us on 9-11-2001, in Paris on 11-13-2015 and in San Bernardino, California. The list is endless. I say the best way to protect a sky scraper is to deport a Muslim.

What is most interesting is that more than a hundred Republican foreign policy veterans pledged this week to oppose Mr. Trump, they stated in an open letter that his ideas would undermine U.S. security. I will get all their names for Mr. Trump.

Yes indeed these Communists and Muslims operating in our government are afraid that the U.S. military will no longer be used as the worlds policeman and that Mr. Trump will start to rebuild our military, rebuild are troop strengths, increase our carrier battle fleets. This also means that Saudi Arabia will have to start fighting its own wars. Leave us out.

Trump will also provide the Navy SEALs with all the weapons they need instead of them having to borrow weapons from buddies in between deployments. I sent this info up the chain of command via some congressmen. Lets see who acts on it.

The New World Order Communists in the White House have decimated our military weakening the United States. Mr. Trump will not tolerate this anymore.

Also, North Korea is threatening a preemptive nuclear strike on the United States… Seriously ? Mr. North Korea…..South Korea needs a parking lot for overflow cars from the malls in Seoul …..we will oblige….pick a day….

We will return to super power status and bury those Muslims and Communists and the rest of the evil doers in our government trying to take us down internally. Obama I have a plane ticket for you to Dubai….

The New World Order U.S. military Police Dept. is coming to a close and we can get back to rebuilding our nation and our military and return to constitutional governance. Mr. Trump is the leader we have been waiting for.

So to all the yellow bellied, Communists, Muslims, and illegal immigrants that read my columns….. pack your **** and find a new place to live. Your fired.

As for Hillary Clinton… start planning on a nice vacation at the Federal Holiday Penitentiary Inn. Cheers.

Copy to: Mexican Embassy Washington DC.
Copy to: Venezuelan Embassy Washington DC
Copy to: North Korean Consular in Cuba

RELATED ARTICLE: Foreign diplomats voicing alarm to U.S. officials about Trump

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of AFP/Michael B. Thomas.

GOP Establishment Loves Losers

The great divide of the GOP electorate started all the way back in 1992, when Republican Pat Buchanan and political outsider Ross Perot decided to challenge incumbent George H.W. Bush for the presidency. Bush managed to hang on to the GOP nomination, but Perot was able to take 19% of the vote as an Independent in the general election, allowing Bill Clinton to win the White House with only 43% of the popular vote.

The GOP electorate has been systematically divided into competing factions ever since. The GOP ran Sen. Bob Dole against Clinton in 1996. Dole and Clinton were essentially tied, 49.2% of the popular vote each… except Perot grabbed 8.4% of the GOP vote, allowing Clinton to win re-election and a second term.

Since 2000, the GOP establishment has been dead set on flooding the field with too many prospects and picking losers for their GOP presidential nominees. The presumed GOP favorite in 2000 was originally Sen. John McCain.

The 2000 GOP Primary field

  1. John McCain
  2. Steve Forbes
  3. Gary Bauer
  4. Orrin Hatch
  5. Lamar Alexander
  6. Pat Buchanan
  7. Elisabeth Dole
  8. John Kasich
  9. Dan Quayle
  10. Bob Smith
  11. Herman Cain
  12. George W. Bush
  13. Alan Keyes

By mid-way through the primaries, everyone had dropped out except Bush, McCain and Keyes. Bush went on to win the GOP with 62% of the GOP vote, but the fracture in the GOP electorate would show in the general election when Democrat Al Gore won the popular vote by a half-million votes, but narrowly lost the Electoral College vote, making George W. Bush President.

In the aftermath of September 11, 2001, the GOP was much more united behind Bush for a period, as the nation recovered from the worst act of war on American soil since Pearl Harbor. So, Bush defeated John Kerry 50.7% to 48.3%…. The political divisions in the nation were galvanized and divisions in the GOP were about to get much worse.

By 2008, GOP divisions would become insurmountable. The GOP field…

  1. John McCain
  2. Mike Huckabee
  3. Mitt Romney
  4. Ron Paul
  5. Fred Thompson
  6. Alan Keyes
  7. Duncan Hunter
  8. Rudy Giuliani
  9. Sam Brownback
  10. Jim Gilmore
  11. Tom Tancredo
  12. Tommy Thompson

McCain won the GOP nomination with only 47.3% of the GOP vote. McCain then lost to a totally unknown nobody from nowhere with a blank résumé, Barack Obama, by a 52.9% to 45.7% margin… the GOP was perfecting the art of losing…

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

In 2012, the worst President in U.S. history was re-elected for a second term. Again, it is due to the fact that the GOP establishment was totally committed to running another loser, Mitt Romney.

The 2012 GOP field

  1. Mitt Romney
  2. Rick Santorum
  3. Ron Paul
  4. Newt Gingrich
  5. Buddy Roemer
  6. Rick Perry
  7. Tim Pawlenty
  8. Gary Johnson
  9. Michelle Bachmann
  10. Herman Cain
  11. Thaddeus McCotter
  12. Jon Huntsman

Romney won the GOP nomination with only 40.7% of the GOP vote… a worse GOP showing than even John McCain in 2008. As a result, Romney went on to lose to Barack Obama in the general election, 51.1% to 47.2%…

Enter 2016…

  1. Scott Walker
  2. Donald Trump
  3. Ted Cruz (ineligible)
  4. Marco Rubio (ineligible)
  5. Bobby Jindal (ineligible) (endorsed ineligible Rubio)
  6. Mike Huckabee
  7. John Kasich
  8. Ben Carson
  9. Jeb Bush
  10. Rand Paul
  11. Chris Christie (Endorsed Donald Trump)
  12. Carly Fiorina
  13. Rick Perry (endorsed ineligible Cruz)
  14. Rick Santorum (endorsed ineligible Rubio)
  15. Jim Gilmore
  16. Lindsey Graham (endorsed Bush)
  17. George Pataki (endorsed ineligible Rubio)

The GOP field is more divided than ever, and so is the GOP electorate.

As of today, Trump leads the race having won 12 state primaries, 3,596,663 votes and 391 delegates.

Ineligible Cruz is running second having won 6 states, 2,994,300 votes and 304 delegates.

Everyone is out of the race now, except Trump, Cruz, Kasich and Rubio…

The GOP establishment 1st choice was Jeb Bush, who was forced out of the race having received only 1.7% of the vote… a clear losing choice by the GOP establishment.

Then the GOP establishment shifted behind ineligible “anchor baby” Marco Rubio and their endorsement sunk the Rubio campaign instantly, like throwing a boat anchor to a drowning man… Marco will soon be forced to leave the race with only 10.11% of the votes secured.

That leaves business man Donald Trump and ineligible Canadian at birth Ted Cruz in the race for the GOP nomination. Continuing their trend of picking losers, I’m certain the GOP establishment will quickly endorse 2016 GOP establishment loser #3, Ted Cruz, in their effort to stop the conservative grassroots revolt that is the Trump Campaign. They are certain to toss Cruz a boat anchor any minute now…

Not only has the GOP elite made a habit of picking total losers, they have now perfected the art. They are no longer just running unqualified RINO losers like McCain and Romney, they have reached a new low by running totally ineligible frauds like Cruz and Rubio in their effort to throw the election to Democrats.

The Democrats see the U.S. Constitution as just a relic from history no longer of any use or value to our beloved Republic. Clearly, the GOP establishment now agrees with that view, running ineligible frauds like Cruz and Rubio on the GOP ticket as if the GOP and DNC are now one in the same, both destructive of the Constitutional Republic and favoring a globalist agenda.

And then there is Trump…

The GOP elite is in full scale panic mode… dragging old losers like Romney out of the dust bin and propping them up on camera to float the idea of a brokered convention, or maybe even a late entry to the race by either Romney or House Speaker Paul Ryan, both of whom have been rejected by the GOP electorate before…

They thought that getting Rubio to act like a preschooler in a sandbox on the debate stage would derail Trump… but it only served to sink Rubio.

They thought getting Ted, the biggest lying fraud on the GOP debate stage, to call Trump a liar and fraud would work. But it only made the Trump revolution even more angry and more committed to defeating the GOP establishment by any means necessary.

They thought getting their RNC friends, Beck, Levin, Napolitano, Limbaugh, O’Reilly and Kelly, in the so-called “conservative media” to attack Trump, to set “the Donald” up in “gotcha” questions at every debate, stacking the debate audiences with pro-establishment anti-Trump crowds to scream and boo in the background like a Jerry Springer audience, might work….

But no… the more they do to derail Trump, the more the tsunami of conservative anger grows…

How can they possibly miss the message at this point? The GOP establishment says “anyone but Trump,” going so far as to tell voters “it doesn’t matter who you vote for, as long as it is against Trump” – “even if you have to vote for Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton!”

The emperor has no clothes now…

People are not supporting Trump in droves because of who Trump is… They support him because of who he isn’t…. He isn’t “them.”

The establishment who has given conservative voters loser after loser after loser, no longer has any influence with conservative voters, and neither do their minions in the so-called “conservative media.” Trump supporters aren’t just voting for Trump… they are voting against everyone else with any connection to Washington D.C. or the D.C. elite on their résumé.

Unlike Democrat voters who don’t know and don’t care what a “natural born Citizen” is… Conservative voters do know and very much care. They are totally insulted and infuriated by the moronic effort of GOP establishment folks to pass off a Canadian from birth until May 2014 as a “natural born Citizen” of the United States, eligible for the Oval Office.

Trump backers are sick and tired of being sick and tired…

They are ready to take to the streets to stop Obama leftists from finishing off the United States… but they are ten-times as angry with D.C. Republicans, all of them, for allowing Obama & Co. to destroy our country without any effort by D.C. Republicans to stop him, much less hold Obama and his entire evil criminal cabal accountable.

Trump backers are the “conservative base” of the Republican Party. They want control of their party back, in order to retake control of their country…. And that is what scares the hell out of every D.C. establishment insider, both sides of the aisle.

The jig is up, as they say… The people (at least Trump supporters) have finally figured out that everyone in D.C. today should be on the unemployment line tomorrow morning. That includes the two Senate Republicans who have defrauded millions of American voters out of their money and votes, Cruz and Rubio.

I hope they throw everything including the kitchen sink at Trump… because the more they do it, the more the people rise up against them. No matter who or what Trump himself may be, one thing should be very clear to everyone in America by now….

Trump represents the conservative core of America…. And they mean business this time! It’s time to get on the bus, before you find yourselves under the bus!

NOTE: This is NOT a personal endorsement of Trump, as I do NOT endorse candidates. But this is my endorsement of the people waking up and standing up against the D.C. establishment that has been allowed to destroy our country from within for far too long, from both political parties!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Facing a Crucial Election Year: Will Traditional Values Survive?

Jim DeMint: Conservatives Win When They Run on Conservative Ideas

Rep. Jim Jordan Thinks It’s Time to ‘Do a Conservative Budget.’ Here’s Why.

By the Numbers: Its a Two Man Race for the GOP Nomination

I have said that Americans will know who will win the Republican nomination for President by March 15th. It now appears that the race is down to two men: Donald J. Trump and Senator Ted Cruz. Neither of these candidates is favored by the GOP establishment (GOPe). Both  are considered outsiders and outliers.

Trump and Cruz are men fundamentally detached from the main body of the GOPe.

delegate count march 6th

RELATED VIDEO: 5 Secret Conspiracies to Stop Donald Trump. Video created by DARK 5:

Here is the delegate count to date courtesy of the Associated Press:

Mar 1

Alabama · 50 delegates: Trump won and has 36 delegates, Cruz has 13, Rubio has 1
Alaska · 28 delegates: Cruz won and has 12 delegates, Trump has 11, Rubio has 5
Arkansas · 40 delegates: Trump won and has 16 delegates, Cruz has 14, Rubio has 9
Georgia · 76 delegates: Trump won and has 40 delegates, Rubio has 14, Cruz has 18
Massachusetts · 42 delegates: Trump won and has 22 delegates, Kasich has 8, Rubio has 8, Cruz has 4
Minnesota · 38 delegates: Rubio won and has 17 delegates, Cruz has 13, Trump has 8
Oklahoma · 43 delegates: Cruz won and has 15 delegates, Trump has 13, Rubio has 12
Tennessee · 58 delegates: Trump won and has 31 delegates, Cruz has 15, Rubio has 9
Texas · 155 delegates: Cruz won and has 102 delegates, Trump has 47, Rubio has 3
Vermont · 16 delegates: Trump won and has 6 delegates, Kasich has 6
Virginia · 49 delegates: Trump won and has 17 delegates, Rubio has 16, Cruz has 8, Kasich has 5, Carson has 3

Mar 5

Kansas · 40 delegates: Cruz won and has 24 delegates, Trump has 9, Rubio has 6, Kasich has 1
Kentucky · 46 delegates: Trump won and has 16 delegates, Cruz has 14, Rubio has 7, Kasich has 6
Louisiana · 46 delegates: Trump won and has 15 delegates, Cruz has 14
Maine · 23 delegates: Cruz won and has 12 delegates, Trump has 9, Kasich has 2

Mar 8

Hawaii · 19 delegates
Idaho · 32 delegates
Michigan · 59 delegates
Mississippi · 40 delegates

Mar 12

Washington, D.C. · 19 delegates

Mar 15

Florida · 99 delegates
Illinois · 69 delegates
Missouri · 52 delegates
North Carolina · 72 delegates
Ohio · 66 delegates

Mar 22

Arizona · 58 delegates
Utah · 40 delegates

Source: AP

RELATED ARTICLES:

Video: Questions about Marco Rubio’s arrest and gay foam party could end his campaign – USA Politics Today

South Dakota’s Republican Governor Has No Problem With Boys in Girls’ Locker Rooms

House GOP Leaders Argue Against Scrapping Budget Deal

Colleges Use Tax-Exempt Status to Excuse Restricting Free Speech

D.C. Madam’s black book ‘relevant’ to 2016 Presidential Election

WASHINGTON D.C. – Montgomery Blair Sibley, former attorney for Deborah Jeane Palfrey famously known as the D.C. Madam, has started a GoFundMe
campaign to raise $25,000 to pay for the filing fees, printing fees and attorney fees he expects to incur taking his case to the U.S. Supreme Court in the next 60 days.

His case began in January 2016 when Sibley, custodian of the records of the D.C. Madam’s Escort Service, realized that those records contained information relevant to the Presidential election.

However, since 2007 Sibley has been under a Restraining Order not to disseminate those, and other, Escort Service records he possesses. Accordingly, Sibley made a Motion to Modify the Restraining Order to the U.S. District Court to permit him to release some – if not all – of those records.

Rather than hear and decide upon the merits of Sibley’s Motion to Modify the Restraining Order, the Court simply directed the Clerk not to file Sibley’s Motion
so the merits were not addressed.

Thus, the only course available to Sibley to seek judicial authorization to release those records is to appeal first to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeal and then the
U.S. Supreme Court. Climbing that appellate ladder in the next 60 days on an expedited basis costs money. Hence Sibley has started a GoFundMe campaign:
www.gofundme.com/DCMadam. That campaign begins with a video of Sibley stating: “I need a horse for the same reason Paul Revere needed a horse . . . ”

A copy of Montgomery Blair Sibley’s Motion to Modify Restraining Order can be found at: http://MontgomeryBlairSibley.com/library/MotionModifyRestrainingOrders.pdf

RELATED ARTICLE: Former lawyer for the ‘D.C. Madam’ says names in her records could be ‘relevant’ to election

Does Democracy Lead to Socialism? by B.K. Marcus

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders has brought “democratic socialism” out of the shadows of fringe ideologies and into the spotlight of mainstream American politics. Nevertheless, many find Sanders’s self-description perplexing. Is socialism seriously still in play? Didn’t the horrors of the 20th century finally bury that ideological monstrosity?

No, that’s communism you’re thinking of. To quote the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA),

Socialists have been among the harshest critics of authoritarian Communist states. Just because their bureaucratic elites called them “socialist” did not make it so; they also called their regimes “democratic.”

If the communists weren’t really socialists, then what the heck does socialism mean?

The basic definition of socialism, democratic or otherwise, is collective ownership of the means of production. The DSA website says, “We believe that the workers and consumers who are affected by economic institutions should own and control them.”

But the DSA keeps the emphasis on democracy:

Democratic socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically — to meet public needs, not to make profits for a few. To achieve a more just society, many structures of our government and economy must be radically transformed through greater economic and social democracy so that ordinary Americans can participate in the many decisions that affect our lives.

Socialism, then, as the democratic socialists understand the term, is just the logical consequence of the democratic ideal:

Democracy and socialism go hand in hand. All over the world, wherever the idea of democracy has taken root, the vision ofsocialism has taken root as well.

On this point, at least, many in America’s free-market tradition would agree.

Anti-democratic Anti-socialists

Ludwig von Mises may have been the most radical classical liberal in 20th-century Europe, but when he came to the United States, Mises found himself at odds with American libertarians who felt that his liberalism didn’t go far enough.

Some of these disagreements would strike most of us as highly abstract, such as the question of whether or not the philosophy of freedom is based in natural law or utilitarianism. But at least one practical point of contention was the issue of majoritarian democracy. Mises had defended both capitalism and democracy in his book Liberalism. American libertarians such as R.C. Hoiles and Frank Chodorov shared Mises’s appreciation of the free market but were far less sanguine about majority rule. The harshest language came from Discovery of Freedom author Rose Wilder Lane:

As an American I am of course fundamentally opposed to democracy and to anyone advocating or defending democracy, which in theory and practice is the basis of socialism.

It is precisely democracy which is destroying the American political structure, American law, and the American economy, as Madison said it would, and as Macauley prophesied that it would do in fact in the 20th century. (Letter from Lane to Mises, July 5, 1947; quoted in Mises: The Last Knight of Liberalism)

Why would Lane argue that democracy is “the basis of socialism”?

Majority Fools

Voting turns out to be a particularly bad way to make economic decisions. Mancur Olson’s book The Logic of Collective Action wouldn’t appear for another 18 years, but some version of his thesis was probably already familiar to Lane and her radical allies. Olson argues that majority rule separates the benefits and the costs of decision-making.

Elections aren’t just a poll of everyone’s opinion; they are organized campaigns by different groups fighting for their interests. A voter doesn’t go into the booth having studied the controversy in question. He or she brings to the polls an impression of an issue based on how different organized groups have presented their cause during massive advocacy campaigns prior to Election Day. Every such campaign is a case of a special-interest minority trying to persuade a voting majority.

And it’s not a level playing field, to borrow one of the political left’s favorite metaphors. Olson explains how the incentive for group action decreases as the size of a group increases, meaning that bigger groups are less able to act in their common interest than smaller ones. Small groups can gain concentrated benefitswhile the rest of us face diffuse costs.

The textbook example is sugar tariffs (“or what amounts to the same thing in the form of quota restrictions against imports of sugar,” as former Freeman editor Paul Poirot put it). Why is Coke sweetened with corn syrup in the United States and with sugar everywhere else in the world? Because sugar is cheaper everywhere else, while the US government keeps sugar artificially expensive for Americans. The protections responsible are a huge benefit to a small group of domestic sugar producers (and, as it turns out, also to corn growers) and a burden on the rest of us.

Ignore the corn-syrup issue for a moment and pretend that Coke is still made with sugar. Let’s imagine that government price supports make each can of Coke, say, 5¢ more than it otherwise would be. That difference adds up, but at the moment you’re buying the can of soda, it’s an irritation, not a hardship. Even if you bother to figure out how much extra money you have to spend on sweet drinks each year, the figure probably won’t be enough to stir you to petition the legislature to repeal the sugar lobby’s protections. In fact, the loss isn’t even enough to prompt you to learn the cause of the higher price.

That’s what economists mean when they talk about diffuse costs. (And the Coke drinker’s very reasonable cluelessness about the cause of his lost nickel is what economists call “rational ignorance.” See “Too Dumb for Democracy?” Freeman, Spring 2015.)

On the other hand, the sugar producers will make billions from lobbying and campaigning to explain why their favorite barriers are good for the economy.

Take this example and multiply it by all the special interests seeking government favors. Even if you do understand what’s going on, even if you know how this hurts the economy and consumers and yourself, it’s not like there’s ever one plebiscite, a big thumbs-up or thumbs-down for free trade in sugar. Every issue is addressed separately, and every issue faces the same logic of collective action we see in the case of the sugar. (And as with the case of sugar, where the corn industry has its own interests in promoting higher sugar prices, many issues have multiple special-interest groups with their own reasons for supporting socially harmful policies.)

Now replace agribusiness in this example with teachers unions or the AARP or anyone else who benefits from a government program, even if that program hurts the rest of us.

The democratic system is rigged from the outset to favor ever more interference from ever-bigger government. From this perspective, Rose Wilder Lane doesn’t seem quite so polemical for equating democracy and socialism.

Democratic Socialists for Crony Capitalism

But is big government the same thing as socialism? The DSA denies it. They insist that they prefer local and decentralized socialism wherever possible. How long an elected socialist would keep his hands off the bludgeon of central power is a reasonable question, and a chilling one, as is the question of how long asocialist democracy would honor the civil liberties that the DSA claims to support.

But even if we reject the DSA’s claims as either naive or fraudulent, there is still a compelling reason to reject the equation of big government and socialism.

Government doesn’t grow to serve the poor or the proletariat. Democracy spawns special interests, and special-interest campaigns require deep pockets. None come deeper than the pockets of established business interests.

Real-world capitalists, despite the rhetoric of the socialists, rarely support capitalism — at least not in the sense of free trade and free markets. What they too often support is government protection and largess for themselves and their cronies, and if that means having to share some of the spoils with organized labor, or green energy, or the welfare industry, that’s not a problem. Corporate welfare flows left and right with equal ease.

“Democratic socialists,” according to the DSA, “do not want to create an all-powerful government bureaucracy. But we do not want big corporate bureaucracies to control our society either.”

If that’s true, then democratic socialists should aim to reduce both the size of government and the scope of democratic decisions. Unfortunately, they’re headed in the opposite direction — and trying to drag the rest of us with them.

B.K. MarcusB.K. Marcus

B.K. Marcus is editor of the Freeman.

VIDEO: Hillary Clinton’s war against freedom of speech

This video is from April 14, 2015, when I was the featured speaker at the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s Wednesday Morning Club. I discussed Hillary Clinton’s war against the freedom of speech, explaining how Clinton as Secretary of State, along with others in the Obama Administration and Barack Obama himself, knowingly and actively aided the advance of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s campaign to restrict the freedom of speech and stigmatize counter-terror efforts as “hate speech.”

In light of the very real possibility that Hillary Clinton could be the next President of the United States, I thought it would be a good time to repost this video.

And here is Paul Schnee’s introduction:

Today we will have the great pleasure of listening to Robert Spencer talk about, “Is the Islamic State Islamic and why does it matter?” To ask this question is to answer it unless, of course, you happen to be president of the United States. Mr. Spencer is a scholar who has become a sovereign figure in the fight against the Islamization of America and the West. Indeed, he has been so successful in making the country aware of Islam’s true meaning and intentions that he now has to live in an undisclosed location in order to avoid the threats of violence of which he is a regular recipient from the votaries of the “Religion of Peace”.

At 5ft. 4ins. tall it was said of James Madison that there had never been a greater ratio of mind to mass. At 5ft. 6ins. tall, of Robert Spencer it can be said that there has seldom been a greater ratio of courage to mass.

He was telling me earlier that he is always gratified to see how many people come to hear him speak but, like Winston Churchill, he suspects that if he were instead being hanged, the crowd would be 100 times larger.

Robert is the director of Jihad Watch, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and the author of some 13 books, available at fine book shops everywhere. These include two New York Times bestsellers, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and The Truth about Muhammad. His latest book is Arab Winter Comes to America: The Truth About the War We’re In, and his next book, The Complete Infidel’s Guide to ISIS, will be released on August 17th. The number 13 is significant not only because it is a great many books to have written, but also because this number exceeds by 3 the combined I.Q’s of John Kerry and Wendy Sherman, who have recently, in Switzerland, concocted one of the most potentially lethal agreements with the messianic ayatollahs of Iran whose apocalyptic vision remains undiminished.

Mr. Spencer has conducted seminars on Islam and jihad for the United States Central Command, the United States Army Command and General Staff College, the U.S. Army’s Assymetric Warfare Group, the FBI, the Joint Terrorism Task Force and the U.S. Intelligence community. To our detriment, these activities have been curtailed by an American president whose insatiable appetite for historical revision anxiously tries to convince us that Islam has always been a part of the rich mosaic of American life. Nothing could farther from the truth, and only demonstrates Barack Obama’s faculty for realizing hallucinations.

As well as having spoken on literally hundreds of university campuses across America, we are pleased to have seen Mr. Spencer appear on a variety of Fox News programs, PBS, MSNBC, CNBC, C-Span and France 24, but you will not, alas, be seeing him on the BBC any time soon.

In June of 2013, along with Pamela Geller he was due to speak at an English Defense League march in Woolwich, where Private Lee Rigby had been brutally murdered by two Islamic jihadists. He was banned from entering Britain.

A British government spokesman said individuals whose presence “is not conducive to the public good” could be excluded by the home secretary.

He added: “We condemn all those whose behaviours and views run counter to our shared values and will not stand for extremism in any form.”

Yet, just days before Robert Spencer was banned, the British government admitted Saudi Sheikh Mohammed al-Arefe. Al-Arefe has said: “Devotion to jihad for the sake of Allah, and the desire to shed blood, to smash skulls, and to sever limbs for the sake of Allah and in defense of His religion, is, undoubtedly, an honor for the believer. Allah said that if a man fights the infidels, the infidels will be unable to prepare to fight.”

Thomas Mann’s observation that tolerance is a crime when applied to evil must have escaped the notice of Britain’s Home Secretary.

This incident shows, at least in this instance, that if it were not for double standards, the British government would not have any standards at all. It also demonstrates just how far the termites have travelled, how well they have feasted, and that these two decisions by the British government could not possibly have been made without the benefit of alcohol.

Will you please give a warm California welcome to a man whose knowledge and analysis so accurately informs us all but terrifies the British government, Ladies & Gentlemen: Mr. Robert Spencer.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Germany: Mob of 30 Muslim migrants chase girls through shopping center before clashing with police

Iran accuses the U.S. of breaching the nuke deal

An Overthrow of the Government

Sure enough, presidential candidate Donald J. Trump racked up impressive statistics in his Fox News debate tonight, effectively trouncing the competition that included Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

Once again, however, Fox’s Megyn “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” Kelly ambushed Mr. Trump by falsely stating that the Better Business Bureau had given Trump University a D-minus rating, when in fact it’s rating is, as Trump asserted, an A!

Here is the Better Business Bureau report, with an ‘A’ grade for Trump University.

trump university bbb report grade a

The same trouncing happened last week when Trump’s victories in the primaries garnered him the lion’s share of electoral votes by winning Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Massachusetts, Tennessee, and Virginia, which, according to Philip Bump of The Washington Post, “no Republican has ever won…going back to 1960.”

Both pundits and pollsters attributed the massive turn-outs to Mr. Trump’s having excited, inspired and therefore mobilized the electorate––in some cases well over 100% increase above the 2012 midterms. In one instance, Mr. Trump beat Sen. Cruz by 450,000 votes; in another he beat Sen. Rubio by over a million votes! According to writers Bill Barrow and Emily Swanson, Trump had “significant support across educational, ideological, age and income classifications.”

In his victory speech last week, looking and sounding presidential, Mr. Trump accurately proclaimed: “We have expanded the Republican Party.”

This ought to have been music to the ears of Republicans everywhere, especially “establishment” types who constantly seek to attract influential voting blocs comprised of African-Americans, Hispanics, and young people, all of whom––mysteriously, incomprehensibly, self-destructively––have huddled under the Democrat tent for decades, gaining not a micrometer of progress in their personal lives, wages, schools, crime rates, the pathetic list is endless.

Trump, only nine months into being a politician, has accomplished this incredible feat. But the more he succeeds, the more the Grand Poobahs of the Grand Old Party, as well as the media (both right and left), have devolved into what appears to be a clinical state of hysteria.

Think about this. Barack Obama’s record violates every principle and value that Republicans and Conservatives claim they stand for. Under his watch, we have…

  • 94-million unemployed Americans
  • An almost-insurmountable debt of nearly $20 trillion
  • Borders so porous that not thousands but millions of unvetted and potentially murderous illegal aliens (i.e., jihadists) have been able to invade our shores and set up their U.S.-government-dependent shop in sanctuary cities around our nation
  • A severely diminished military and nothing less than vile treatment of our veterans
  • Trampling on the Constitution
  • Bypassing Congress to act unilaterally (and illegally)
  • Appeasing our enemies and spitting at our allies

…and yet those same Republicans and Conservatives––in full control of the Senate and House––have been notably absent in mustering up anything more than mild rebuke to counter Mr. Obama’s assaults on our country.

But to them, Trump is the real threat!

BATTEN DOWN THE HATCHES

That’s what the frenzied GOP, media, and also-rans are trying to do, figuratively closing any openings in what they believe is their own personal Ship of State now that the threatening weather called Donald Trump is upon them. They are in a state of impotent horror, given their abject failure––in spite of multimillions spent and generous media assistance––to stem the Trump juggernaut.

Ironic, isn’t it. If any entity deserves a comeuppance, it is the very arrogant, go-along-to-get-along, ineffectual, leftist-whipped, emasculated, cave-to-Obama, bow-to-the-lobbyists, accommodate-the-Arab-lobby establishment!

Impotent? Emasculated? Yes, money and power are mighty motivators, but it is a tacit acknowledgment of their own sissified selves that is now spurring Trump’s critics into action.

And they’re trying their damnedest!

On March 2, a gaggle of Republican national security leaders––no doubt many of them members of the globalist Council on Foreign Relations whose animating raison d’ȇtre would be threatened by a Trump presidency––wrote an open letter to Trump expressing their “united opposition” to his candidacy.”  They don’t like his “vision of American influence and power in the world….advocacy for aggressively waging trade wars…rhetoric [that] undercuts the seriousness of combating Islamic radicalism…insistence that Mexico will fund a wall on the southern border…,” on and on. Comical, isn’t it, that everything they’ve failed to address with any seriousness or success compels them to slam the guy who promises to address those issues and succeed.

On March 3, 22 Republicans––including philandering Congressman Mark Sanford and the execrable Glenn Beck––declared that they would not vote for Trump.

August writers like the Wall St. Journal’s Bret Stephens have been apoplectic about Trump for months, sparing no slur or invective. Author and military historian Max Boot has dug deep into his assault repertoire to make sure no insult has gone unhurled.  And the usually dazzling Andrew C. McCarthy at National Review Online is simply unable to contain his hostility to Trump’s candidacy, just as most of the other writers at NRO have jumped on the anti-Trump bandwagon. And that’s not to omit the florid hysteria emanating from Commentarymagazine.com.

On March 4, desperate anti-Trump operatives pimped out good ole patsy Mitt Romney to go before a teleprompter and read the words written for him by an anti-Trump operative. So sad––a man who once had class.

But no one forgot that Romney, a lifelong liberal, lost both senatorial and presidential elections and that the last image of him––etched indelibly in the American public’s consciousness––was of him debating his rival for the presidency, Barack Obama, and simply folding like a cheap suit!

Romney––who The Wall St. Journal called “a flawed messenger”––didn’t look or sound like he had dementia, so it’s strange indeed that he barely mentioned the endorsement Trump gave him for his campaign for president, and the lavish praise he heaped upon Trump.

Romney’s hit job evoked the following 22-word, devastating and well-deserved tweet from Trump: “Looks like two-time failed candidate Mitt Romney is going to be telling Republicans how to get elected. Not a good messenger!”

All of the abovementioned people––and dozens I haven’t named––are growing frustrated that their old tricks of marginalizing and finally destroying the target in question haven’t worked. They long to emulate the JournOlist  of 2007, when over-400 members of the leftist media colluded to quash any and every criticism or fact-based doubt about Mr. Obama’s Constitutional eligibility to hold office, to intimidate any critic into silence.

To this day, has anyone seen even one of Barack Obama’s college transcripts, his marriage license, a doctor’s evaluation? Now it’s the Republicans––actually those cocktail-swigging “conservatives” who routinely cozy up to the lobbyists they’re beholden to––who have gotten together to defeat Trump. These feckless so-called leaders decided that their target, a self-funded former liberal, was worth more of their negative, insult-laden literary output and passionate commentary than the Marxist-driven, jihadist-defending, anti-Constitutional, anti-American regime in power.

If you ever wonder how this could happen, why Republicans and self-described Conservatives could rebel so ferociously against a candidate who promises to strengthen our military, bring jobs and industry back to America, seal our borders against the  onslaught of illegal aliens, and make America great again, wonder no more.

FOLLOW THE MONEY

Doesn’t it always come down to money? Money leads to power and influence and control, all of which politicians––that too-often pliable and buyable species––lust for. It’s not only the ephemeral day-to-day power they fear losing, it’s the entire network they’re enmeshed in, which involves all the treaties and deals and “arrangements” they’ve signed onto and the pelf it promises to keep on yielding (for Exhibit No. 1, see The Clinton Foundation and the mountain of cash it reaps).

Imagine their fear of a president who actually cuts the pork, actually strikes deals that don’t line his own pockets, actually exposes the bad deals that have been made by the bad players in Washington, D.C. Imagine what Trump will learn about the massive under-the-table, self-serving deals that were made in the Iran deal and others.

The same lust for power applies to media moguls whose wealth is not limited to TV stations and newspapers but to the very deals made by government and on Wall St. No one knows this better than Mr. Trump, the author of the mega-bestseller, The Art of the Deal. That’s why his critics are so terrified. They pretend to be offended by the kind of comment or gesture that they themselves express routinely. But they’re really afraid of being in the presence of someone who is utterly immune to either their blandishments or strong-arm tactics.

Roger Stone, a former advisor to Mr. Trump, told writer S. Noble at WorldNetDaily.com, that the perceived threat is so real that “The GOP establishment would rather suffer through four years of Hillary––whose policies are indistinguishable from Marco Rubio’s or Mitt Romney’s––than to have an outsider be president, like Trump who is beholden to no one.”

As Mark Cunningham wrote in the New York Post: “All the noise about Donald Trump’s ‘hostile takeover’ of the Republican Party misses a key point: Such takeovers only succeed when existing management has failed massively. And that’s true of both the GOP and the conservative movement. Trump’s a disrupter—but most of the fire aimed his way is just shooting the messenger.”

Monica Crowley, editor of online opinion at The Washington Times, explains that the “emotionally fragile Republican ruling class” deluded themselves into thinking that Mr. Trump couldn’t possibly win. “Then actual voting began. And the first-timer, the brash anti-politician, began racking up resounding victories…”

In addition, Crowley writes: “Like his style or not, Mr. Trump is an in-your-face guy. Voters want that kind of guy taking it to President Obama’s record, [to] Hillary Clinton…and to the unbridled, destructive leftism that has rendered America virtually unrecognizable.” And, I might add, taking it to the wimps in the GOP!

Former Governor Mike Huckabee told Fox News that Donald Trump’s success represents a peaceful “overthrow of the government” and that the Republican establishment should be glad it’s being achieved with “ballots not bullets.” He added that the Trump phenomenon was a “political revolution in the Republican Party and in the country.”

64% Say Supreme Court Vacancy Important Factor in Voting

family research council logoWASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Today, Family Research Council (FRC) released the results of a commissioned national survey conducted by WPA Opinion Research showing that 64 percent of likely voters agree the Supreme Court will be “an important factor in determining who you vote for in November’s elections.”

71% of Republican voters and 63% of Democratic voters rank the Supreme Court as an important factor.

The survey also found that 71 percent of those who frequently attend worship services (once a week or more) say the Supreme Court is an important factor in determining their vote.  Even 59 percent of those who never attend worship services consider the Supreme Court important to their vote.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins made the following comments in response:

“This survey tells us that the American people have a sobering perspective following the passing of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Reality is sinking in for voters in both parties that the next president will likely appoint two or three justices to the U.S. Supreme Court, which will impact our nation for decades to come.

“By an 8 point margin, Republican voters are more concerned than Democrats about the future of the Supreme Court. I believe this is in part due to previous Republican presidents who have either been unable to identify liberal jurists in conservative clothing or have been unwilling to fight for nominees who were true constitutionalists.

“The survey also shows that frequent churchgoers are even more concerned than non-churchgoers about the direction of the Court. This higher level of concern is no doubt due to the Supreme Court preempting social consensus by imposing its abortion and marriage views on all 50 states.

“While the country is divided over whether the Supreme Court vacancy should be filled now or after the November elections, it’s clear that the Court is a greater motivating factor for Republican voters and frequent churchgoers than it is for Democrats and those who attend worship services less frequently.

Justice Scalia’s replacement may very well be the deciding vote on major cases involving religious liberty, state abortion laws, gun control, and immigration. With so much at stake, the American people should be allowed to decide in November who picks the next Supreme Court justice,” concluded Perkins.

Click here to download the full survey results.

ABOUT THE FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL

Our vision is a culture in which human life is valued, families flourish, and religious liberty thrives.

VIDEO: Trump on national security 25 years ago — worth a watch

No matter what your current opinion of Donald Trump is, it is my best guess that you will find this video fascinating!

Maybe Donald Trump should be taken more seriously? Interesting that this interview with Oprah was done 25 years ago. Has he changed his views?

Watch the video and you decide.

Muslim Voters Overwhelmingly Support Hillary Clinton

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim Brotherhood linked organization, today released the results of a six-state “Super Tuesday” poll of almost 2000 Muslim voters indicating that almost half of those voters (46 percent) support Hillary Clinton, followed by Bernie Sanders at 25 percent and 11 percent support for Donald Trump.

CAIR’s poll also showed that growing Islamophobia is the top issue for Muslim voters.

According to Discover the Networks:

The term “Islamophobia” was invented and promoted in the early 1990s by the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT), a front group of the Muslim Brotherhood. Former IIIT member Abdur-Rahman Muhammad — who was with that organization when the word was formally created, and who has since rejected IIIT’s ideology — now reveals the original intent behind the concept of Islamophobia: “This loathsome term is nothing more than a thought-terminating cliche conceived in the bowels of Muslim think tanks for the purpose of beating down critics.” In short, in its very origins, “Islamophobia” was a term designed as a weapon to advance a totalitarian cause by stigmatizing critics and silencing them.

NIHAD AWAD

Nihad Awad

“American Muslim voters are worried about the unprecedented anti-Muslim rhetoric being used by presidential candidates and are going to the polls in increasing numbers at both the state and national levels to make their voices heard by the candidates,” said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad.

Awad publicly declared “I am in support of the Hamas movement,” during a March 1994 symposium at Barry University.

An exit poll of Muslim voters in Texas and Virginia indicated that Sanders narrowed Clinton’s lead in those states – 34 to 40 percent in Virginia and 29 to 37 percent in Texas.

In upcoming primary elections in California, Illinois, New York, and Florida Clinton’s lead over Sanders ranged from 22 percent (California) to 40 percent (New York).

The survey indicated that older Muslim voters – 65 percent of those 45 to 64 and 80 percent of those 65 and older – backed Clinton, while younger Muslim voters (18 to 24) supported Sanders (78 percent). In the 25 to 44 age group, support for Clinton and Sanders was more evenly distributed at 44 percent for Sanders and 56 percent for Clinton.

CAIR noted that Muslim support for Sanders may actually be higher because its poll surveyed more voters over the age of 45.

Nationwide, Islamophobia continued to rank as the most important issue of concern for all Muslim voters (24 percent), a partisan divide was evident with Muslim Democrats ranking Islamophobia highest (27 percent) and then the economy (19 percent), while Muslim Republicans ranked the economy (38 percent) highest followed by Islamophobia (14 percent).

Support for the Democratic and Republican Parties mostly remained constant from previous surveys with 67 percent of Muslim voters supporting the Democratic Party and 18 percent supporting the Republican Party. CAIR’s February 1 poll of Muslim voters showed 67 and 15 percent respectively voiced support for the Democratic and Republican Parties.

RELATED ARTICLE: Were Muslim Voters Behind Sanders’ Surprising Upset in Michigan?

Demographic and Economic Profiles of States Holding March 8 Primaries and Caucuses

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — In advance of the March 8 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:

Hawaii
Idaho
Michigan
Mississippi

hawaii demographics election 2016

cb16-tps36_graphic_voting_idaho

cb16-tps37_graphic_voting_michigan

cb16-tps38_graphic_voting_mississippi

Demographic and Economic Profiles of Hawaii’s Electorate

WASHINGTON, March 1, 2016 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — In advance of the Hawaii caucuses on March 8and March 26, the Census Bureau presents a variety of statistics that give an overall profile of the state’s voting-age population and industries. Statistics include:

hawaii demographics election 2016

Harris Poll: 68% of voters want ‘a President who is not a career politician’

NEW YORK, NY /PRNewswire/ — Happy Super Tuesday! As primary results start streaming in today, there is bound to be plenty of analyzing, spinning, and no small amount of arguing. Nine in 10 Americans (91%) feel political discussions today are angry and bad tempered, with nearly four in 10 adults (38%) describing them as extremely angry and bad tempered. What’s more, most Americans feel this tonality is on the rise:

  • Nearly three-fourths of Americans (73%) feel the political climate has gotten more angry and bad tempered since 2016’s Presidential candidates began their campaigns (up from 52% last October).
  • Furthermore, over half (53%) believe political discourse will get more angry and bad tempered once the parties have nominated their candidates and we head into the general election showdown.

And if Americans are right, we should expect to see this anger bubbling over into our daily lives as well: three-fourths of adults (76%) believe that the way American politicians treat one another influences how American citizens treat one another.

These are some of the results of The Harris Poll® of 2,219 U.S. adults surveyed online between February 17 and 22, 2016. Full results of this study, including data tables, can be found here.

The majority of Americans (69%) have negative opinions of politicians they perceive as generally angry and bad tempered; 8% have positive feelings toward such candidates, while 20% feel neither positive nor negative toward them.

But where do the candidates stack up? When asked (in an open ended manner) which candidate’s campaign they believe has been the most angry and bad tempered thus far, over six in ten Americans (62%) point toDonald Trump; 11% choose Hillary Clinton, while 7% cite Ted Cruz.

  • Trump is the top selection across party lines, while Cruz overtakes Clinton for a second place showing among Democrats.

On the other end of the spectrum, a 22% plurality points to Bernie Sanders as their top pick for the candidate whose campaign has been most civil or even tempered thus far; next up are Hillary Clinton (15%) and Ben Carson (14%).

  • Carson leads the pack among Republicans; Sanders holds a strong lead among Independents, but is only marginally ahead of Clinton in Democratic circles.

Electing an outsider

“Outsider” has been something of a buzzword so far in this election cycle, and a separate Harris Poll, conducted in December, found that Americans have some varied – and even contradictory – points of view on the subject:

  • On the one hand, nearly two-thirds (65%) think it’s important that the next President has had experience as an elected government official.
    • This varies considerably across political lines, with over eight in 10 Democrats (84%) feeling it’s important compared to six in 10 Independents (60%) and less than half of Republicans (47%).
  • Additionally, 82% believe that running the country is so difficult that we need a President who really understands how to get things done in Washington.
  • Meanwhile, 68% say we need a President who is not a career politician and 50% believe that someone who has spent most of his or her life in politics and government cannot be trusted to run the country.

Americans are especially mixed when asked more directly about their feelings on electing a political outsider as the next President of the United States, with 37% in favor, 32% opposed and 8% unsure.

  • The majority of Republicans (56%) and a plurality of Independents (42%) favor electing an outsider, while a 50% plurality of Democrats are opposed.

Presidential and Congressional ratings
Even as much of the country heads to the polls in order to narrow the field of White House contenders, President Obama and Congress still have a responsibility to the electorate and the electorate still has opinions about the respective jobs they’re doing. Four in ten Americans (41%) give President Obama positive ratings on his overall job performance, while 59% rate him negatively. This marks a four point drop from last month’s post State of the Union high (45%), but is also four points up from December ratings (37%). An identical 41% rate the President positively for his performance in relation to the economy.

  • Strong majorities of registered Democrats voters give the President positive ratings both overall (79%) and on the economy (75%), while two-thirds of Independent voters (67% each) and over nine in ten registered Republicans (93% overall, 91% economy) rate him negatively.

Congressional ratings have seen some incremental growth in recent months (from 10% in November to 12% in December to 15% in January), but that trend sees a sharp reversal this month, with only 9% of Americans rating Congress positively.

Direction of the country
One-third of Americans (33%) believe things in the country are going in the right direction, up from 29% in December. In comparison to past election years, this attitude is on par with levels seen leading up to the 2012 Presidential (34% March 2012) and 2014 midterm (34% Feb 2014) elections.  Millennials (43%) are far more likely to feel things are going in the right direction than their elders (32% Gen Xers, 28% Baby Boomers, 24% Matures).

To see other recent Harris Polls, visit us at TheHarrisPoll.com.

Want Harris Polls delivered direct to your inbox? Click here!

Methodology

This Harris Poll was conducted online within the United States between February 17 and 22, 2016 among 2,219 U.S. adults and between December 9 and 14, 2015 among 2,252 adults (aged 18 and over). Figures for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, region and household income were weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population. Propensity score weighting was also used to adjust for respondents’ propensity to be online.

All sample surveys and polls, whether or not they use probability sampling, are subject to multiple sources of error which are most often not possible to quantify or estimate, including sampling error, coverage error, error associated with nonresponse, error associated with question wording and response options, and post-survey weighting and adjustments. Therefore, The Harris Poll avoids the words “margin of error” as they are misleading. All that can be calculated are different possible sampling errors with different probabilities for pure, unweighted, random samples with 100% response rates. These are only theoretical because no published polls come close to this ideal.

Respondents for this survey were selected from among those who have agreed to participate in Harris Poll surveys. The data have been weighted to reflect the composition of the adult population. Because the sample is based on those who agreed to participate in our panel, no estimates of theoretical sampling error can be calculated.

These statements conform to the principles of disclosure of the National Council on Public Polls.

The results of this Harris Poll may not be used in advertising, marketing or promotion without the prior written permission of The Harris Poll.

The Harris Poll® #17, March 1, 2016 By Larry Shannon-Missal, Managing Editor, The Harris Poll

About The Harris Poll®

Begun in 1963, The Harris Poll is one of the longest running surveys measuring public opinion in the U.S. and is highly regarded throughout the world.  The nationally representative polls, conducted primarily online, measure the knowledge, opinions, behaviors and motivations of the general public.  New and trended polls on a wide variety of subjects including politics, the economy, healthcare, foreign affairs, science and technology, sports and entertainment, and lifestyles are published weekly.  For more information, or to see other recent polls, visit us at TheHarrisPoll.com.

Trump the ‘Unifier’, Trump the Individualist, Trump the Republican

Super Tuesday voters gave Donald Trump clear wins in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Virginia and Vermont. Senator Ted Cruz won in his home state of Texas and the neighboring state of Oklahoma. Senator Marco Rubio won in Minnesota.

trump supporters youngTrump made a short statement at his Mar-A-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida following the super Tuesday primary results:

I will say this, we have expanded the Republican party. When you look at what’s happened in South Carolina and you see the kind of numbers that we got in terms of extra people coming in. They came from the Democratic party… and they were never going to switch and they all switched. They were Independents. We’ve expanded the party. Look at the number of votes we had in that area as an example. Four years ago they had 390,000 or so votes. We doubled it. We’re almost 800,000. The Democrats went down.

There’s much less enthusiasm for the Democrats. I’m a unifier. I know people will find this hard to believe. Once we get this finished, I’m going to go after one person on the assumption she is allowed to run. I don’t know if she will be allowed to run. I don’t think Marco will be able to beat her. I think Ted will have a very hard time… I just tell you this, we are going to be a much finer party, a much — we’re going to be a unified party. We are going to be a much bigger you can see that happening. We’re going to be a much bigger party. our party is expanding.

All you have to do is take a look at the primary states where I’ve won. Much larger number. I think we’ll be more inclusive and more unified. I think we’ll be a much bigger party. I think we’re going to win in November.

It is clear that Donald Trump has energized the electorate, driving voters to the polls to support the Republican party in record numbers.

Ayn Rand wrote a short nineteen page paper asking: What is the basic issue facing the world today? Rand, in her paper makes the case that, “The basic issue in the world today is between two principles: Individualism and Collectivism.” Rand defines these two principles as follows:

  • Individualism – Each man exists by his own right and for his own sake, not for the sake of the group.
  • Collectivism – Each man exists only by the permission of the group and for the sake of the group.

It is becoming clearer that on November 8th the battle will be between a Collectivist (either Hillary Clinton or Senator Bernie Sanders) and an Individualist, Donald J. Trump.

French historian Alexis de Tocqueville  (1805-1859)  wrote, “The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money.”

Let the people chose which path they will follow. Will they follow those who “bribe the people with their own money” or those who remain dedicated to preserving the Republic? That is the basic issue facing America today.

gop delegate count

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Trump Insurgency

Trump Has It Right