“One day we’ll be needed to recreate the GOP as a center-right party rather than a vehicle for inane populist keggers. For now, I hope Democrats win Congress in 2018.”
From USA Today:
Republicans once believed in limited government, fiscal restraint, support for the defense and national security establishments, family values, and a strong American role in maintaining global order. More than that, we were the party that believed in logic and prudence over emotion. Our hearts were perhaps too cold, but never bleeding.
Today’s Republicans, however, are a party of bellowing drama queens whose elected representatives blow up spending caps, bust the deficit, and attack America’s law enforcement and national security agencies as dangerous conspirators. Their leader expects banana republic parades, coddles the Kremlin, protects violent men in positions of responsibility, and overlooks child molestation. The rank-and-file GOP members who once claimed that liberals were creating a tyrannical monarchy in the Oval Office now applaud the expansion of the presidency into a gigantic cult of personality.
So, am I still a Republican?
Continue reading …
According to retired newspaperman and widely read blogger Don Surber, the “increasingly violent resistance” to the Trump presidency, we see today, began with “Barack Obama’s refusal to lead his party to a peaceful transition of power a year ago.”
It probably motivated Sally Yates to refuse “a legal order as acting attorney general, an “act of insubordination” that should have disqualified her as a lawyer, had there still been “a rule of law in this country.”
And now “Democratic Congressman Keith Ellison, the No. 2 man in the DNC, has embraced the Antifa fascists,” making “the Antifa black shirts the brownshirts of his party.”
Since electing Barack Obama president, Democrats have seen their party decimated nationally and at the state level.
Those remaining are bitter radicals. Ellison’s embrace of violence is alarming. Americans rejected Obama’s Marxism. Let’s hope [they reject] Ellison’s Muslim Marxism — especially as he has no problem promoting an increasingly violent movement.
“Democrats’ already wide advantage over Republicans in a hypothetical Congressional matchup has grown, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS. At the same time, enthusiasm about voting next year has increased among Democrats nationwide following an unexpected win in Alabama’s Senate special election and a strong showing in Virginia’s state government elections last month.”
Nevertheless, polls don’t always get it right. In fact, if the 2016 presidential election is anything to go by, polls can get it severely wrong — and at the worst possible time.
So we’ve all learned — or should have, by now — not to pay too much attention to polls.
Still, the recent election results could be a sign that the Republican Party is beginning to fall out of favor with the voting public. The midterm elections will either confirm or refute such a prognosis.
From Real Clear Politics:
Democrats credited turnout and engagement from diverse coalitions for statewide election wins this year, but chief among these reasons was the increased participation and a large shift in support from a demographic that bedeviled the party last year: millennials.
Though Hillary Clinton won more young voters than President Trump, she underperformed with the group compared to President Obama’s elections, including lower-than-expected support in key swing states that helped Trump win. A year later, in a large part in response to Trump’s victory, surging youth turnout helped Democrats win key statewide races, and the party is counting on similar results in next year’s midterms.
Republicans generally dismiss the notion that Democratic wins in 2017 represented a pattern, arguing that Alabama’s unique circumstances and Virginia’s increasingly blue electorate are not indicative of a cresting wave of young, Democratic support.
Yet despite the unique nature of Alabama’s Senate contest on Tuesday — a controversial Republican nominee losing in a deep red state on an Election Day squeezed between two major holidays — Democrats saw encouraging signs among young voters.
“You’re really seeing millennial voters really leading now and millennial voters really taking the reins of this democracy and starting to drive it in the right direction,” said Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, who rallied with Democrat Doug Jones in Alabama the weekend before the election.
It seems the political tide is turning:
Fresh off their victory in Alabama’s special Senate election, Democrats now enjoy their largest advantage in congressional preference in nine years, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, signaling a dangerous political environment for Republicans entering next year’s midterm elections.
Fifty percent of registered voters say they prefer a Democratic-controlled Congress, versus 39 percent who want Republicans in charge.
Yep! And the vote to scrap net neutrality will almost certainly be one of the nails in the GOP coffin — as we’ll probably see, come the midterm elections.
It’s a story of an incredible lack of foresight by Democrats:
With last weekend’s surprise nuclear test, North Korea has reached final stage of its crash course to develop thermonuclear weapons that can reach and destroy U.S. cities. So why are we not on a crash course to protect our cities from North Korean nuclear missiles?
Answer: Because for more than three decades, Democrats have done everything in their power to prevent, obstruct or delay the deployment of ballistic missile defense.
Opposition to missile defense has been an article of faith for Democrats since President Ronald Reagan announced the Strategic Defense Initiative in 1983. Sen. Edward Kennedy led the early opposition to what Democrats derisively labeled “Star Wars,” denouncing missile defense as a “mirage” and “a certain prescription for an arms race in outer space.” Running against Reagan in 1984, Walter Mondale called it a “dangerously destabilizing” and unworkable “hoax.”
“Reagan nonetheless moved forward with research and development,” and so did his successor, George H. W. Bush. However, when President Bill Clinton took office in 1993, he “cut national missile defense funding by 80 percent.”
Then, when “Republicans took over Congress, and passed a defense authorization bill in 1996 that required deployment,” President Clinton “vetoed it on the grounds that there was no threat.”
When George W. Bush took office in 2001, “he revitalized missile defense efforts” and things began to look up again — until Barack Obama became president in 2009 and “slashed funding for ballistic missile defense by 25 percent.”
In 1983, Reagan asked “Isn’t it worth every investment necessary to free the world from the threat of nuclear war?” For the Democrats, the answer was no. No one is happier about that today than Kim Jong Un.