Trump

Mid-terms will be a vote on what to do with the scab of division

0CA64E91-A9DA-4FB6-9B61-637B9EAE1A48.jpeg

Every time we turn on the news we’re told America has never been so divided. If we listen to the narrative it would seemingly be all President Trump’s fault. The reality would point more towards his brash, vulgar and politically incorrect style catalyzing the removal of a scab covering a festering wound that has not healed for over a decade.

The upcoming midterms will be an interesting read on the underlying mood of the country. It is likely both sides will get out in force like few midterms before it. Normally midterms garner a 40% turnout. It should be much higher in Nov 2018. .

Never has been predicting a result in the midterms been so difficult. CM thinks it swings to the Republicans. Despite that being a total stab in the dark, the recent Kavanaugh confirmation debacle raised some interesting stats according to Rasmussen Reports.

In response to SCJ Brett Kavanaugh’s statement that “This confirmation process has become a national disgrace. The Constitution gives the Senate an important role in the confirmation process, but you have replaced advise and consent with search and destroy.” 

56% of Likely U.S. Voters agree with his statement. Unsurprisingly 77% of Republicans thought that way. 51% affiliated with neither party and even 40% of Democrats agree with Kavanaugh.

In what was probably the most ghastly political stunt since Attorney General Loretta Lynch met Bill Clinton on an airport tarmac to discuss grandkids and golf days ahead of a testimony surrounding Hillary Clinton’s emails, America saw two victims eviscerated for political capital.

What could have happened behind closed doors, became a spectator sport. Evidence was withheld until it became expedient to use it  Now that Ford doesn’t wish to push forward with any charges only makes the whole episode stink more. She has been left as road kill and Kavanaugh will bear the scars for many years to come.

CM copped a lot of criticism from late 2015 when he suggested Trump would beat Clinton. How people scoffed and laughed, throwing White House stats in the face on how great things were. CM’s argument when going through broader stats found that the disappearing middle class was only worsening post GFC. The simple argument was that those not living the dream portrayed by rosy econometrics know best. Calling them uneducated, stupid or deplorable was never going to change their minds. They saw the current system not working for them. Nothing to do with identity. All to do with prosperity (rather lack thereof) .

Those very people, if they feel their lot has improved on balance they’ll vote for who will keep that fortune going. It is no longer a question of GOP vs Democrat.

More than any bragging by Trump about his achievements, the mid terms will weigh and measure the reality. Truth be told his constant boasting about new highs on the stock market being down to his stewardship will only backfire if markets correct.

Whatever the media’s constant attacks on the “division” of a nation should be taken in context of the shock of Trump’s election win. Good Americans on both sides of the aisle do not agree with extremists kicking others out of restaurants, calling his daughter a “feckless c*nt” and they probably don’t think too highly of extra marital affairs.

Yet looking across the street in one’s own backyard middle Americans probably know a neighbour having an extra marital affair or embarking on a third marriage. It’s nothing remotely shocking in today’s society.

The question for America is not merely about enforcing the moral high ground (what’s left of it) but sustaining prosperity. Putting food on the table without having to work 3 jobs is more important to many than whether Trump paid a porn star. Apart from it being a matter for Melania, people will be exercising a mid-term vote on whether the Trump frag grenade was worth lobbing.

It is irrelevant whether you love or hate him, his rallies are as packed at the mid-terms as they were during his election campaign. Taking away the bias, listening to how he works up a crowd is worth paying attention to. Whether taking pot shots at Dr Ford, slamming the media at the back of the room for being ‘fake news’ and getting the crowd to chant “CNN sucks” shows he may not be as stupid as made out.

The Kavanaugh confirmation brought up the ugliness of the swamp. The calculated horrorshow of partisan politics was put on full display. There were no winners in that kangaroo court. The GOP May have achieved a Phyrric victory of sorts by getting their man on the Supreme Court but there was little grace.

So in November Americans can choose to leave the scab over the gangrenous wound and go back to the status quo or vote to yank it off and keep the experiment going. Only sunlight has a chance to cauterize this mess. Yet the Democrats are fighting hard to avoid seeing the doctor.

If Americans want to send a message to show that civil unrest and public demonstrations which seek to disrupt daily lives will likely see Republicans do better. People are aware of the issues. Having it force fed through one sided media didn’t work in 2016 and is less likely to work in 2018.

Actions speak louder than laughs

F24219F2-39FD-4D90-A1AD-DB5A1C6F7E67.jpeg

While the mainstream media has blown much hot air about the UN GA audience laughing at POTUS during his speech, where was the very same audience backing the poster boy of virtue signaling and globalist politics? Here is a picture of Canadian PM Trudeau addressing the UN General Assembly during the Nelson Mandela Peace Summit on Sep 24th. Worse, a whole section of them are on their mobile phones. As impolite as deleting/sending emails during the speech of any world leader (or anyone for that matter) is, at least being laughed at suggests the audience was paying attention to the content, as ridiculous as anyone may have made it out to be. As much as Trump’s boasting and glass jaw were on full display, it was standing room only, because love or hate him, his words have global ramifications.

While French President Macron might have sounded sensible castigating Trump’s America First view as fanning the flames of nationalism around the world, perhaps he might have reflected on the shift toward populist parties across Europe occurring well before either took office. Macron should remind himself that anti-EU leader of the far right Front National, Marine Le Pen, achieved twice the vote ever achieved by her party. 35%.

People may not have noticed but Sweden’s newly appointed PM Stefan Lofven has lost a no confidence motion yesterday. The right leaning Sweden Democrats achieved the fastest growth in the Sep 9 election, taking almost 18% of the vote from 12.9%, holding the balance of power despite the establishment is reluctant to wed . All the while,  3 weeks have passed and a no confidence motion has occurred.

Italy is now run by an anti-EU M5S & anti-immigrant League coalition. Austria voted in a EU-skeptic party led by a 32yo Chancellor Sebastian Kurz. The Brits voted for Brexit. The Dutch awarded the fastest growing share to platinum haired Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party. The Hungarians and Polish have openly told Juncker where to stick his views on forced migration. Even Chancellor Merkel had the worst showing of her party in 70 years as the anti-immigrant Alternative for Deutschland took 13% of the vote, achieving 94 seats in the Bundestag mostly at the expense of Merkel’s CDU & former European Parliament President Schulz’s SPD.

Poor old Justin Trudeau had a member of his own party, Leona Alleslev, defect to the Conservatives stating she was ‘concerned about the government’s handling of the economy.’ It is one thing for the opposition to berate the government for poor stewardship but it is deeply embarrassing to lose people from one’s own party due to a lack of confidence.

So yes, we can collectively laugh at Trump for his bluster, chest beating and itchy Twitter fingers, but one would hope the mockers at the UNGA would glance in the mirror and realise that their constituents are becoming ever more disillusioned with the establishment they represent. These are the same people that bashed the president for calling out their lack of commitment to NATO, with 23 nations well behind promises made of their own volition 12 years prior. Could it be that for however abhorrent they might find the current leader of the US, he is calling many out on their failure to hold up their end of the bargain?

At the end of the day, no matter what one’s personal feelings for Trump may be, we have to live with his decisions. He is far from perfect. Yet instead of the predictable constant drone of noise following his speech, perhaps countries would be better off putting aside personal differences. Rather than crossing fingers in hope he maybe impeached so they can go back to the status quo and live the very lies he has exposed in his almost 2 years in office. Now that type of hypocrisy is truly laughable. Indeed the very fact that out of touch politicians can mock in such a manner shows just how badly they stink at relaying the very messages they think resonate with the public.

Feinstein’s timing truly defending the rights of a sexual assault victim?

FFC44C27-733C-40EB-B3C9-D45A89939278.jpeg

There is absolutely nothing right about sexual harassment of any kind. CM wrote extensively here on the subject last year. CM also warned of the dangers of #MeToo turning into baseless witch hunts that could permanently stain the character of otherwise innocent people. CM contends that false claims should be equally punishable under the law to prevent false claims getting air.

Whether Supreme Court Justice-in waiting Brett Kavanaugh is guilty of harassment 36 years ago is nothing more than an allegation at this stage. All claims should be heard under the legal framework. However studying the timeline of events, there is a touch of convenience in Senator Diane Feinstein’s use of Christine Blasey Ford’s accusation letter.

Kavanaugh’s announcement as SC nominee was made mid July, 2018. Ford documented her supposed harassment encounter in a letter to Feinstein two weeks later, dated July 30th. Yet it would appear Feinstein sat on this nugget til September in order to maximize its utility to prevent Kavanaugh’s confirmation if all other political stunts failed. With any luck she can drag an FBI investigation into the mid-terms (i.e. the real goal).

If Feinstein truly wanted to defend the rights of a supposed sexual harassment victim, surely she should have acted immediately? No doubt she would need a bit of time to discuss with lawyers to understand if this constituted substantial evidence but sexual harassment is a serious claim and crime. Surely the united forces within the Democratic Party could summon the resources to expedite the allegation and use its validity to block.

As the party of supposed social values, what better way to derail the candidate than to release a real claim ASAP after legal checks and balances, including meeting the openly Trump hating Democratic professor were completed. Provided the evidence was incontrovertible it would sell itself. Could it be that the evidence is so sketchy that Feinstein knew it only served as a stalling tactic, hence delaying it by 6 weeks? This says more about the moral compass of the Democrats than Ford.

It seems that Ford does not want to testify under oath before the Senate Judiciary Committee until the FBI investigation. Yet the FBI will investigate what? The crime scene is 36 years old. Her recollection is vague at best. Interviewing people who were likely underage kids who were drunk at a party

Alas, as all of the stunts from Democrats, including Cory Booker admitting he may lose his position for leaking certain documents which turned out to support Kavanaugh not being racist, they pull out claims of sexual misconduct, in the hope it drags the confirmation beyond the Novemeber elections whereby a potential blue wave will potentially allow them to block Trump’s choice. Tactically a shrewd move, but utterly disgusting to true victims if proved untrue.

There is no reason to fault the Democrats wish to block a Republican choice for a vacant SCJ seat (which by the way was on the 2016 ballot given the subject was raised in the presidential debates because it was the first time since Eisenhower that an SCJ seat was empty at election time) on the basis of supposed conflicts in convictions and beliefs. No doubt the Republicans would do likewise. Yet citizens were given the chance to vote on a SC judge with their presidential choice. The names were all out there.

Unfortunately, to use a sexual assault allegation based on sketchy information given by the accuser who admits she doesn’t remember much 36 years ago is utterly reprehensible if the claims turn out to be false. There will be no surprise if the Dems get their goal achieved that Ford will quietly withdraw her claims.

Let’s be perfectly clear. If Kavanaugh is guilty of such a serious crime then he is unfit to serve on a SC bench. Should Ford’s claim turn out to be completely baseless then the Dems will reveal themselves as morally bankrupt to use such a tactic to besmirch someone’s reputation. The timing of the letter is convenient to say the least.

Is this the way forward? Everything that doesn’t stand on its merits or via democratic process will somehow be stopped by claims of sexual impropriety?

In this battle the only thing everyone should be united behind is that “justice” is properly served for the right reasons. Certainly not to dish up political character assassinations for convenience.

True victims tend to bottle trauma for substantial periods, usually decades. Yet rarely would they openly come out on a whim and chuck around claims which don’t help their own healing process.

Nike & Colin Kaepernick

7EB3D471-D052-4233-BB4D-E2C3C5F66DCC.jpeg

Ultimately consumers will vote with their feet (no pun intended) after Nike’s use of original kneeler Colin Kaepernick as its latest “Just do it.” campaign face. Arguing over who is right or wrong over this has become somewhat irrelevant. The kneeling debate is over 12 months old.

Nike is free to market how it chooses but must bear full responsibility for the firestorm it creates for itself. There is no doubt the social media impact will be huge and the marketing department might wax lyrical at the attention gained all it wants but the question is will the majority of it be positive? Virtue signaling for corporates is a dangerous game. More often than not it backfires.

CM has always held that corporations should stay out of politics because as much as they might profess a united face on certain issues, there is no way they speak on behalf of all those that work for them. The risk is creating an unfair working environment to those who do not wish to participate in the manner the corporate desires, even if they might privately agree. Coercing staff to openly tow the party line is tantamount to making them slaves if forced against their will for fear of repercussions in the workplace.

Don’t think for a second it doesn’t happen. Think of the same sex marriage (SSM) debate. If you had a rainbow flag screen saver you would have been cheered by the internal apparatchiks. Had you a “Vote NO for SSM” screen saver it is likely you would have been hauled in front of your manager and HR to explain your inappropriate workplace behaviour. The matter was a vote of democracy. What place is it for corporates to enforce one type of opinion on changes to the Marriage Act? Let’s not forget the results of the 2011 Census where 0.03% of the population identified with being husband and wife in a same sex relationship. Yes. 1,338 people only. All that fanfare for less than 1,400 people.

We are already seeing people in the US burn Nike products to protest the company’s move.

4F2A07F8-BC36-4AB6-8CDE-DCE3E822DAD3.jpeg

In much the same vein as Democrat Party activists boycotting In-N-Out burgers for donating to the GOP, there is no real sense in die-hard NFL fans pushing to #boycottNike. What is the obsession with boycotts? Surely disgruntled fans can make up their own minds whether they’ll choose to buy Nike products or not. It is just more of the oppression obsession.

Nike will ultimately survive. The NFL has already seen ratings take a proper beating. The question is does this help? Probably not but Nike want to make a statement.

Knee jerk reactions where people burn football jerseys, season tickets, Superbowl pennants or Nike sneakers have become less and less about the subject protested about (Black Lives Matter) but more about people getting sick and tired of political correctness and social justice rammed down their throats on an almost daily basis. Even Buzz Aldrin is sick of the politically correct overtones in ‘First Man’ that went out of its way to delete scenes of an epic moment in America’s history – planting an American flag on the moon. Don’t forget Buzz punched a reporter who disparaged him in public. He said he is a “proud American

Sadly, many Americans feel their patriotism is under fire. That they should feel guilty for displaying Old Glory outside their homes. Maybe those loyal fans want to go and watch a NFL match to leave the financial, relationship, work, marital stresses behind. They pay money to unwind, not have political messaging paraded in front of them. Even if they think Black Lives Matter is a worthy cause, kneeling every match won’t make it sink in any deeper but dilute the message, as has been displayed by making Kaepernick the poster child.

Not all NRA members are cold blooded murderers. Those people that voted Republican in the last election aren’t all white supremacist, bigoted, racist Nazis any more than all those people that voted Democrat aren’t all whining, virtue signaling liberals.

Open debate is what is needed. Kicking people out of restaurants through open harassment, burning runners or boycotting businesses won’t fix a thing. Listening and debating the issues based on logical reason is the only way forward.  The only thing worth boycotting is the boycotters themselves. Sadly the lesson is unlikely to be learnt.

#MakeActivismGreatAgain

E35AAF93-69F6-4C3B-97A9-7158D4994E2D.jpeg

There is a sense of irony that Democrat Party protesters still fail to get. Boycotting business doesn’t work very well. In fact the opposite could well be true. This is a picture from the front of In-N-Out burgers on Sept 2, the day after Democrat activists called for a boycott for the fast food chain donating $25,000 to the GOP in California. Why didn’t they protest and call for a boycott when the same burger chain donated $30,000 to the GOP in 2016 and again in 2017? Shouldn’t they be embarrassed for their inconsistency? Perhaps they could thank the burger chain for reducing the size of the donation? One thing is for sure Democrats need to make blue caps with ‘MAKE ACTIVISM GREAT AGAIN”

When people boycotted the NRA post the Florida school shooting, membership surged. It seems more Americans are growing tired of this constant harassment.

There is a pattern from boycotts. People can decide for themselves if they abhor such donations. They don’t require a bunch of idle pot smoking basement dwellers to yell at them and tell them how to spend their hard earned dollars.

Even in Australia, activists called for a boycott of supermarket chain Coles for reintroducing plastic bags to convenience customers. Despite studies by the UK Environment Agency which showed that man made reusable “eco bags” we’re told are so green would have to be used 286x to match the environmental footprint of the single use HDPE disposable shopping bags they replaced. If people dispose of rubbish in these same bags (using them twice) then the eco bags would be required to be used 572x to offset the environmental impact. Ironically if people can’t use such bags for their rubbish they’re forced to buy plastic bags off the shelf to do so meaning plastic consumption is neutral, not reduced.

As these activists conjure up new schemes to makes us feel bad they probably do so sipping a latte from Starbucks in a paper cup. The cost to recycle the 500 billion (and rising) coffee cups consumed annually is so astronomical (it is hard to separate the wax that stops the cup disintegrating because of the energy intensity involved to do so) that over 90% end up in landfill. No one talks about that 300 million tons of virgin paper used to make these cups! How many of us give it one thought when we need a shot of caffeine? Right?! Although Starbucks is trialing a 5p latte levy for those that elect to use a paper cup. In any event no protest.

Boycotting businesses seems to help their fortunes so keep up the good work! Perhaps they should work it into being a platform policy such is the unbridled success

Michelle Wolf’s show axed by Netflix

842B37D0-A770-49D1-AF73-ABEFF17FD2FA

Oh how we all  laughed at Michelle Wolf’s comedy sketch about abortion. Who knew one could turn such an awful topic into one about fanfare and celebration worthy of a marching band? Luckily such is her total lack of comedic talent and content, Netflix has decided to axe her show.. You might recall Wolf’s speech at the White House Correspondents dinner where her fingernails-down-a-chalkboard voice made off-coloured jokes surrounding abortion, Trump’s bedroom prowess, his daughter being as useful as an empty box of tampons and even portrayed WH Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders as a fat softball playing lesbian Uncle Tom for white women.

I’m sure Americans and Netflix will weather her departure

CNN’s tale of contradictory titles

965C3C9D-C91B-407C-9155-05A8B928C1FE.jpeg

In the same article – CNN make the inference that this Colorado couple are “now fighting to keep her from being deported” yet after opening the article it is titled  “Colorado couple wins battle” What a disgracefully misleading piece which we’ll discover was all to do with obtaining sufficient documentation with respect to legal custody rather than racist immigration officials executing this administration’s draconian rule.

10BAF690-802A-4FCC-B303-3534FCE61233.jpeg

The inference was to take a potshot at the Trump administration for being insensitive jackbooted alt-right nutjobs when the reality is that the laws and processes that would have been required to get the child’s adoption approved would apply to everyone.

In any event she was “approved” hence making the dramatics of attacking the system a total falsehood. She had initially been rejected because according to CNN:

In its August 8 denial, the immigration agency said the couple “failed to demonstrate” that they had “legal custody” of Angela for two years before filing the petition for citizenship, Angela Becerra said.

Who would honestly censure a government agency that wanted to prevent any risk of child trafficking by demanding such proof? So typical of the garbage reporting we face today and why CNN is suffering in the ratings war. Stop insulting people’s intelligence if you want credibility, which amazingly leads to ratings!