House GOP Drop Outs & Democrat Debate Set The Stage For 2020 Election

Congrats to Republican Dan Bishop for winning the special election earlier this month in North Carolina's ninth congressional district (NC-09).  It was a hard fought victory – in fact too hard fought & that is the problem.

 

The race was the last unresolved House race for the 2018 midterm election.  The special election was ordered after the previous Republican candidate was charged with fraud for tampering with absentee ballots after apparently winning by 900 votes.

 

Bishop beat his opponent Democrat Dan Macready by 2 percentage points 50.7% to 48.7% or 3,937 votes – a razor thin margin when you consider that 189,363 votes were cast.  But still a low one third turnout – source Kyle Peterson on JER. 

 

This is not a case of a win is a win.  This win comes with some baggage. 

 

NC-09 has been represented in the House by a Republican since 1963.  Both Trump & Mitt won the district by 12 percentage points.  Trump & Pence each campaigned, all in, for Bishop the day before the election period closed, election day, with Trump holding a standing room only KAG rally on that Monday night.  Bishop & Republican groups spent over $6 million to get this election result.

 

The problem is that Bishop's margin of victory in NC-09 did nothing to "convince House Republicans undecided about seeking reelection in 2020 that they're in a position to win back the majority" said Dave Wasserman of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report who added it "is still bad news for the House GOP overall."

 

House Republicans need to win a net 19 seats to retake the House majority & remove Nancy Pelosi as Speaker.  There are 35 GOP-held House seats that are less favorable than the staunchly Republican NC-09.  Democrat incumbents only represent four districts where Trump won by more than the 12 points he did in NC- 09 (MN-07 by 31%, NY-22 by 15%, OK –05 by 14%, & SC –01 by 13%).

 

In addition, 2020 is a year that the Constitution requires the federal government to complete a census from which reapportionment - the reallocation of congressional seats - will take place.  Some states will lose seats & some will gain seats.  Both parties will go all out to control the redistricting (gerrymandering) process that shapes congressional & state legislative districts for the next ten years.

 

The one bright spot from the NC-09 special election is the result from Cumberland County – a county with a 35% black population.  Trump lost Cumberland County by 20,000 votes in 2016 but Bishop actually won it by 0.3%.  As of August black & Asian unemployment rates are all-time record lows & the Hispanic unemployment rate tied its previous all-time low – source Bureau Of Labor Statistics.  The black unemployment rate narrowed in August to the smallest gap ever with the white unemployment rate.  The type of black voter turnaround in NC- 09 would be stunning if carried over nationally to the presidential race in 2020 & Hispanics & Asians followed suit.  

 

But let's not get ahead of ourselves.

 

It was late July when the slew of House Republican retirements began coming in that started worrying Republicans & many conservatives – especially since so many of these politicians who suddenly wanted to spend more time with their families were from Texas – a state that looks to be in the process of turning blue.

 

But a detailed look @ the record of these GOP retirees shows that virtually all of them have been little or no help to Trump & definitely none to our Republic & the Constitution they took an oath to support & defend.

 

Texas congressmen Pete Olson (F @ 46%), Mike Conaway (F @ 42%), Will Hurd (F @ 20%), Bill Flores (F @ 51%), & Kenny Marchant (D @ 67%) are all retiring.  Their grades & liberty scores, shown next to their names, are indicative of the majority of incumbent Republicans - they are little better than Democrats, everyone of which is an F.  Other than Conway, who won 80% to 20% in his last election, & Flores, who won 58% to 42% in his last election, the other three retiring Texas GOP drop outs won their last election by less than 5 percentage points meaning they foresaw the losing electoral writing on the wall in 2020.  The results of the NC-09 special election only confirmed the correctness of their decision to drop out.

 

Other well known early House Republican drop outs were Rob Bishop of Utah (F @ 46%), Martha Roby of Alabama (F @ 52%), & Susan Brooks of Indiana (F @ 30%).  In the ultimate of ironies Susan Brooks is the NRCC's recruitment chairwomen – an F @ 30% is the Republican recruitment chairwomen?  Oh, please.

 

Then, @ the end of August, Wisconsin congressman Sean Duffy announced his retirement the day after appearing on FNC for an hour with Steve Hilton acting, as always, as a constitutional & fiscal conservative.  Duffy is graded F with a liberty score of 56%.

 

Finally, another Wisconsin congressman, Jim Sensenbrenner, the second longest serving House member, announced his retirement.  Sensenbrenner is graded C with a 78% liberty score which is remarkable after 40 years in Washington. 

 

The liberty scores of the above list of GOP retirees, & the knowledge that all but a handful of Republican incumbents are equally poor, shows why people who vote Republican are more often than not frustrated.  Republicans can talk a good game from time to time but then don't deliver once in office – think not repealing ObamaCare or cutting spending.  Democrats stick together because every one of them are graded F with the highest liberty scores in the 20s.

 

Democrats try to pass legislation that will destroy America while Republicans are very weak & fragmented really standing for nothing & just about all of the drop-outs so far resemble this picture.

 

Republican debates & town halls have American flags clearly displayed around the facilities & on the lapel pins of the speakers - for what it is worth.  At the Houston Democrat Party primary debate earlier this month there was no American flag visible on stage during the debate & only Biden & Yang wore American flag lapel pins & Yang had his on the wrong side of his jacket according to the U.S. Flag Code Section 8(J).  Bernie wore a lapel pin but not an American flag lapel pin.

 

Though not televised – it was live streamed only - the national anthem was sung prior to the aforementioned debate by Breanna Lindsey, a 20 year old student @ Texas Southern University – a large public historically black university (HBCU) where the debate was held.  The American flag was visible on the side of the auditorium during Breanna's fine rendition but not on the stage behind the debaters.  See photo below.

 

 click on photo to enlarge.

 

The flag was not seen by the television audience once the debate started.

 

Now not wearing lapel pins & not displaying the flag of a group of people you are trying to control are the type of silly mistakes that Saul Alinsky warned against in Rules For Radicals.  Alinsky taught that a community organizer – or in this case national organizer running for president – should blend in with the people to make it look like he or she was one of them – i.e., he or she was on their side.  Not wearing a pin or showing a flag were stupid misjudgments that could only make it harder for an enterprising organizer to be successful in winning over a group.

 

Now the most alarming thought of all is that the Democrat presidential primary candidates, who all know & practice the Alinsky method, are not trying to blend in with the unsuspecting Americans who are too busy enjoying America to know what is happening, but rather these presidential aspirants are showing their attractive natural feeling of closeness & understanding to the enemies of America - those who have been taught & brainwashed from an early age to hate America, those who despise our way of life so much that they can't stand seeing the American flag or a patriotic lapel pin.  What if these presidential primary candidates have correctly determined that these haters are in the majority, or @ least the voting majority, & therefore know there is more to gain by revealing their natural dislike for America too?

 

Pocket Constitution

To celebrate the writing of the Constitution 232 years ago this week below are two examples of correspondence Hillsdale College received regarding the Constitution & in particular

the 390,000 pocket constitutions that the school has sent to students across America.  Grateful teachers are also most appreciative.

 

For those who have not read the Constitution in years, decades, or ever please contact Gina Gallutia @ 517-607-2738 @ Hillsdale College to receive a free copy of the pocket Constitution.  Please let me know if you have any problem getting through & I will try to help.

 

You will find reading the Constitution invaluable between now & the November 2020 presidential election.

 

Green New Deal Is More About AOC's Economic Agenda Than Climate Change

“I said, we have an existential threat, we are in a situation where, if we don’t act quickly, we’re going to basically lose almost everything we have.  And that’s exactly the case.  It’s even more urgent now.”  Joe Biden speaking about the urgency of addressing climate change @ a campaign rally in NH in May where he claimed to introduce the first bill that addressed climate change in the 1980s – over 30 years ago.

After AOC, the de facto leader of the Democrat Party, presented her version of the Green New Deal to a group of fawning Democrat congressmen last February, all of the Democrat presidential aspirants have hopped on board to one large degree or another.  Joe Biden joined in to remind everyone that it is even more urgent now than it was the first time he told us about its urgency over 30 years ago.

 

But the devil is in the details & a check of the details of the plan reveals that AOC’s Green New Deal is in reality the largest expansion of government since LBJ’s Great Society.  It not only proposes getting the U.S. off of fossil fuels within 10 years but also providing universal healthcare, government job & housing guarantees, & a host of impractical ideas like replacing air travel with trains & upgrading & retrofitting every building in America to make them more energy efficient.  It is more about AOC’s economic agenda for America & less about eliminating carbon emissions.

 

The above understanding of the purpose of AOC’s Green New Deal plan was confirmed when AOC’s chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, explained to the staff of former presidential candidate Jay Inslee (one-issue climate change candidate who has now dropped out) that “The interesting thing about the Green New Deal, is it wasn’t originally a climate thing @ all.  Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?  Because we really think of it as a how do you change the entire economy thing.”

 

Now you can check to see for yourself that AOC’s Green New Deal puts in just enough climate change points to mask that it is really about taking over the entire American way of life or as her chief of staff put it

the “economy thing.”  Just look below @ some of the points from the Senate Joint Resolution 8, entitled “A joint resolution recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal” within 10 years, but not later than 2030, sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell & brought to the Senate floor for the purpose of putting senators on record supporting such a plan.

 

 

1.  establishing millions of high-wage jobs & ensuring economic security for all,

 

2.  securing clean air & water, climate & community resiliency, healthy food, access to nature, & a sustainable environment for all & promoting justice & equality,

 

3.  upgrading all existing buildings & constructing new buildings to achieve maximum energy & water efficiency,

 

4.  removing pollution & greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation & agriculture sectors – i.e., no more fossil fuels, &

 

5.  providing higher education, high-quality healthcare, & affordable, safe, & adequate housing to all.

 

The joint resolution was defeated in the Senate 57 to 0 with not one Democrat, including Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey who introduced the bill, voting for it when it counted (see photo above).

 

The urgency, or @ least the significance of making the right politically correct impression, about the Green New Deal was evidently lost on the “Google Campers” – i.e., celebrities who took 114 private jets & mega yachts valued @ between $200 million & 400 million to attend Google’s climate change conference in Sicily’s Verdura Resort last month.  The celebrities, most of whom thankfully I never heard of, very well could have used more fossil fuels getting to the conference than most people use in a year.  A classic example of do as I say, not as I do.

 

American Action Forum (AAF) headed by former Congressional Budget Office Director, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, analyzed the Green New Deal & provided a cost estimate of the several parts & its totality.

 

AAF calculated that it will cost over $5 billion just to meet

the Green New Deal’s goal of transitioning to “clean, renewable, & zero-emission energy sources” within the next 10 years.  Not to be outdone by AOC, his friend & one time presidential primary campaign worker in 2016, Bernie (also a co-sponsor of AOC’s Green New Deal) has added many bell & whistle giveaways to AOC’s mostly aspirational original plan & has

come up with his own version of the Green New Deal that is estimated to cost $16.7 trillion over the next 10 years - for both the fossil fuel elimination portion & the economic agenda portion of his plan that is not directly linked to climate policy.  To help understand why Joe Biden is considered a moderate – Biden’s climate change

plan is estimated to cost “only” $1.7 trillion in the next 10 years.

 

Bernie claims his plan will pay for itself within 15 years through a combination of new taxes, fees, & litigation against fossil fuel companies, new taxes on corporations & wealthy people, together with cuts in military spending related to U.S. reliance on oil & savings across the economy.  Source: Inside Climate News.

 

But getting back to AOC’s original Green New Deal – when all of the pieces of the above Senate Joint Resolution are added together AAF calculates the cost could be as high as $93 trillion over the next ten years.  See table below.

The Federal Reserve reports that the nation’s household net worth is currently about $108 trillion meaning that the $93 trillion estimated cost over the next ten years of AOC’s Green New Deal is just a little less than the nation’s current total wealth – the value of all assets such as stocks, savings accounts, & property minus liabilities such as personal debt.  AAF estimates the annual cost for each American household could be as high as $67,000 to meet the goals of the Green New Deal: “net zero” emissions, widespread high-speed rail service that makes air travel unnecessary, guaranteed government jobs, universal healthcare & its tax cost & diminished choices & decreased access to providers, & building, retrofitting, or otherwise upgrading every house & building in the country to maximize energy efficiency.

 

The Heritage Foundation provides the following graphic that shows the cost comparisons for electricity bills using coal versus those using wind & solar energy systems for a family of four.

The AAF report concludes that "the Green New Deal is clearly very expensive.  Its further expansion of the federal government's role in some of the most basic decisions of daily life, however, would likely have a more lasting & damaging impact than its enormous price tag."

A lot has been made the past several days about the erroneous track of many weather forecasting models that showed Hurricane Dorian going across Florida into Alabama.  Now if meteorologists can't get the forecast of a hurricane right over a period of a few days why would we trust them to surrender our way of life over climate change predictions & draconian regulations & their tremendous costs covering the next ten years?