Impact of Palin's Endorsement?
I've heard a lot of talk about Palin's motivations/the impact of her endorsement of Trump, but nothing about what it's done to conservatism in the country. My personal opinion is that it's seriously undermined the position and ideology of conservatives and really ushered in a lot of doubt. Wondering if anyone else agrees/has a different take.
The announcement for Trump has changed my opinion of Palin as she no longer supports my values. Just saying.
hatred from the crazies...she exposes their weakness just by being alive.
As for the political center, that moves farther right as you move west as a rule of thumb. I'm from Minnesota originally, all my family still lives there, I know the politics there well and it's moving right, but will still be a blue state for a long time yet. Republicans in Minnesota barely meet the standards to be a democrat in the west. If you don't have signs up on your restaurants by the front door as to whether you can carry your side arm in or not, you're not really that conservative overall (would be my opinion).
We actually have a similar but somewhat opposite problem here. About 85% of California by land territory is very, very Republican. Unfortunately there are so many lib-tards by population in LA and San Francisco that we vote to the left every cycle. It tends to be all that rent control, gun control, minimum wage, etc... If it involves "control" those people are for it. We swing right though anytime the Republicans have a decent turnout. I'm optimistic this cycle, Bernie's communist crap isn't going to play well in Silicon Valley, and we already have the highest taxes in the country, there is no one here that will jump for that 90% crap. With a lackluster democrat nominee (either one in handcuffs or a commie), and not in our governor election cycle, I don't see a lot of interest. On the other hand, the Republicans here have been buying 1.5 million guns a year (up from about 600,000 prior to Obama), so 8 years has been pretty long... I see a huge red voter turnout coming. LA is fresh off terrorism and they have more cars registered than people (not an exaggeration), that global warming stuff is not even on the radar screen for them right now.
Can Bernie be a socialist and have any chance outside of the bluest of the blue states like Iowa & New Hampshire? No way. He's trying to move left when the country has obviously been moving to the right with Obama killing off a filibuster-proof majority into the smallest minorities that the Dems have had in 50 years.
We have the same dim-wits here, Kamala Harris is running for the Feinstein seat in the Senate... she's the attorney general that refused to uphold and defend Proposition 8 in court (voter-ban on gay marriage). However someone feels about it, her job was to defend a constitutional amendment on the books, she did not do her job. Now she wants to "take strong liberal leadership to Washington"... Really? The Dems will lose more seats this cycle, her 'leadership' would at best be a Vice chair position on the Capitol janitorial oversight committee (if there were only 2 committee members). Our knucklehead voters will vote for her though instead of say, a good Republican that would get California something close to a equal share of federal spending instead of a straight-up donor state (we only get less than 50 cents on the dollar back of fed tax revenue). We have the dumbest electorate in the nation... but its been well-programmed in our green-party controlled school systems.
Black pastors are endorsing Trump, if he can secure a Latino caucus it would be over, the build a wall thing has turned them off though. My wife is Hispanic, hates illegals, but centering Mexico isn't the best approach, most of the violence and illegals are from further south.
Stopping wire transfers from immigrants here back to Mexico and embargoing the oil sale would tremendously stress the Mexican government. He's been saying all along, it's their problem, they need to fix it and pay for it. I don't disagree with that assessment. They don't do anything to stop the central americans from riding trains across their southern border (or walking across it) on their way here either.
If Mexico allowed my wife and I for example to inherit and own her family's ancestral villa in PV, maybe my views (and hers) would be different, but we cannot legally own it, so someone in her siblings needs to get dual citizenship, or the government will seize it when her father dies. Do we do that to Mexican residents here? of course not. Get in an accident in Mexico? You either get a air-evac back to the US, or you might die there. It's not an equal partnership, it never has been.
The "pet programs" he talks about in smaller groups is amplifying HUD redevelopment funds to rebuild our inner cities. The source of strife in America, the chaos in the streets, is all rooted in poverty. If you didn't have a car and have to take a bus 10 miles or walk there to go to a grocery store if you live in South Central LA, your view of the world is probably different than say, mine, where I live outside Lake Tahoe and even here in the mountains I walk to a corner grocery store or Starbucks in under 500 feet.
The 'war on poverty' was handouts, it was never a hand-up. Now, it's so bad, no sane-minded business person would ever build something back in the ghetto... but what does work is helping a few that grew up in those places, got out, went to school, and instead of going to work for Goldman Sachs, help them (or make it easier for them) to bring those skills and entrepreneurship back to their community. Everywhere it is tried, it seems to work (LeBron James in Cleveland is a good example).
How do you win back a growing base of the party, reduce the cost of government, and bring back conservative values? You have to move the needle back in our direction. Show them what conservatism is about. It will take some priming of the pump obviously, but when there is money to be made, it will pour in. You gotta create a model though.
These communities are sick of the last 50 years, nothing changes, nothing gets better.
So, would you rather have someone like Hillary or Bernie or Cruz planning future communities? Or would you think Trump might know a little more about real estate development...
Our problem is we have a president that thinks that people are happy working their Walmart jobs & whatever, so we have "5% unemployment" when it's really closer to 15-25% it seems like. When people are not really fully employed, they are not really paying taxes either.
Loss of that revenue and paying out earned income credits & all that boondoggle pile to people that should really just be earning a realistic income is where most of the money goes.
Government-sponsored development is one of the cheapest things we can do, it's like the SBA, you don't really spend anything on it, it's just guaranteeing the loans. If they don't pay, the government pays back the lender but they also seize everything the borrower has and enslave their tax returns for life until its paid back.
Nonetheless, development is non-existent in those communities because underwriting standards will have requirements such as "rooftops in vicinity", "vehicle traffic per hour/day", etc.. for retail for example. If you are in the hood, there isn't going to be as much retail traffic as in a retail magnet. Even if people want to invest, on the open market it's difficult to do so, or impossible.
Does it square with where we want to be right now? No, probably not, but it's a realistic part of the process to move past the welfare state and is more of a policy issue than a fiscal cost.
Here's a great example, under Obama, it's very "unpopular" to make mortgages available to 'undesirable' homeowners. If you live in California, and are underwater, but have an 800 FICO and negligible debt vs. income, you will not qualify for one of those Obama refinance loans... you are stuck in that adjustable-rate interest-only jumbo because we can't possibly stand for helping people in $800,000 houses... (even though everyone in that zip code has an $800,000 house). It's called social engineering, does it cost the government anything more to guarantee an $800k mortgage to someone with huge credit scores and quadruple the income as a struggling couple in a $300k home and bad credit and crushing consumer debt? Of course not, it's a silly argument. But the Obama policies will pick the struggling people every time because "We gotta help those folks!" The same has been the SBA policies since ancient times practically, student loans for college - are you a white male veteran with distinguished service and want to go to medical school? Probably not going to happen. Are you a female with an unpronounceable name whose parents don't pay taxes? Sure - welcome wagon open!
To me, it's about repealing all that crap, simply looking at the numbers on a yes/no decision, get the gender/race questions completely out of the stupid applications altogether, and let people achieve on merit alone.
I've actually been slapped before when some distant relative-in-law was bitching about the cost of education and all I said was "sign up for the military, makes college free"... You know what, it was good enough for me, it can be good enough for others.. To me, college should only be 'free' if you serve as part of the compensation. If you do not serve, it's called a loan, and you pay it back with interest. Giving it away for free because mom & dad are illegal immigrants makes no sense to me, while at the same time charging people who actually work and pay taxes. I don't care if they are poor, they came here, must be better than where they came from. Don't make the underwriting any harder than it is for anyone else as long as they are citizens or permanent residents, but nothing should be free for anyone. If your degree isn't going to pay the bill and you can't afford to pay it otherwise, better pick some other options... maybe diesel mechanic, they make more than teachers... by double...
We need to get away from this rewarding for nothing mentality. It's only fair if everyone pays their own way, it lowers taxes, and it unburdens the economy. If you can't figure out a way to piddle away that $100 student loan payment until the end of time if that is all you can afford you have no business going to college anyway - stick to the trades or a union job or whatever.
Cut off the flow of people to careers that require an education but pay poorly, and guess what - within 10 or 15 years those careers are going to pay better.. it's called supply & demand.
Proof that the author really understands GOP voters.
Only mindless sheep could have felt that Palin was anything but a politician.
Palin, a Conservative leader? Rubbish!
Thanks for posting it, krevello.
Although I haven't heard it anywhere, yet, watching her with him, I got the clear impression of a paid political spokeswoman. She knows how to get paid in the reality show business. They made a "deal".
He's also a Canadian anchor baby, I'm not confident he would defeat an eligibility challenge. His mom had a work permit and had legitimately immigrated, not just there for the holiday.
If she did, it's game over. That is citizenship. She did at least have permanent residency and work visa while working there... For most immigrants here, their home country would not recognize their children born here as citizens of say India or the UK.
Commonwealth countries are a little different, they are recognized as British subjects, obviously, we are not a Commonwealth country but Canada certainly is. I don't know anything about the specific countries and policies, but I do know it varies by locale.
As an aside, Hanks is such a fine actor, but where did he get his coo-coo ideas from?
You can't get much more left wing socialist facist than that.
The both sides of aisle part is another left wing fascist lie. they moved the center to the center of the left. The republicans are the right wing of the left and they are ALL left wing socialist fascists. Either as Rinos And Dinos or as enablers who do what they are told.
Sorry Comrades I don't serve the party. No matter how you form or frame the BS.
That's how you define evil.
she made the hard turn towards Trump. . she is damned
tired of the turncoat "conservatives" with whom she has
been consorting, and wants to win -- even if it's only a
partial conservative win. . and She Does Not Want Hillary. -- j
.
Palin is most famous for being the only one in the room that understood geography and the Constitution but then the room was full of reporters not journalists. Using those terms together would be a media oxymoron. You wish they would get over it and just go...out.
.
I'm now retired but recall valuing a steady job.
Yawn, now I prefer naps.
Yawn is also my perception of any Palin endorsement, though I watched it.
An excitable grizzled mama kinda gal, ain't she?
Just wonder if something is going on that is not apparent. Never would of guessed Palin would get involved...maybe she's under his spell.
Gets more bizarre every day.
Rhymes are perceived by weak thinkers as true:
Donuts and fries
Will give you thin thighs.
Nash has the shortest (rhyming) poem, called Fleas:
Adam
Had 'em
I eat peas with honey
I know it sounds funny
It keeps them on my knife.
Enough of this spin. Spin is another word for deceit.
Somewhat telling is the fact that he's polling better than Rubio and Bush put together -- in Florida!
Right now, people want a "hero" to save them and they don't want to peek under the "mask" of the one with a big "T" on his chest at the top of Trump tower. Enter Palin, who says Trump is the "one"...because she gets paid well to say it.
Hillary or Sanders are not going to be elected President. The rats are already jumping from her ship; the crew will be last to notice. She's looking more and more like she's headed toward a "medical issue" that will help her save face and bow out while she deals with her legal issues. Hopefully, she becomes the pariah she deserves to be, since it's unlikely she will serve time in prison. With luck, her world will crumble around her in a 'Lance Armstrongesue' meltdown.
A Socialist is not going to win a general election. Not yet.
I just read about Sanders' proposals for free college , medicare for everyone, and all the other stuff he stands for. His tax increases would be dramatic, but not as high as under Eisenhower where the top marginal rate was 91%. If it gets close to Hillary or Sanders seeming to overtake Trump (who is NOT going to raise taxes like that), I am going to sell any stocks I have before the tax rates go sky high.
Her endorsement means nothing to me, however. I wasn't going to vote for Trump and her endorsement doesn't change that.
The reality is that because of the way the Electoral College is built, the race is the Democratic candidate's to lose because they open with such a huge head start from New York and California. I think that is indicative of one of the major problems in making the electoral college popular-based rather than State-based - especially where most States are all-or-nothing voters.
Perhaps the democrats will win anyway regardless, and our once great country will continue its slide (faster with Sanders than Hillary). Its very depressing actually. I will vote for Trump if he gets nominated and hope the slide will be slower with him than the democrats. My lousy vote wont count for much, and I doubt many of the gulchers will vote for Trump. Its going to be interesting for those who hate trump so much, how they can live with Hillary or Sanders.
She has been pretty bitterly attacked by both the left and the Republican establishment so one can see her attracted to the most anti-establishment candidate she can find.
Trump is on record as far back as his keynote at the 88 convention with strong support for vets and that morphed to include first responders after 9/11.
To me, the fundamental difference between right and left is about the size of government. Left likes big, protectionist statism. Right likes small, localized government. That definition only works within the American system however. And I don't know how widely accepted it is. I have a degree in political science and when I said that was the chief difference between the two parties in class my professor snapped at me that was not true. Anyway, then you get into "right wing of the left" and terms like that, as you point out. And that becomes more a matter of philosophical differences, which is further complicated by individual interpretations.