Sunday, August 7, 2016

If Obama cancels the presidential election, who will stop him? ^ | 8/7/2016 | Lloyd Marcus 

Many of you have heard the conspiracy theory that Black Lives Matter and other paid thug protest groups will cause so much chaos in the streets that Obama will use it as an excuse to cancel the presidential election and remain president. I do not think that will happen.

However, I asked my wife Mary a rhetorical question: "If Obama did cancel the election, who would stop him?" Folks, the terrifying answer which we all know is "no one." For eight years, even after we gave Republicans control of the House and Senate, the GOP has allowed Obama to break the law and ignore the Constitution at will.

Congress has ignored their power of the purse and funded everything Obama has decreed. Senate majority leader Republican Mitch McConnell said that no matter what Obama does, impeachment is off the table.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Displaying your “Don’t Tread on Me” flag may now be a punishable offense! ^ | 08/07/2016 | Jazz Shaw 

This item popped up the other day at The Volokh Conspiracy and it’s a rather sad sign of the times. .....
On January 8, 2014, Complainant filed a formal complaint in which he alleged that the Agency subjected him to discrimination on the basis of race (African American) and in reprisal for prior EEO activity when, starting in the fall of 2013, a coworker (C1) repeatedly wore a cap to work with an insignia of the Gadsden Flag, which depicts a coiled rattlesnake and the phrase “Don’t Tread on Me.”

Complainant stated that he found the cap to be racially offensive to African Americans because the flag was designed by Christopher Gadsden, a “slave trader & owner of slaves.” Complainant also alleged that he complained about the cap to management; however, although management assured him C1 would be told not to wear the cap, C1 continued to come to work wearing the offensive cap......
...As Volokh points out, there is no indication that the accused worker ever did or said anything to the complainant which could be construed as racially insensitive. He simply wore a cap with the “Don’t Tread on Me” flag on it. For the EEOC to even take up the case provides a signal that we have entered an era where nothing actually has to be racist to get you in trouble. All it takes is for someone else to decide that it looks racist to them. This is apparently sufficient to complete the offense in the eyes of the government. Because Gadsden (the flag’s originator) lived in a time when slave ownership was still legal and broadly practiced, that makes the flag a racist symbol centuries later. Ian Tuttle at National Review notes the flaw in this logic.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Social Media Patterns Show Trump Is Looking at a Landslide Victory

Gateway Pundit ^ | Aug 7th, 2016 | Jim Hoft 

Current polls show the race for President is much tighter than it really is. Ann Coulter warned us years ago in her best seller Slander that Democrats and the liberal media always use polls to manipulate and discourage conservatives from voting. Thanks to social media there is more and more evidence that the polls are way off and if things stay as they are, Trump will win in a landslide!
It’s evident Hillary has a hard time filling a Union Hall while Trump regularly turns people away from his stadium and arena venues.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Clinton’s Lead Over Trump Narrows To Less Than Three Points ^ | 7 August 2016 | Reuters via Breitbart 

(Reuters) – Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s lead over Republican rival Donald Trump narrowed to less than 3 percentage points, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll released on Friday, down from nearly eight points on Monday.
About 42 percent of likely voters favored Clinton, to Trump’s 39 percent, according to the July 31-Aug. 4 online poll of 1,154 likely voters. The poll had a credibility interval of plus or minus 3 percentage points, meaning that the results suggest the race is roughly even.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Are all those Trump controversies raising doubts in Trump Nation? Not really

LA Times ^ | 08/07/2016 | Nigel Duara, Joe Mozingo, Molly Hennessy-Fiske and Noah Bierman 

Donald Trump has dominated the airwaves for much of the 2016 presidential campaign, but the Republican presidential nominee has faltered in recent polls.
His campaign has been dogged by a series of controversies, including Trump’s sparring with the family of a Muslim soldier killed in Iraq, his invitation to Russian hackers to look into Hillary Clinton’s emails, and his initial hesitancy in endorsing House Speaker Paul D. Ryan.
Are those issues causing second thoughts among his most ardent supporters? Earlier this year, we profiled several voters around the country — a personal trainer in Virginia, a retired car salesman in Las Vegas and a Latina immigrant in Texas, among others. All had become, for different reasons, enthusiastic citizens of Trump Nation.
What’s behind Trump’s slipping poll numbers? Have the latest controversies caused these voters to reconsider? We checked back with some of them, and the answer is: not really. The things that made Trump appealing to them to begin with — his willingness to take on the status quo, his calls for building American strength and clamping down on immigration — still hold true, they said.
She said Republicans who have endorsed Clinton in recent days “are not thinking of the Supreme Court justices” she would appoint.
“Trump at some point should just stop tweeting and not get in more trouble. But I don’t think that’s him. He’s just not going to stop,” Magnon said. “I’m just thinking, don’t screw up enough that it will cost you the election. Just focus on the goal. You can do that if you just focus on the states you need to turn Republican to win: Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania. If you can do that, you can win,” she said.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Paul Ryan must be defeated on Tuesday in our first step to saving America

The Coach's Team ^ | 8/7/16 | Kevin "Coach" Collins 

Our friend Charles Johnson of has put together a compelling argument for Speaker of the House Paul Ryan’s defeat in the Republican primary being held in the 1st Congressional District of Wisconsin on Tuesday. Whether Ryan stays on or not is to be determined by a small group of Americans who are being asked to place country over their personal aims and goals. Let us hope those who have not yet decided on which man to support will read this and vote accordingly.
Ryan’s challenger is Paul Nehlen a local businessman who, in the truest tradition of our Founding Fathers, has stepped forward to stop the tyranny of a man who, having lost his way and purpose in life, is now a clear and present danger to all of us.
Ryan is being advised by Cesar Conda who, as his former top staffer, single-handedly pushed Senator Marco Rubio into joining the infamous Gang of Eight that tried mightily to cram amnesty down our throats.
Ryan has been a devious character all of his life. In high school he was voted “biggest brown noser” and hasn’t really stood tall ever since. Today he is a Cheap Labor Express supporter who has turned out to be a big asset to Barack Obama in moving forward his plans to destroy America.
In 2007 it was Conda, as Ryan’s mentor since he arrived in Washington, who introduced Ryan to Mitt Romney. Romney sized up Ryan saw a man with no spine and that is why Romney picked Ryan as his running mate.
With Ryan under his control, Conda has worked for pro-amnesty and anti-border security candidates.
Ryan and Conda adore Jack Kemp who few people realize was an advocate of illegal immigration and ultimately would have been dangerous if he were still alive and in the political arena today.
When you see Paul Ryan think Cesar Conda because both men want to erase our borders and swamp us with the worst the world has to offer.

Julian Assange: We Will Release More Emails on the Clinton Foundation – FBI Has Enough Evidence...

Gateway Pundit ^ | 8/6/2016 | Jim hoft 

Rattansi: If there is any illegality in the pending emails you will release or malfesance in what you alreaday released President Obama could presumably act on it and get Hillary Clinton charged? Regardless on whether you are about to release any email which would mean that James Comey and the FBI would have no alternative but to arrest Hillary Clinton?
Assange: Our view which we have already stated is if the evidence that the FBI has is enough for a grand jury to indict already… But a prosecutor has to ask a grand jury to indict. And if a prosecutor doesn’t ask, a grand jury won’t indict.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Hillary to police union: Get lost? ^ | 08/07/2016 | ED MORRISSEY 

During the Democrat’s national convention, it took until the third day before anyone got around to mentioning support for law enforcement. Police officials sharply criticized the Democratic Party for giving time for speeches to the Mothers of the Movement from Black Lives Matter, but failing to offer any time at all for the families of law-enforcement officers killed in the line of duty, especially those in Dallas who died protecting a BLM rally. According to the president of the largest police union, that’s no accident — and Hillary Clinton wants nothing to do with police, The Hill’s Jonathan Swan reports today:
Top officials at the biggest police union in the country are upset with Hillary Clinton, saying she snubbed them.
The leader of the National Fraternal Order of Police told The Hill that the Democrat sent a signal through her staff that she wouldn’t be seeking the union’s endorsement.
“It sends a powerful message. To be honest with you, I was disappointed and shocked,” said Chuck Canterbury, the president of the National Fraternal Order of Police.
“You would think with law enforcement issues so much in the news that even if she had disagreements with our positions, that she would’ve been willing to say that.”
Well, yes, you’d think so. In Dallas, the assassination of five police officers has produced an unprecedented round of recruiting as police chief David Brown challenged his community to stop protesting and stand watches as part of the force. Communities have rallied to police as they have come under fire — literally — from radicals bent on anarchy and destruction. There seems to be a belated realization in many communities that an effective police force is necessary, especially in the urban cores, and that pushing them into more passive stances only puts the most vulnerable citizens more at risk.
That realization hasn’t occurred to Team Hillary, apparently. The NFOP asks candidates to fill out questionnaires to allow them to determine their choice for endorsement. Donald Trump has completed his questionnaire, but they never heard back from Hillary. Instead, her staff finally responded with a “thanks but no thanks” response, making it the first such snub since John Kerry in 2004. (Barack Obama responded in both 2008 and 2012, according to Canterbury.)
Team Hillary wants to go all in with the Black Lives Matter movement, apparently, just at the moment when the movement itself seems to be contemplating its earlier strategies. Maybe that will pay off; BLM has become a sustained movement akin to Occupy, only less broad and arguably less impactful, especially since a number of assassinations of police officers have taken place. Hillary and her campaign seem to be betting that cold-shouldering cops will help build loyalty and emotional ties to the activists and their allies, which could produce a turnout similar to Obama’s in 2012 if not 2008.
As bets go, it’s not entirely irrational, but it cedes one important point. Trump has already called himself the law-and-order candidate. If Hillary chooses to go all in with BLM, that leaves the GOP wide open to embrace law enforcement at a time when civil unrest has many Americans worried — even those in cities where competent and fair law enforcement is most needed. If the GOP is paying attention, they should start messaging on this immediately, and see how well that bet works out.

Donald Trump Is the middle-class growth candidate!

CNBC ^ | 8/6/2016 | Larry Kudlow 

Trump is the pro-growth candidate in this race. Hillary Clinton is the anti-growth candidate. Trump wants to expand national income and the economic pie. Clinton wants to redistribute income and shrink the pie.
In past columns, I have equated Trump's tax-reduction plan to the JFK and Ronald Reagan tax cuts, which generated economic booms of roughly 5 percent growth per year. President Barack Obama, by comparison, has raised taxes, spending, and regulations, producing the worst recovery since World War II. And Clinton intends to follow in Obama's footsteps with a Bernie Sanders-like, left-wing policy mix. She is the Democrats' anti-JFK. What a pity.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

WikiLeaks drops Hillary email labeled ‘tick tock on Libya’ – will Rush’s prediction come true?

BPR BizPac Review ^ | 08/06/06 | John Binder 

When Hillary Clinton is asked about her plan to invade Libya while she was secretary of state, she often passes the buck to President Obama, saying he ultimately had to make the final decision.
But, new emails from WikiLeaks’ hack into Clinton’s private email server show she openly bragged about having a “critical voice” in the invasion of Libya, which ultimately led to the rise of the Islamic State and the Syrian refugee crisis.
Take a look:
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Donald Trump Is Proposing The Biggest Tax Cuts Since Ronald Reagan's Presidency

Fortune Mag. ^ | Aug. 6, 2016 | Madeline Farber 

In a new economic blueprint that is set to unveil next week, Donald Trump will propose one of the biggest tax cuts since Ronald Reagan’s presidency, an advisor to the Republican Presidential nominee told Bloomberg.
The proposal will reiterate Trump’s plan to cut the corporate tax rate to 15%, Stephen Moore, who is the chief economist for the Heritage Foundation, and of one of the men on Trump’s 13-member economic advisory team that the Republican presidential candidate announced Friday, said.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

'White Trash' — The Original Underclass

ProPublica ^ | Aug. 5, 2016 | Alec MacGillis 

Sometime during the past few years, the country started talking differently about white Americans of modest means.
Early in the Obama era, the ennobling language of campaign pundits prevailed. There was much discussion of “white working-class voters,” with whom the Democrats, and especially Barack Obama, were having such trouble connecting. Never mind that this overbroad category of Americans — the exit pollsters’ definition was anyone without a four-year college degree, or more than a third of the electorate — obliterated major differences in geography, ethnicity, and culture. The label served to conjure a vast swath of salt-of-the-earth citizens living and working in the wide-open spaces between the coasts — Sarah Palin’s “real America” — who were dubious of the effete, hifalutin types increasingly dominating the party that had once purported to represent the common man.
The “white working class” connoted virtue and integrity. A party losing touch with it was a party unmoored.
That flattering glow has faded away. Today, less privileged white Americans are considered to be in crisis, and the language of sociologists and pathologists predominates. Charles Murray’s “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960–2010” was published in 2012, and Robert D. Putnam’s “Our Kids: The American Dream in Crisis” came out last year. From opposite ends of the ideological spectrum, they made the case that social breakdown among low-income whites was starting to mimic trends that had begun decades earlier among African Americans: Rates of out-of-wedlock births and male joblessness were rising sharply. Then came the stories about a surge in opiate addiction among white Americans, alongside shocking reports of rising mortality rates (including by suicide) among middle-aged whites. And then, of course, came the 2016 presidential campaign. The question was suddenly no longer why Democrats struggled to appeal to regular Americans. It was why so many regular Americans were drawn to a man like Donald Trump. Equally jarring has been the shift in tone. A barely suppressed contempt has characterized much of the commentary about white woe, on both the left and the right. Writing for National Review in March, the conservative provocateur Kevin Williamson shoveled scorn on the low-income white Republican voters who, as he saw it, were most responsible for the rise of Trump...

Huge cut. MUCH more in th article. Please read the whole thing.

Reuters Baffled As Clinton's Lead Over Trump Suddenly Evaporates

Time Magazine Image, Reuters Graphics, RealClearPolitics on zero hedge ^ | 6AUG16 | Reuters, RealClearPolitics copied by Tyler Durden 

We're gonna need another polling methodology 'tweak'...
Having seen her poll numbers suddenly explode higher (and Trump's collapse) following Reuters' decision to tweak its polling methodology, it appears we just witnessed 'Peak Hillary' as Reuters reports Clinton's lead over Trump has tumbled back to just 3 points (the poll had a credibility interval of plus or minus 3 percentage points) meaning, as Reuters is forced to admit, that the results suggest the race is roughly even...
Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's lead over Republican rival Donald Trump narrowed to less than 3 percentage points, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll released on Friday, down from nearly eight points on Monday.

About 42 percent of likely voters favored Clinton, to Trump's 39 percent, according to the July 31-Aug. 4 online poll of 1,154 likely voters. The poll had a credibility interval of plus or minus 3 percentage points, meaning that the results suggest the race is roughly even. Among registered voters over the same period, Clinton held a lead of five percentage points, down from eight percentage points on Monday, according to the poll.
Reuters tweaked data shows Hillary's lead has peaked...

Reuters subtly points out the folly of their survey respondents...
Clinton had pulled well ahead of Trump on the heels of the Democratic National Convention last week, where she became the first woman to accept the U.S. presidential nomination from a major political party.

Since then, Trump has engaged in a days-long feud with the family of an American soldier killed in Iraq and squabbled with the Republican leadership over his comments and leadership turmoil within his campaign.
But as RealClearPolitics' aggregated data shows, the swings are dramatic to say the least...

The noise in these polling numbers is incredible and prompted MishTalk's Mike Shedlock to take a caustic look at the prognostications of the web's forecasters... Peter Atwater, President of Financial Insyghts and Author of Moods and Markets asked an interesting question today: Have we reached peak Hillary yet?” 
In Atwater’s tweet, he posted a flashback to this January 2014 Time Magazine cover.
Time Hillary
The answer to the question “Can anyone stop Hillary?” is pretty obvious: Yes, Trump can easily win if he can ever learn to control his mouth (a recession hits or some dirt that matters comes out on Hillary that matters).

Ridiculous Forecasts

I watch with amusement as Nate Silver posts his ridiculous forecasts on the Presidential Election Odds.
Silver Odds 2016-08-04
Rest assured, Hillary does not have a 79% chance of winning.
Silver Odds 2016-08-04A
Pure Idiocy
  • Supposedly, Hillary has a 79.9% chance of winning in November as of today.
  • Supposedly, Trump had a 50.1% chance of winning in November on July 31, just four days ago!
  • Supposedly, Hillary had a 77.4% chance of winning in November on July 12.
This is pure idiocy.
Silver is clearly taking the news of the day and projecting it out to November when voters clearly have a time span of about three days.
How Silver can look himself in a mirror and make such widely varying off the wall predictions is a mystery.

Social Mood

Atwater had a second tweet today that is quite interesting...
Social Mood is clearly in control here.

Silver is totally clueless about what social mood will be in November, just as he was totally clueless about social mood the entire Republican nomination process.
*  *  *
We leave it to Reuters themselves to conclude with their thoughts on the drop in Hillary's support and revival of Trump...
The reasons behind the shift were unclear.
Unclear indeed.