You Won't Win an Election by Insulting the Voter's Intelligence

I have to ask, "How is insulting voter's intelligence a winning campaign strategy?" Because that seems to be entire strategy of the Democrat party and the media. Well, sham trials and a weaponized justice system notwithstanding, of course.

Now they are running with the latest Trump comment. Trump says he doesn't care about his voters in scorching heat rally.

Give me a break. Really? Look, there is video on this. Trump did say that. But one look at the video and anyone with even half a brain immediately makes out that he was speaking tongue in cheek. Not only was it a joke. He was clearly mocking the media.

As he was speaking to the crowd the wind blew and he praised the breeze. He said, in an after all sort of way, "I don't want anyone going anywhere. I don't care about you. I just want your vote." Which is as direct a jab against the media narrative that he is a narcissist dictator in the making as one can make.

He smiled and chuckled. The crowd laughed. The crowd got the joke. There is no, "Oh, there he goes again, gotcha," moment. But of course the media thinks it is. Biden thinks it is too, as I am sure his comment will make it into a Biden campaign ad somewhere.

A deep and ominous voice will boom on the screen, "Would you vote for a convicted felon who doesn't care about you?"

It's coming. Just wait for it.

Like almost everything the left is doing, I think this backfires on them just as bad as everything else they've tried has. And I think what they (the Democrats) are doing is simply wearing the voters out. People are getting tired of all of this Trump bashing and hatred. Because the reality is that the country is on fire, and no one is bringing water. They're just trying to point out the arsonist.

And by the way, we all know the real arsonist is the accuser.

It's just dumb. It's dumb to suggest Trump did anything but tell a joke and mock the media. He even said, "The press is going to take that and say I said a horrible thing." Because that's what they always do. The left and media think we're stupid. They think we will fall for anything they tell us.

Granted. Some might. Some will. Because there are die-hard haters out there so deep in their TDS they walk around like zombies. Instead of chanting, "Brains," as they wander aimlessly about, they chant, "Trump."

Trump did say he didn't care about his voters. But even if that's what he said, that's not what he said, and the context is everything. The smile and the chuckle is everything. It's the defining moment. It was when the joke was made clear as a bell.

I don't think the voters are stupid. Not the majority anyway. So, I say, let them run with this nonsense. Let them keep shooting themselves in the foot. Let them keep taking eggs to the face from their own inside throwers.

It's only going to more solidly seal Trump's win in November.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page or on X to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

© 2024 Jim Bauer

Time To End the Circus on the Next Choice for Speaker

There are days when I swear, I am but a mere witness to a circus and that bothers me. Because right now a lot of the circus seems to be on my side of the political aisle. And I mean that with all sincerity. Hey look, I have said it many times before and I will say it again, just because I am a republican doesn't mean I am going to overlook reality like the other side does and dismiss what I can see with my own damn eyes!

I supported McCarthy for the speakership when the question came around last time and urged my fellow republicans to simply show strength and rally around the guy—even if they have some reservations. Which, to be fair, we're going to have with just about anyone. No one is a perfect candidate no matter what they are running for. 

The thing for me was about the optics of it all. Take optics for what they are, but the truth is that's exactly what the media wanted everyone to see. Instability, infighting, disarray, discombobulation and lack of direction.

And the months long McCarthy fight did more than provide for enough of that, and even with the now ousting of McCarthy we're still giving the media the same fodder for more bad optics.

Nonetheless, I can also understand some of the arguments in favor of McCarthy's losing the gavel. I'm an honest guy, like I keep saying. Was the decision a bit hasty in my opinion? Sure. Regardless of anyone's opinion overall the reality is that it just adds to the narrative that the republican party is disorganized and unfocused.

But that's for another day.

The two top contenders in the mix right now are Rep. John Scalise (R-LA) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), and so far, it appears Scalise may have slightly more support than Jordan does. Personally, I think Scalise may be the better choice right now, but honestly, I think either would make a good speaker. Jordan in the past, for example, has shown deep interest in getting to the bottom of a lot of important questions, and he's been a bull in Congress in my opinion.

At the same time, I also believe that Scalise has more admiration and respect from the other side and that makes him slightly more suited to the position. Because not only does he need to rally the caucus, he needs to be able to reach across the aisle and be able to bring sensible judgement and ideas to the table working with the president.

Granted, regardless of whatever respect he has from either side, getting the 218 votes he needs to become speaker is no easy task. Especially if the republicans can't make up their minds what they want or need to do. And right now, they are having a really tough time with that.

Throw into the mix the Trump card. It's not the first time his name has come up of course. It did as well when McCarthy was fighting for the spot. His name is in the mix yet again, with at least a couple members supporting the idea, and the infamous Marjorie Taylor Greene saying she won't support anyone other than Trump for speaker.

Trump even went on to post on social media a picture of him holding the speaker's gavel without any text to accompany it, and publicly stated when asked whether he'd consider the role if asked, "All I can say is we will do whatever is best for the country, republican party and the people."

By the way, Trump will never be speaker. At least not in my opinion. For one thing if the battle for Scalise and Jordan are a climb up a very steep mountain, the feat for Trump would be one of astronomical proportion the likes of which we have never seen or may never likely ever see again.

It is, by all measures, simply anecdotal. But again, it adds to the circus even though I might support Trump to land the role—although I am not sure I agree that it would be good for the country, the republican party or the people. And that's not me discounting Trump's leadership capabilities. It's just me being realistic.

And, at the same time, reaffirming my position that what we need right now in the role of speaker is someone who can be less divisive and rally the troops and be able to cross party lines. I think that person is Scalise. Jordan would have difficulty doing that in my opinion, and certainly Trump would not be able to do that.

In fact, going one step further, I think Trump in the role of speaker would also damage some of his chances in 2024 as well as distract him from his own campaign. As I have said many times, the focus needs to be on 2024 and on how we defeat President Biden. And that's as tough a road, despite that it shouldn't be, based on Biden's complete failure of a presidency, as Scalise's ascendency to the speakership. But we're in a very weird time right now and the media's not giving things to us straight and many Americans either don't care or are actually listening to what the media is telling them.

Either way, what I am hopeful for is that we can be swift in our election of a new speaker and keep the infighting to a bare minimum, showing strength and solidarity to the American people who very badly right now need to see a republican party better able to come together.

We need to end the circus. It's gone on long enough and it's gone beyond the clown show. We're in near ridiculous territory.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on YouTube or on my Facebook page to keep up with all the latest Springboard stuff from here, HubPages and other places where I ply my wares and share my thoughts.

Evaluating Politics Has to be On the Basis of Honesty and Openness, Not Party Divisions

Let's face it, political discussions are hard. What gets in the way is either denial, defiance, or outright bias. Often times, there's just no winning—but having an open and honest political dialogue is important because so much of what happens in politics has a direct impact on our lives and even our livelihoods. 

What gets in the way as well is often not a matter of reality, but rather personal perspectives. For example, if you have someone who has always earned low wages in a fast-food restaurant or retail store, they are going to tend to view the world in a very different way than someone who is a middle-class earner. 

On top of that, in order for someone to truly evaluate what is happening politically, one has to be able to be honest with themselves, honest about the assessment, and able to step away from one side or the other and do our own homework. Because we also have to know that the media is not going to always tell us the truth any more than our politicians themselves are going to do it.

In other words, we can't even take our guy's word for it. We have to decide for ourselves what is working and what is not, and not separate ideas by political party, but acknowledge ideas by how successful they are or aren't.

I bring this up because of discussions we have about former president Trump and current president Biden and my personal observation that I just don't think anyone is being honest with ourselves about the facts. Granted, I come at this with a little bit of obvious bias. I supported Trump and I dislike Biden, and I am also a conservative republican.

But let that not sway you from my general point here.

The thing is, sometimes there are things that are simply undeniable on an intellectual, informed level. When it comes to Trump, many of us can agree there were things he got right and there were things he got wrong. Same thing with Obama to be fair. The same goes for any president or politician we have ever known. 

Let's take gas prices. We cannot deny that gas prices were cheaper when Trump was in office and is more expensive today under Biden. I think, if we are being honest, that there are also key things that one can point to that Obama did regarding policy, things that Trump did regarding policy, and things that Biden did regarding policy that had a very visible impact on what gas prices were in all three administrations and why.

In other words, we normally hold the thought—and fairly accurately—that presidents do not control gas prices. But there are policy decisions presidents can make that do impact prices at the pump to an extent. If gas prices were to have been lower under Trump and then remained lower under Biden after reversing Trump's energy policies on day one of his presidency, then we could safely assume that something other than Trump's policies drove down the price of gas.

Regardless of what side of the aisle one resides on, it should be clear that energy policy had a notable effect on what we pay for gas. Yet on the other side, there are deniers. Their argument is simply that Obama's policies finally kicked in and by the time Trump was out of office, his policies reversed Obama's course.

It's just not the case.

The stock market is another glaring example of one's economic situation over another. And again, just like with gas prices, presidents do not control the stock market. But they can have certain economic policy that either fosters a strong business climate or hinders it. 

Granted, under Obama, the stock market did not do badly. In fact it did rather well. But it really did so, mainly, due to quantitative easing which flooded the economy with money to bolster it because the real underlying economy was faltering. It ended essentially in 2014 although a 4th round came after the Covid thing happened. 

There was no QE, essentially, during Trump's term and there were clear things he did regarding policy that helped to free up business to operate and grow. It bolstered the economy and created spending activity which also, of course, fueled market returns.

Biden's economic policy has not had the same result. Inflation aside, which cannot be entirely blamed on Biden, but certainly the trillions of dollars added to the deficit under two bills and Biden's energy policy contributed greatly to it.

There are simply things you can point to that determine why something happened. And again, we have to be honest about all of that if we want to make informed decisions the next time we have to decide who is right or wrong to get us headed in the right direction. Or to decide whether or not maybe we made a mistake. Or that we missed an important detail in our evaluation.

We cannot deny failure just because it is our side failing any more than we can deny success because it is not our side succeeding. 

When Trump was president, GDP rose. That's a fact. Even after Obama told us 2.5% was the "new normal and we would just have to get used to it." Poverty rates declined under Trump. It's statistically true. Black, Hispanic and women unemployment rates dropped to historical lows under Trump. We can't say that didn't happen. Wages rose considerably under Trump, and we cannot deny that either.

It is not to say Trump was perfect. By no means. But in order to fairly assess his presidency overall, we have to at least acknowledge what he did that worked, and if not entirely give credit to Trump for having done it, but ask ourselves why we are not holding Biden to account for the things he did differently that are not working in the way they did under Trump?

Why would we not say, "Hey, Mr. Biden, what he did in this area worked. Why not keep doing that and instead of focusing on denying what worked and changing course, instead find the things that really didn't work and work on those things?"

Trump's immigration policy worked. In fact, to some extent, Obama's immigration policy was more effective than Biden's as well. Why not keep it? Trump's economic policies mostly worked. Why not keep going with that? Say what you want about Trump's tax cut, his cuts worked much like cuts JFK made and Reagan as well made. Trump's energy policy worked. Why not keep that going as well?

The bottom line is that knowing what's happening and being honest about it serves everyone in pursuing what's best for the country at large. If we can do that, all sides win, and heck, all sides can claim the victory as well.

Both sides have good ideas and bad ideas, and we as the American people are in charge of deciding which ones are good and which ones are bad, and electing people who will do the things that work as opposed to denying them and changing course, which accomplishes nothing.

Is this a call to bring Trump back in 2024? No. Not hardly. It is simply a call to open our eyes, be honest, and listen to both sides, honestly evaluate the results, and elect the next guy to lead us based on the merit of what he offers and on the basis of what the last guy didn't deliver.

If we are able to be honest. America only succeeds if we can honestly evaluate policies that work over which party made the policy, or which side we wish had.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on Twitter at @jimbauer601.

What is Truth and the Silencing of Conservatives

It often becomes, to me, a confusing area of contention. Why does it seem that the only people being sought after to silence is targeted to silence only those who speak from the right? Granted, there may be no actual data to support the claim, so let's just call it an observation, shall we?

But you have to admit, it does seem a bit obvious. The right IS the target.

I will even grant you that most of the time there's "something" behind the silencing. Or at least, that is the impressive that wants to get left after the silencing occurs. 

Why is that, and again it seems, that the left can say anything it wants, call anything it wants to truth, and have their say and no one gets to question that? But when the right says something, everything is questioned. And in the minds of those asking the questions, and ultimately doing the silencing, there is no room for questioning the questioner. 

You will remember around 2017 Bill O'Reilly, then the top-rated cable news show host on television, was boost off the air amid sexual harassment allegations. Okay, sounds justified, right? Sure, according to all of the allegations and reports he was a bit of a fox in the den of Fox News. 

But was he? Or was he simply pushing back too hard and getting too big of an audience for his clearly conservative viewpoints? Maybe. Maybe not. It does seem odd that Fox News would want to remove a host who was clearly a large part of their bread and butter without at least good cause.

Or was the left just pushing too hard? Were the other things Fox News was concerned about that they used Bill O'Reilly as an opportunity to quiet the potential bigger onslaught?

Tucker Carlson, the latest target, was removed from their airwaves with his last show airing Friday, April 21st—which at the end of the show he told audience he would see them on Monday. So, it was a quick development over the weekend following the settlement of the Dominion voting machines defamation lawsuit.

Lou Dobbs was also recently cancelled, and he happens to be another one among those named in the filing against Fox News.

Before I go any further, might I remind people that there were many hosts on other networks who were offering up false information and lies galore during the entire Russia Collusion farce. Who fact-checked? Who offered redactions? Who corrected the record?

Why was no one sued for defamation in those cases? Okay, no one brought the suits. But should someone have? Maybe. Should calls to action have been encouraged? Probably. Should it have been important to set the record straight and tell the news straight? Would it even have been a good idea to maybe offer up apologies?

I mean, say what you want about the claims regarding Dominion sort of accusing Dominion of being the source for stealing an entire election from the American people. But one could easily argue that the entire left wing media news organization which is comprised of NBC, CNN and even media giants like Google and Facebook might have had more to do with rigging an election than Dominion ever was if the claims made against them by Tucker Carlson and others were true.

Whether it was about issues surrounding the election or the supposed insurrection of January 6th when it was supposed that angry conservative Trump supporters sought to storm the capital and overturn an election, the mere fact is that conservatives were literally silenced and shut down from having anything to say to potentially open a dialogue, even if was just to ask questions and see where those questions might lead.

Donald Trump was at the forefront of course. A former sitting president was literally kicked off of Twitter. And others followed him—all conservatives. All of them cited for supposedly spreading misinformation and lies.

Based on who's truth? I mean, that should be the question of the day, right? Who's truth is the Imperial truth and who gets to decide what that is? Why is always so immediately assumed the right is at the helm of harmful misinformation?

We have people out there who can openly debate that a woman exists for Heaven's sake. Isn't that patently false? Is it even an argument? Apparently it is. They can freely say that a woman cannot be defined by old outdated standards. But can we, the right, openly deny their truth?

No. We can't. Even if we are not silenced for that speech, surely we are made into pariahs for it. We're called liars and racists and homophobes, we're called out of touch and out of sync with the times. We are called imaginiationists (a word I just made up) instead of realists. We're labeled as bigots.

To be completely honest what I take issue with more than anything is the very use of the word misinformation. Frankly, I think it gets tossed around too readily and too easily—and of course it's the right being accused of it time and time again.

As I asked before, "Based on who's truth?"

Who are the fact checkers? The media of course. And what makes up the largest portion of the media? Liberals. The left. They are the ones cracking the code of truth and anyone who questions the person supposedly setting the record straight is simply spreading more misinformation and denying the truth. The truth they decide.

Now TikTok is up in arms and running a bit scared by the truth seekers of the world—particularly the United States government.

They say they have a team of individuals of more than ten thousand people scanning through the media being offered by members to root out the evils of hate speech and information. And who gets targeted? Not the woman sitting in her bath robe sipping on a cup of coffee in a live stream getting to voice her opinions about men and women not existing in the world and defending her use of the word cis to redefine non-transgender people, who before the word existed in the imaginations of the left, simply described men and women. No. She gets to keep talking even if she is offensive to tens of millions of people who disagree with her.

The ones getting silenced and banned and shut down are the ones who voice their opinions other than what the left has already predetermined to be the truth. A guy can be banned for a week for simply suggesting that president Biden may not actually be running the country. Not because he stole the election. But because maybe he does not have all his faculties and can't be in charge.

Granted, it's an opinion. Just like suggesting a man or a woman is somehow now a cis is an opinion. But of course the left are the ones who decided that there is a difference between fact and opinion. Saying a man cannot be a woman, even if biologically that's a true statement, is not allowed. It's misinformation that could potentially be harmful of disrespectful to others.

Never mind the harm or disrespect imposed on someone who thinks otherwise.

Will it ever change? Who knows? I can say that more people seem to be pushing back more than ever. Even coming from both sides—although of course most of the push back is coming from the right and those middle ground people who call themselves independents.

No one sought to silence that crazy democrat congresswoman Maxine Waters from California for shouting, "Impeach 45," with no basis for impeachment other than she disliked the president, or called her out for potentially inciting violence during the Derek Chauvin trial telling protesters to "get more confrontational." No one held Chuck Schumer to the fire for saying there would be "hell to pay" if Roe v. Wade would be overturned which sent a madman nearly to the door of Supreme Court Justice Cavanaugh wishing to murder him.

But people Mike Lindell and Tucker Carlson will be targeted and silenced. Donald Trump himself will be hounded by baseless accusations and investigations, impeachments and indictments. And rather than stack the courts the media and whoever can find any dirt to dig up will go after a Justice like Clarence Thomas and try to physically remove him from the courts.

It is literally a case of the fox minding the chicken coop here and people need to start paying better attention to what's really going on. The misinformation is happening not just on the right—in fact, I would strongly contend that the lion's bulk share of it is actually coming from the left. 

The left, by the way, who have become literal masters of fictional tales selling their books as gospels of truth and verifiable and undeniable correctness to the masses for wide consumption, also bearing the arms against anyone who might question their truths so that they may pounce swiftly and unleash their terrorism of their own defamation and destruction of character—hopeful that eventually all real truth might finally see its own abolishment so that the only thing ever labeled as truth is what they badly want you to believe.

This Is NOT Obama's Economy

TO ALL OF THESE LIBERALS WHO ARE NOW TRYING TO LAY DOWN THE CLAIM THAT SOMEHOW FORMER PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE GREAT ECONOMIC STATE WE ARE IN—let me just say very clearly and with great emphasis...

That is just a total load of frigging hogwash!

The fact of the matter is that Barack Obama was not able to achieve 2% GDP growth over his entire presidency. Not just that, but when you add in the words—and these are not verbatim—that President Obama said, "This is the new normal folks," fully suggesting that we would never, as a nation, see 3% growth again, it sort of helps to make it all too clear that Barack Obama had no frigging clue how to grow the economy.

If the president had any confidence whatsoever that his economic policies would ever allow the American economy to see the light of day the way it is now his words may have been more something along the lines of, "Folks, these things take time, but stick with me and my policies and we can grow the American economy eventually."

He may have even been able to toss in a little add-in to say, "It may be well after I leave office for my policies to really get going."

But the fact of the matter is that it is Trump's economy which has laid the foundation for the exciting economic boom we are seeing. Barack Obama simply had nothing whatsoever to do with it.

Look, I am as fair and honest as anyone. We all know that presidents are more beneficiaries of economies, good or bad, than drivers of them. But we also all know that policies and other actions presidents make can either help or stall an economy.

When President Trump pulled back thousands of business crippling regulations, this helped businesses to open themselves up to new opportunities, and free themselves of other expenses which they were able to redirect into growing their businesses, and passing some of those cost savings on to employees, shareholders, and yes...to consumers as well.

You add in the major tax cuts the president made, and you have a recipe for growth, which is being proven every single day with the economy hitting the ceiling.

Jobs are plentiful, the labor participation rate is showing major signs of improvement, retail is doing great, the stock market is soaring...

These are a direct result of the Trump administration. NOT the Obama administration.

Is it any shock that the liberals would take this stance regarding the success of the Trump administration's economic policy? It shouldn't be if it is. When Obama could not make any inroads it was all Bush's fault. For an entire eight years the Obama administration could not do a thing to get the economy moving. And when Trump accomplished this task, of course it would not be due to Trump, but due to Obama.

Again. What a load of utter hogwash! Guys, I'm sorry. But you simply cannot have it both ways. You are full of crap. You know it. We know it. Everyone knows it!

THREATENING OUR ELECTED LEADERS SOLVES NOTHING

The American people are angry. After all the polls clearly indicated that the majority of the American people did not want this health care reform bill that ultimately was passed, it passed anyway. The president and the democrats in the Congress went forward clearly knowing that at least 52% of the population opposed the bill.

But is it appropriate to direct that anger at our elected leaders through death threats? Through violence? Should we decide that beating down our elected leaders is the answer? Of course not. We've got to get it together. We need to direct our anger appropriately and effectively. This kind of reaction will only make us look like crybaby buffoons.

Look, we said it when Bush was determined to be our president after all the debacle over chads and whatever else—it is what it is. So let's move on and get on with the business of the people and stop bickering about what is. We need to take our own advice. The deal is done, it stinks to high heaven, we all know that all too well, but here is where are, and now what we need to do is to focus on what we do next to appropriately and effectively make things better tomorrow.

The fact is that whatever we think about our current elected leaders, ultimately I think it is an absolutely fair statement to say that our system of government works. The Congress and the President of the United States got this one terribly wrong. Of that there is no debating. This big fucking deal, as the vice presdent so eloquently put it, is going to cost us far more than just an arm and a leg to be sure. We're in for one hell of a debt dealing ride that could make a swingset do loop the loops like a roller coaster. The dems clearly did this vote with their fingers crammed deep in their ears.

We cannot fairly measure our system of government based on this one bill, even if it's a big one. Even if it's a disastrous one. Literally sending our elected leaders to the guillotine may sound enticing, but...

We can vote. That's what we can do. And we'll have just such an opportunity coming around this November to send a loud and clear message that the American people are not happy with what's gone down. This is our proper discourse. Waving fists, raising bats, or sending idle threats against our elected officials when things don't go our way is not the answer. It's frustrating. At times it can be downright maddening. But to strongarm the process? Even if they did it?

How can we expect our elected officials to make the right choices and vote accordingly if they have to do so in fear? Fear only serves to taint and corrupt the system even further. Let our politicians fear their jobs when they get it wrong or ignore the people. Not their lives.

MORE OPINION ON THE HEALTH CARE BILL:

ALL WE NEED IS ANOTHER BIG "EFFING" DEAL
DESPITE IT ALL, HEALTH CARE BILL PASSES