Mediaboss Marketing

|

Posted: May 27, 2017 12:01 AM

"We are living in an interminable succession of absurdities imposed by the myopic logic of short-term thinking." -- Jacques Cousteau

Facts dont care about your feelings. Ben Shapiro

Like a crack addict who cant seem to think about anything other than his next fix, liberals cant seem to think about anything but spewing their emotions at the world. They may be reflexively saying something that makes them feel compassionate, outraged, sensitive or angry, but liberals usually seem to be caught in the grip of some strong emotion.

Of course, it goes without saying that emotion unmoored from logic produces a lot of warped views, but it also mires a person in short term thinking.if you could even call it that. Because when youre emotional, most of the time youre not thinking; youre reacting based on your feels. This is where a lot of liberals live 24 x 7 and so, its not shocking that their behavior is so thoughtless.

Take rock star Katy Perrys reaction to the Manchester bombing, "No barriers, no borders, we all just need to coexist. So, what does co-existing with radical Islamic terrorists who want to kill you mean? Is Katy Perry going to invite ISIS terrorists from Syria to bomb her next concert?

Can you imagine how bizarre the typical liberal reaction to terrorism must seem to the terrorists?

Terrorist: We want to kill you in the name of Allah because were good Muslims!

Liberal: No, youre not. Thats not what you believe.

Terrorist: Yes, it is.

Liberal: No, noyoure oppressed and probably upset about global warming.

Terrorist: Wait, what?

Liberal: Lets all co-exist!

Terrorist: How did you miss the entire, We want to kill you in the name of Allah thing? What is wrong with you?

Then there are the Trump Administration leaks. Undoubtedly, some of the leaks inside the Trump Administration are coming from his staff, but others appear to be coming from the deep state. In other words, Democratic holdovers in the government bureaucracy are leaking information to the press in order to attempt to sabotage a rival political party. Obviously, these leakers are so consumed with their hatred for Trump that they feel politically motivated leaks are justifiable. Except whats going to almost inevitably happen once a Democrat gets back into office? Republicans in the deep state are now going to leak things in an attempt to embarrass him.

Liberals are so overwrought with emotion that they dont get the idea that theyre setting precedents when they do these sort of things. Its like the shock and surprise they experienced when they used the nuclear option to keep Republicans from blocking Barack Obamas cabinet appointments, only to find that it also meant they couldnt stop Trumps cabinet appointments. Wait, you mean that applies to liberals, too? Yes, and those leaks? The next Democrat President is likely to be undermined in exactly the same way.

Look at the liberal threats and violence at universities that have become a regular occurrence. At worst, liberals riot when people they disagree with speak on college campuses and at best, they make threats and do everything they can to rob conservative speakers of their First Amendment rights. Liberals are so supportive of this kind of thing that the police in liberal cities or on liberal campuses refuse to stop the rioting or disruptions.

In other words, conservatives no longer get the same protection from the police. Even illegal aliens are treated better by the police on campuses controlled by liberals. So, when thats the case, is anyone surprised to see that someone like Based Stick Man was warmly received by conservatives for breaking a stick over a violent ANTIFA protestors head? It wouldnt surprise me if we start seeing armed gangs of conservatives policing marches to protect other people on the Right from armed gangs of liberals since the Left has convinced the police not to do it. This is the world liberals are creating with their short term thinking: one where both sides of the political argument will have armed factions at political rallies. How healthy does that sound for the country?

Liberals do the same thing on the deficit. Supporting that program makes me feel good! Spend somebody elses money on it and I dont like thinking about the debt; so just ignore that.

They did it with Obamacare. They lied about the bill, assumed no one would recognize they were misled to when the bill became law and cared nothing about creating an expensive new entitlement program when the country is drowning in debt.

They get upset that Trump actually told NATO that if were going to be in a military alliance, then the nations involved will have to spend enough on their militaries so that they field an effective military force. How dare Trump try to make NATO useful again!

Theyre so blinded by their emotions that theyll even rank Hillary Clinton as the 6th most beautiful woman on the planet. Seriously.

It is impossible to competently govern a nation based on pure emotion and short term thinking. Additionally as a practical matter, its impossible to cut a deal with people whose entire rationale for doing things is, A celebrity told me what I should believe and now I have to do it or I heard a sad story yesterday; so everything has changed. At some point, liberals have to engage in some long term thinking that goes beyond, As long as were in charge, everything we do is okay, or our country is going to get dragged down the tubes along with them.

Obama-Appointed Federal Judge Tosses Benghazi Families'Lawsuit Against Hillary Clinton

Read the original:
How Liberal Short-Term Thinking Is Destroying America - Townhall

OTTAWA Even before Conservatives began counting the ballots, the ruling Liberals set out to frame the new Opposition leader as a far-right extremist.

Only trouble was, the relentless barrage of email missives from Liberal headquarters in the days and hours leading up to Saturday's vote were aimed largely at Maxime Bernier, the front-runner and presumed winner of the marathon Conservative leadership race.

Tory party members may have thought they'd nipped that strategy in the bud when, on the 13th and final ballot, they opted by the thinnest of margins for an ostensibly safer choice: the cherubic, genial, bland Andrew Scheer, former Speaker of the House of Commons.

But the outcome hasn't substantially changed the governing party's narrative.

"If you look at it, at the end of the day it was a contest between the far-right social Conservatives and the far-right economic Conservatives and the far-right social Conservatives won the day," summed up Quebec Liberal MP Pablo Rodriguez.

Liberals had been salivating at the prospect of taking on Bernier in the 2019 election, an unabashed libertarian who would, they warned, dismantle universal health care, abandon Canadian farmers by scrapping supply management and slash government programs by over one third.

Someone, moreover, who had voted Yes to Quebec independence in the 1995 referendum and had been booted from Stephen Harper's cabinet for leaving confidential cabinet documents at the home of a girlfriend with one-time connections to biker gangs.

Scheer does not present quite as tantalizing a target, Liberals privately admit. Unlike Bernier, he represents no radical change from the Harper era, he doesn't challenge Conservative orthodoxy and he enjoys considerable caucus support, which should make it easier to unite the troops behind him.

Still, he's not a moderate or a progressive in the vein of fifth-place finisher Michael Chong or A-listers like Peter MacKay and James Moore who didn't run, any of whom the Liberals believe might have presented more problems for the governing party.

And Liberals believe they have plenty of ammunition against Scheer, starting with the fact that he owes his squeaker victory over Bernier largely to the support of social conservatives who want to re-open divisive debates about abortion and same-sex marriage.

Scheer, a social conservative himself, insists he wants to focus on the issues that unite Conservatives, not divide them. But Rodriguez predicted he won't have much choice.

"He won because of the social conservative wing of the party so he will be under pressure to reopen those debates," Rodriguez said.

And then there's Scheer's own record when it comes to abortion rights, gay rights or, most recently, a transgender rights bill.

"Make no mistake about it, this is somebody who has voted against every single civil rights advancement in the last 25 years," said Toronto Liberal MP Adam Vaughan.

Worse, in Vaughan's view, Scheer is now promoting a new brand of social conservatism with his promise to cut off funding to universities that fail to protect free speech by allowing student protests to shut down things like pro-life events or pro-Israel guest speakers.

"He's somebody who wants to be in charge of the thought police," Vaughan scoffed.

"Academic freedom and the ability for universities to self-govern are as fundamental to the function of democracy as just about every other component of the democratic system. You cannot have free and open debate if you're being told who should talk and who shouldn't talk."

In addition to the social conservative wedge the Liberals intend to drive, they accuse Scheer of wanting to roll back the Trudeau government's middle-class tax cut, reward the wealthiest one per cent and forsake any plan to combat climate change.

In one respect, they think Scheer's narrow win over Bernier may have been a blessing in disguise, at least when it comes to Liberal fortunes in Quebec. While Bernier's opposition to supply management cost him support in his home province, he likely would have fared better in Quebec in a general election than Scheer.

"It's going to be a challenge for (Scheer) in Quebec," said Rodriguez. "Nobody knows him."

Moreover, he said Scheer is "so much to the right on social issues than where Quebecers are ... Those discussions (on abortion and same-sex marriage) are in the past for us."

There might be another bonus for the government in Scheer's upset. As a former Speaker who repeatedly called for decorum in the Commons, he may be less inclined to obstruct the Liberal agenda, which the Conservatives have been doing almost non-stop since January.

"I hope they're more constructive," said Rodriguez, the Liberal whip. "They can't be less than what they were, blocking, playing all kinds of games on a daily basis."

Continued here:
Liberals waste no time branding Scheer as social conservative extremist - Times Colonist

WASHINGTON Democrats lost a significant number of seats in federal and state elections during former President Barack Obamas two terms and on Sunday, Mayor Rahm Emanuel said it would take longer than 2018 to win them all back.

Still, Do I think were going to have a good year in 2018? Yes, Emanuel said, tempering his prediction. Do I think everythings going to be solved in a single cycle? Thats not how we got here, and its not going to be how we get out.

Emanuel looked ahead at the 2018 and 2020 contests when President Donald Trump will be up for re-election during an interview with Dana Bash on CNNs State of the Union.

While in the House of Representatives, Emanuel led the Democratic take-over in 2006, when he chaired the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Now the GOP controls the House, Senate and the White House.

Democrats are optimistic the Trump presidency will help them win back seats but so far Democrats have not claimed any victories in a handful of special elections since Trump took office. In Montana on Thursday, Trump did not prove the liability Democrats have been counting on.

Republican Greg Gianforte, who embraced Trump, kept the Montana at-large seat Republican, winning over Democrat Rob Quist despite facing late breaking assault charges for shoving a reporter.

Last February, Emanuel offered a gloomy prognosis for Democrats during a talk at Stanford Universitys School of Business.

Democrats are at the lowest level since 1928 in the House of Representatives and the lowest level since 1925 in the state houses. It is hard to imagine it getting lower, the mayor said.

It took us a long time to get this low. It aint gonna happen in 2018. Take a chill pill, man. Youve got to be in this for the long haul. And if you think its gonna be a quick turnaround like that, its not. You have to be part of this for the long haul. Youre gonna have a success here and a success here, and then youll build a critical mass. But its worth fighting for. And I think this country is worth fighting for, Emanuel said.

On Sunday, Emanuel was asked if Democrats could take back the House in 2018.

What I disagree with is an approach that assumes its only about one election. Were down, over the last 8 years, about 1,100 Democrats. Youre not going to solve it in 2018.

The Republicans didnt do what they did with just one election cycle. You have to have a long horizon, obviously, and work towards that, electing people at the local level, state houses, into Congress, Emanuel said.

The next showdown is June 20 in Georgia, for the vacancy created when Trump tapped now former Rep. Tom Price to be the Health and Human Services Secretary. Democrat Jon Ossoff is battling Republican Karen Handel.

As for Hillary Clinton running for president again in 2020 Emanuel said, I happen to love Hillary, and I think shes full of energy, and I happen to think theres a lot of time between now and the presidential election. She has to decide whether thats in her heart. We have a lot of time between now and the presidential election of 2020.

Hillary has a lot of offer. The core question is not whether I think she would be a good candidate. Its whether she wants to run.

Link:
Rahm: Democrats will have good year in 2018 but tough road ahead - Chicago Sun-Times

Donald Trump may be off to the worst start in presidential history, but recent polls and election results show Democrats are even more unpopular than he is. Whats wrong with the Democrats?

Recently I ran into a Democratic operative who was adamant that his dispirited partys stock is rising.

Its looking good, for example, that with all Trumps troubles, the donkey party finally will win enough seats in special elections this fall to take control of our states Legislature from the Republicans.

If Democrats cant win this year, he vowed, we should be abolished as a political party.

Might not be as far-fetched as it sounds.

I have written a lot in this space about the Republicans severe political problems. Locally, the GOP seems on the verge of going extinct in King County, which would all but assure the party couldnt win a race for statewide office such as governor.

Weve also covered at length President Donald Trumps unpopularity, with polls at record lows for a president in the first six months of his term.

But this past week the Democrats showed how they excel, above all, at eluding victory. Once again they demonstrated how theyre the party that never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

Somehow the Democrats lost a special election in Montana to a disliked interloper millionaire from New Jersey who body-slammed a reporter on the eve of election. Republican Charged with Assault Wins Montana Seat read the humiliating headlines.

Yes, Montana is a red state, but it has a Democratic governor and one Democratic U.S. senator. While half the vote or more was cast before the body-slamming incident, the Democrats shouldnt fool themselves: They would have lost anyway.

The bigger question is: Why are the Democrats, in this Terrible Time of Trump, still losing?

Recently a poll showed the Democrats have a favorability rating 9 points lowerthan Trumps. Another poll, by ABC News, found that 67 percent think Democrats are out of touch with regular people. Thats 10 points worse than Trump who himself is about as irregular of a person as you can get.

I havent seen Democrats doing much soul-searching about this. Marooned at sea, the plan seems to be to just ride the anti-Trump fervor wave all the way back into shore.

Warning: In Montana, this didnt work. The Republican candidate campaigned like he was Trumps mini-me, from appearing with Vice President Mike Pence to his attacks, in his case literally, on the press. The Democrat, for his part, barnstormed with Bernie Sanders.

Now, in Seattle, everyone loves Bernie. But who thought it was a good idea to parade around in a Montana general election with the socialist?

Democrats nevertheless seem pleased they lost Montana by less than expected which also is classic Democrat-think. No Republican ever says, Yay, we lost but we sure came close!

I dont know what ails the Democrats exactly. Most of their policy positions are more popular than the Republicans on budget issues, on health care, on about everything but fighting terrorism. Yet policy increasingly doesnt seem to matter in elections.

Last year when I wrote about how some longtime Democratic counties on the Washington coast had flipped to Republican for the first time in nearly a century, the former publisher of The Aberdeen Daily World, John Hughes, said Trumps success was due to radiating fear and loathing against Seattle liberals.

OK, I pushed back, but these counties are helped by the Democratic social programs the most.

He wrote back: Im not saying it makes any sense. Its all visceral.

It is all visceral these days. Something is culturally off about the way Democrats are communicating with large swaths of the American public. Must be frustrating, because nobody seems worse at communicating than Trump. Yet so far this year, in the federal campaigns, the Democrats keep right on losing.

Democrats probably will win control of our state Legislature this fall. But the partys problems outside of urban areas are deepening. Meanwhile Republicans arent even making a stab at contesting the most influential position this year in our urban area, King County executive.

That thing the Democratic operative said about his party being abolished? That was a joke. But in a sense, to both parties, its already started happening.

More:
Democrats are supposed to be fighting back, but they just keep losing - The Seattle Times

Since lastyears presidential election, progressives have consistently stated that President Donald Trumps election was not a victory for right-wing politics over progressive politics, but a victory for populism over the status quo. This, many have argued, is the key takeaway from 2016, which saw the Democratic Party lose control of all three branches of government, along with the majority of state legislatures and governorships.

Not surprisingly, the party establishment has yet to fully accept this verdict, and there remains an obstinateresistanceto populism within the Democratic Partys ranks. Indeed, many continue to insist that the 2016 election was a disaster because Democrats were too progressive, rather than beingtoo much in line with the Establishment.

This perspective was dealt yet another blow this week, however, when two relatively minor elections in the Northeast provided further confirmation that populism is the pragmatic way forward for Democrats.

The first was in New Yorks Long Island, where Christine Pellegrino, a progressive and Bernie Sanders delegate at last years Democratic National Convention, was elected to the New York State Assemblyon Tuesday. The significance here is that just six months ago, Donald Trump won by a whopping 23 points in this Republican-leaning suburban district, where Pellegrino becomes the first Democrat to hold the Assembly seat, according to Newsday. In the Nation, John Nicholssummed up this Berniecrat candidate and her successful populist campaign:

Pellegrino, a founding member of the group Long Island Activists, which was born out of the Bernie Sanders movement, ran an edgy anti-corruption campaign that recognized the mood of voters who are frustrated with politicians of both major parties. [And] it worked. The progressive won 58 percent of the vote her conservative foes 42 percent.

The second noteworthy election for Democrats took place in New Hampshire, where Edie DesMarais became the first Democrat to win astate House seat in Wolfeboro,a longtime Republican stronghold in the rural swing state.This successful effort is the first crack in the Republican majority, and the initial sign of Democratic energy translating into electoral victory in the aftermath of the 2016 election, declared the New Hampshire branch of the Democratic Party on its official website.

At first glance these two local elections may appear inconsequential, but their implications should be clear enough. These Democratic victories in Trump country obviously signal that a big electoral backlash reminiscent of 2010 may be upon us and that Trumps toxic brand is beginning to contaminate other Republican candidates. The presidents approval rating continues to drop to historic lows, and even his base about 30 percent of the electorate, give or take appears to be shrinking.The chaotic and scandal-ridden first months of Trumps presidency have generated widespread discontent, and there is no telling how big Democrats could win in the 2018 midterm elections.

Of course, it would be quite a gamble for Democrats to rely solely on Trumps repellent nature to propel them to victory next year. If we learned anything about political strategy from 2016, it is that going after a deplorable figure like Trump for being deplorablewill only get you so far, and that victory is doubtful without a compelling message that appeals to the populist spirit of today. (Though many Hillary Clinton loyalists have maintained that hercampaign had a strong and progressive message, consider this: The vast majority of Clinton campaign ads focused exclusively on personality rather than policy more so than for any other candidate going back to at least 2000.)

No matter how unpopular Trump gets and at this rate it wouldnt be surprising if his approval rating in the future dips below Congress notoriously low rating Democrats would be foolish to think they can revert to business as usual and still lead a successful resistance. If there is anything more anathema to the American electorate than the boorish president, it is the corrupt and arrogant Washington establishment.

The election of a Berniecrat like Pellegrino in a district that went overwhelmingly forTrump reveals the potential and popular appeal of left-wing populism. If the Democratic Party is smart, it will embrace Pellegrinos style of politics. Bold populism that puts working families issues front and center. This is how we win in Trump country, declared Bill Lipton, the state director of the Working Families Party, on Tuesday while commenting on Pellegrinos big win. This is the lesson for Democrats around the country.

Liptons views are supported by the facts. Progressive populism is the path to victory for Democrats in 2018 and 2020.And though populism on the right triumphed in 2016, more and more Americans are coming to see it as the political sham it is, without any real ideas about how to confront the problems we face today. With any luck, the disastrous Trump administration will serve to discredit reactionary populism for a generation. But anti-Establishment anger is unlikely to die down, as many Beltway insiders doubtless hope. As long as the government is dominated by big money and special interests, it seems likely that the Establishment will have to keep fending off popular revolt.

The week concludedwith a special election for the sole congressional seat in Montana between Republican Greg Gianforte and progressive Democrat Rob Quist. The race entered the national spotlight after Gianforte assaulted a reporter for the Guardian the day before the election. (This unlikely had much of an impact, however, as 70 percent of votes were cast early.) Gianforte came out on top, winning a seat Republicans have held for 24 years and counting, but it took millions of dollars in outside spending,and his victory was hardly decisive compared with Trumps 20-point win in the state last November. As the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committees chairman, Rep. Ben Lujn,put it after the election, Republicans should be worried that theyve had to dump so many dollars in to try to defend a district that they shouldnt have had to spend a penny in.

Trump was elected six months ago because he had the perfect opponent in Hillary Clinton, who personified the Washington establishment. Had the billionaire faced a genuine populist on the left, he would probably be at Trump Tower today, still tweeting impulsively about how the election had been rigged. This past week has signaled an approachingelectoral backlash that could dwarf the Tea Party backlash of2010.

But if Democrats hope to retake control of Congress and send Trump packing, they will have to do much more than point out the well-known characterflaws of the president, and galvanize millions of Americans into taking action with a bold,populist and progressive platform.

Go here to read the rest:
Berniecrats are winning in Trump country: Why populism is the pragmatic way forward for Democrats - Salon