Mediaboss Marketing

Not every city is a fan of innovation.

Jared Meyer, senior research fellow at the Foundation for Government Accountability and author of How Progressive Cities Fight Innovation, has conducted extensive national research on the impact of government regulation of innovative services.

Discussing the results of his studies, Meyer tells OneNewsNow the map is "all over the place" in terms of regulations on Uber and Airbnb.

Uber, launched in 2009,competes with cab companies by offering rides arranged by private drivers.Airbnb is an online room rental service that began in 2008.

Some cities completely outlaw renting out part of your home or apartment on Airbnb, and others enthusiastically embrace ride-sharing services like Uber and Lyft, explains Meyer. So it really depends on the city, and youre going to get tons of different regulations depending on where youre looking in the country.

Meyer says this inconsistent regulation is not happening only in progressive cities located in blue states.

For example, he recounts that in 2015 Nashville bowed to pressure from special interests in the hotel industry and organized labor by passing an ordinance that restricted residents freedom to rent out their homes.

Some states, meanwhile, have passed or are considering legislation to prevent cities from enacting restrictions that frown on new online services connecting buyers and sellers i.e., the sharing economy.

The sharing economy is something that Progressives should embrace, never mind that its just embracing changes in technology, continues Meyer. But what weve seen is that over the past few years, the battle lines have been drawn where we have proudly progressive mayors and city council members fighting back against these services, rather than wholeheartedly embracing them.

For too long, Meyer says, cities established policies that effectively created government monopolies on certain services, specifically with for-hire vehicles.

Concerning his study of such government monopolies, Meyer says private, for-hire transportation became a "luxury" enjoyed only by the wealthy.

Now, because Uber and Lyft were able to go around these decades-old antiquated regulations," says the researcher, "they brought that service truly to the 99 percent. So I would hope that if they went under, we would have a new competitor step in that would be able to serve even more people effectively and affordably.

The staff at Onenewsnow.com strives daily to bring you news from a biblical perspective. If you benefit from this platform and want others to know about it please consider a generous gift today.

We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article - NOT another reader's comments. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved.

Read the original post:
When innovation meets Progressives and pressure - OneNewsNow

A catastrophe is unfolding just south of the Wisconsin border. Illinois is going bankrupt.

The state has over $140 billion in unpaid debts and future pension benefit obligations without the resources to pay these obligations. It is so bad that Powerball is pulling out of Illinois because the state can't afford to pay the winners.

How did Illinois get in this fix? The answer is progressive politics and initiatives. For over 50 years Illinois has been run by progressives with their tax-and-spend philosophy. It hasn't worked. You cannot endlessly promise more and more benefits and programs without a means to pay for them and borrowing to cover the shortfall.

This is what progressives want for America and in many cases what we already have. In the near future, Illinois might default, or be forced to implement massive tax increases, and that won't be enough to protect the pensions of public employees across the state or pay all the bills.

So when people wax poetically about the wonderful nature of progressive ideology, just think about Illinois and you will see the terrible problems it brings.

Joseph Tripalin, McFarland

Originally posted here:
Progressive politics led to Illinois' plight -- Joseph Tripalin - Madison.com

Updated 5 hours ago

In Connecticut's Cromwell High School, a 15-year-old boy with a mustache is crushing female competitors in track and field, to the great dismay of the girls who have spent many intense days training hard.

This doesn't seem fair, does it?

Well, it does in the left's brave new world of fundamental transformation.

The boy, you see, calls himself a girl. That's his self-proclaimed gender identity. And all's fair in the bizarre universe of modern-day LGBTQ liberalism.

The Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference permits students and their schools to decide which teams they can join. The conference is abiding by state and federal laws mandating that students have the ability to compete on sports teams that accord with their public gender identity.

And Andraya Yearwood, a 15-year-old biological boy, identifies (at least for now) as a girl. And get this, sports fans: He's only a freshman. He could easily dominate the girls' meets for four years.

Too bad, ladies. You've come a long way, but liberalism's new world is erecting some brand-new obstacles to your progress.

The (real) girl who finished second to Andraya, a junior named Kate Hall, was tearful over her loss. It's frustrating, Hall said. But that's just the way it is now. I can't really say what I want to say, but there's not much I can do about it.

No, there's not. Kate doesn't want to be denounced as a hater, as an intolerant bigot toward LGBTQ persons.

Ditto for Hall's coach, Ben Bowne, who's no doubt terrified about saying anything that would bring him the enmity of nature's redefiners. The coach lamely told the Hartford Courant: Kate was emotional. She works really hard. She's a very competitive athlete. She hates losing to anybody.

As for the father of the transgender girl, he's fully on board the LGBTQ-liberal train. He apparently has been sufficiently indoctrinated into the modern progressive worldview and thus is tolerating no objections. He told the Hartford newspaper: If someone says, Why is your daughter running with the girls?' I say because she's my daughter, much like the reason your daughter is running with the girls. The dad barks: She's running exactly where she should be running.

The dad, of course, is merely mimicking the prevailing progressive zeitgeist. Note how he cleverly uses all the right liberal language to silence any critics who dare suggest this was an unfair race biased toward his daughter.

And good for him. The well-coached dad simply is taking a page from the bible of modern liberalism, The New York Times, which, in a breathtakingly hilarious February editorial titled Welcoming Transgender Boy Scouts, authoritatively stated: The Boy Scouts are recognizing transgender boys for what they genuinely are: boys.

So, liberals, if your daughters lose their track meets, or swim meets, or tennis tournaments, or golf tournaments, or whatever other sporting events to inherently stronger biological boys declaring themselves girls and perhaps lose scholarships in the process then suck it up and take one for the liberal team.

You've created this monster. And now you can live with it.

Paul Kengor is a professor of political science at Grove City College. His latest book is A Pope and a President: John Paul II, Ronald Reagan, and the Extraordinary Untold Story of the 20th Century.

'Star Wars': The ultimate morality tale

A better 'climate' for America

Recklessly exposing a CIA operative's identity

Jerry Brown, a CO2 kind of guy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

Penguins notebook: Defenseman Justin Schultz signs three-year deal

Penguins sign defenseman Matt Hunwick, goalie Antti Niemi

Pittsburgh embraces Furries invasion

Read the original:
When liberals punish girls - Tribune-Review

Im not sure that voters could be easily fooled by candidates who pretend to be what they are not. People may hear a politicians words, but most need to see evidence before casting their vote. That has never been more true than today, as people of faith see and are saddened that secularism is promoted in our schools and society. We want our leaders to truly represent us and our values.

BONNIE ONEIL NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF.

To the Editor:

The Democrats do not have a religion problem. Religion as practiced by the Republican Party is the problem. It has reduced religion to the primary issue of abortion. If you are against abortion or claim to be, as Donald Trump conveniently proclaimed during the campaign, that is enough to claim the mantle of religion. True, it also helps to be against selling wedding cakes to homosexuals and contraceptives to women.

The Republican Party cant seriously claim the mantle of social conservatism when its current standard-bearer, never known to be a churchgoer, publicly lived the playboy life and extolled the values of greed, rather than charity. Has the Republican Party heeded Pope Francis call for social justice, to care for the poor and the disabled, refugees and the environment? The answer is no. The Republican Party is, to be sure, pro life, but it is against the living.

ALAN KUSINITZ, NEW YORK

To the Editor:

Daniel K. Williams errs in criticizing Jon Ossoff for his reluctance to advance his religious beliefs during his campaign. Mr. Ossoff is an adherent of Reform Judaism, perhaps the most progressive faith in the United States. The Sixth District has a strong conservative Christian orientation, which is at odds with core tenets of Reform Judaism. The Sixth District includes Cobb County, where in 2002 high schools placed stickers saying evolution is a theory not a fact on biology textbooks.

Mr. Ossoffs opponents questioned his legitimacy because he lived outside the district and had an ethnic-sounding name. He rightly assumed that proclaiming his Jewish heritage might further undermine his viability.

ELLEN G. RAFSHOON BROOKHAVEN, GA.

To the Editor:

Daniel K. Williams accurately maps out the Democrats problem with religion, except for one thing: They do have a religion. Its called liberal-progressivism. Increasingly, modern, college-educated white Democrats worship at the altar of historical grievance, political correctness, censorship and seeking any evidence (no matter how remote) of having been oppressed. They even seek to identify with others oppression when they themselves have suffered little. (Talk about cultural appropriation.)

Their liturgy is stigmatizing the unconverted by calling them nasty names: Youre sexist, racist, homophobic, xenophobic. The Democrats cant win elections because most people reject the core values of liberal-progressivism. Why? Because at the heart of any great religion is a core belief in our common God-given humanity. The Democratic Party has become the party of division, name-calling and alienation.

THOMAS OHARE, BOSTON

To the Editor:

While I agree with Daniel K. Williamss assessment of the Democrats religious problem as a rhetorical device, I wonder when the vast majority of Americans are going to wake up to the fact that the Democratic Party and its candidates are actually living up to the tenets of every religious faith by caring for the poor and the destitute, pushing for health care for all, promoting a living wage, and advocating for civil rights and a clean environment. Its all too easy to spout religious platitudes, but by their fruits ye shall know them (Matthew 7:16).

JOANN D. CLAPS, RANDOLPH, N.J.

To the Editor:

Re Democrats Fume as Georgia Loss Deepens Discord (front page, June 22):

I understand the frustration in Democratic ranks after a disheartening eight months, but I disagree about the partys near-term prospects. A badly damaged Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by almost three million. Her losing the presidency hinged on only about 80,000 votes in three key states. Since then, motivated Democrats have outperformed the norm in congressional races in deep red territory, which bodes well for 2018.

My biggest concern in the next few years isnt the partys brand, although that needs work. Its the deepening rift between the partys left flank and the partys mainstream. Lets try to remember, Democrats, that were all in this together.

CASEY CONLEY, DOVER, N.H.

To the Editor:

There is a disheartening reality to the Democrats special election defeat in Georgia: There is seemingly nothing that can move President Trumps rabid base away from him and his Republican surrogates. It is simply unrealistic (and wishful thinking) to believe that people who were duped by Mr. Trumps false promises, oblivious to his ignorance and willing to overlook his glaring personal shortcomings will suddenly wake from their stupor and realize what they have done.

And the hope that there were at least a few Republicans in the House and the Senate principled and courageous enough to resist this disastrous presidency fades with each passing day.

One cant blame Democrats for desperately reaching in all directions, from changing their leadership to trying to relate to the fears of working men and women, to crystallizing their message on jobs, whatever that entails. The answer to the Democrats problems is elusive, but one thing should remain clear: The attacks on Mr. Trumps agenda, his ethics and his lack of fitness for the office of the presidency must be intense and unrelenting.

JAY ADOLF, NEW YORK

A version of this letter appears in print on July 2, 2017, on Page SR10 of the New York edition with the headline: Are the Democrats Too Secular?.

Link:
Are the Democrats Too Secular? - New York Times

WASHINGTON What do Democrats have in common with bars of soap?

For the purposes of developing their brands, plenty, according to David Srere.

As the co-CEO and chief strategy officer at the global brand agency firm Siegel+Gale, Srere says any entitys credibility, likability and staying power boils down to the same things: What do you stand for? How are you different? And why should anybody care?

It might be food for thought for Democrats around the country who are stuck in limbo trying to get back on top after a series of demoralizing defeats.

South Carolina Democrats, whose candidate Archie Parnell lost to Republican Ralph Norman in the 5th Congressional District special election by a mere 3.2 percentage points, are among those reeling.

But in South Carolina, there are obstacles as old as 30 years. The state is as conservative as ever. Through gerrymandering, Democratic voters are concentrated in a single congressional district represented by the state's only Democrat in Washington, U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn. All of state government is in GOP hands.

Pair this with years of financial neglect from the national Democratic Party and the faithful have been left to their own devices.

South Carolina Democrats have never, ever, relied on or waited for the national party to come in and help us, said S.C. Democratic Party Chairman Trav Robertson. Weve got the ability to organize, weve got the ability to train and teach and, most important, we have a message that, if we localize, well move voters in this state.

But South Carolina Democrats might be up against a bigger problem: Their party, at the national level, needs a better brand.

Bruce Newman, professor of marketing at DePaul University College of Business in Illinois, said the reinvention of any organization, including political parties, typically happens in four parts.

Step one: find good leaders, Newman said. Step two: find the right message. Step three: communicate that message effectively. And step four: Who is your competition? What are they talking about? How do you respond and how do you differentiate your message from theirs?

Heres a look at how Democrats in South Carolina are working to reverse their party's fortunes ahead of the midterm elections, and how they might take a page from a branding strategist's playbook.

Theres more to winning than just the messenger. But sometimes, when people dont have time to delve into the facts, a figurehead is the only thing that matters, said Craig Johnson, president of the Atlanta-based Matchstic branding agency.

At a certain point, someone makes a judgment call on which side theyre going to believe, and who do they trust, Johnson said. And really, thats what brands are. ... When its too much to break down and understand, do I trust Donald Trump? Or do I trust Hillary Clinton?

To the extent that all politics is local, Newman said any rebranding effort for Democrats must involve identifying leaders nationally but also locally.

Others, though, say little will change locally until theres a change in leadership nationally. They say House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi should step aside, arguing the liberal Californian represents a brand thats out of touch with moderate-to-conservative districts around the country, especially in the South.

In South Carolinas 1st Congressional District, just hours after announcing his bid to unseat Republican Mark Sanford, Democrat Joe Cunningham promised he would not support Pelosi for party leader, if elected.

Its kind of like a sports team and a head coach. Its not the head coachs fault, but when the team starts losing, they ultimately look for a new coach, Cunningham said. If a company experiences losses quarter after quarter ... the buck stops at the CEO.

Clyburn, the third-ranking member of House Democratic leadership, flatly dismissed Cunninghams strategy of disassociating himself with Pelosi. "That's stupid stuff," he said. "That's not going to connect with South Carolina Democratic voters.

Robertson said it is up to every individual campaign whether they wanted to wade into a national conversation about the sustainability of Pelosis tenure.

I think that weve got plenty other issues facing the citizens of South Carolina than to give a damn right now who the minority leader is in the United States Congress, he said. We have people who are going to die if Republicans get their way as it relates to health care.

As South Carolina Republicans succeed in nationalizing issues, Robertson said Democrats have to do better at localizing them. When Trump vilified German manufacturing at the expense of American production, for instance, Democrats needed to point to the business BMW has brought to the state.

And next year, Robertson continued, while were talking about rebranding something, we have to talk about how the Democrats are the ones who put in a middle class tax cut for people in this state.

In his campaign, Parnells message was that he would go to Washington to help simplify the tax code to make life easier for middle-class families.

The Democrats cant brand themselves as the anti-Trump, its just not going to work, Newman said. It has no positive message; it has no real meaning.

Democrats have a message, said Jaime Harrison, former S.C. Democratic Party chairman and now an associate chairman of the Democratic National Committee. The problem is, they aren't as disciplined as Republicans at communicating it.

"Say it, repeat; say it, repeat; say it, repeat," Harrison said of the GOP.

AJ Lenar, vice president for political campaigns at GMMB Communications, said Parnell ran a successful campaign because he found his message helping constituents through economic insecurity and doubled down.

Local brands are different than national brands, said Lenar, who is based in Greenville and oversaw all of Parnells digital advertising. Archie was an example of that when he was talking about local issues, keeping the national brand out of it.

Though Parnells background as a tax attorney was a good starting point, selling that to voters presented a challenge. Ultimately, his strategists settled on portraying Parnell as a non-politician, an awkward policy wonk with little natural charisma but an earnest desire to do good by voters.

In all four of his digital ads, Parnell said the following two lines: I know enough about the tax code to bore you to tears, and I dont have all the answers, but I will work every day to make your life better.

Lenar said that on Election Day, Republicans said they voted for Parnell because they "loved his ads."

"'Differentiation' is not a strategy that can be achieved by saying, 'I'm different,'" Srere stressed. "Differentiation really is finding something that sells really well and selling it every single day."

Harrison suggested Democrats need to "show, not tell," how they're different from Republicans.

One answer, Harrison said, would be for local parties, elected officials and political candidates to pool resources and host workshops to help voters learn job and resume-writing skills. In a nod to improving education opportunities, Sumter County Democrats host a yearly school supplies drive.

"This is how you start to change the brand, the perception," Harrison said. "It's not about changing our slogan, or even changing the things we fight for. People understand that. People have to start trusting that the image they see is the real thing before they believe it."

Harrison said it would take time. Marketing experts agree.

"Democrats need to find their story," Srere said. "And that's only the end of the beginning."

Read more from the original source:
The art of the rebrand: Can South Carolina Democrats change their image? - Charleston Post Courier