Monday, August 17, 2020

BloggeRhythms

Attempting to make a point in yesterday’s entry, a seemingly complex governmental funding issue was reduced to simple English. It was then that the realization hit that if the president, or any other politician, desires the highest probability of being understood by the highest number of potential voters, the more fundamental the explanation, the better the chance the message will be grasped.  

Therefore, in the most basic of terms, as touched upon yesterday the question needing asking by Trump regarding the Democrat platform is that, although the entire scope of promises sounds marvelous, particularly to those needing financial support most, where will the funding come from?  

And that brings us back to rudiments having nothing to do with political philosophy whatsoever. While progressive change sounds particularly appealing to those having financial need by chance or by choice, without some form of income redistribution it simply can’t be afforded. Which is the point that growth and development practitioners, such as typical Republicans, much less conservatives, have to constantly hammer home in order to prevail. Because the entire cost of whatever is extended to any recipient for any reason comes directly out of the pocket of those earning any form of income that is taxable. What’s more, the Democrat platform not only makes no effort to disguise their “wealth” redistribution premise, leaders such as Cortez and Sanders proudly promote it.

Thus, barring some kind of presently unknown event or calamity, the probable outcome of the presidential election can reasonably be assumed. Are there more actual voters earning income that wish to have the government raise their taxes thereby redistributing their incomes, or less?

Taking the most elementary approach to predicting the likely victor, historic preferences will most probably apply. As of May 2020, Gallup polling found that 31% of Americans identified as Democrats, 25% identified as Republican, and 40% as Independent. Meaning that only 31% of voters comprise the most probable maximum attainable for leftist candidates. However, according to Pew Research, while 47% of Democratic and Democratic-leaning registered voters identify as liberal or very liberal, 51% identify as moderate, conservative, or very conservative.

That means in actuality, whereas approximately half of the reported 31% Democrats identified themselves as being moderate, conservative, or very conservative, the hard left’s probable maximum voter target reduces to somewhere around 15% of all voters.

Therefore, were it not for the hard-core left-controlled major media influencing what, how and where so-called “news” is disseminated, in actuality the more the Democrat redistribution is promoted, the more their electoral chances sink.

Returning us to today’s fundamental premise that the more things are reduced to easily understood fundamentals, the higher the probability of their being understood.

That’s it for today folks. 

Adios 

No comments:

Post a Comment