BloggeRhythms

While presidential candidates on both sides trash and smear each other, the race may be over for Democrats altogether. Because the U.S. is a nation that traditionally, with a few exceptions, votes on its economy. 

And, although the stock market’s done quite well for some time now, those in the labor markets, or one’s having seen income raises curtailed or have had their workday shortened, are quite unhappy with the present outlook for their financial future. Furthermore, although the recent increases to minimum wages may have great appeal to those on the lowest rung of the employment ladder, those higher in the income strata don’t have politicians stumping for them. 

With that background in mind, here’s some confirmation of potential bad news for Democrats down the line.  Paul Handley @yahoo.com, writes today: “The International Monetary Fund said Tuesday that the global economy faces wide-ranging threats from weak growth and rising protectionism, warning of possible "severe" damage should Britain quit the European Union. 

“The Fund cut its global forecast for the third straight quarter, saying economic activity has been "too slow for too long," and called for immediate action by the world's economic powers to shore up growth.” 

More specifically toward this coming November: “Most leading economies saw their growth projections cut back by 0.2 percentage points. The outlook for the United States -- hit by the impact of the strong dollar -- was trimmed to 2.4 percent this year, from 2.6 percent in January.” Which doesn’t bode well for any incumbents, especially those at the highest levels. 

As far as specific candidates are concerned, here’s an example of how quickly political winds can change. 

Back on January 24, 2016, Cruz was quoted in a realclearpolitics.com article via Drudge, talking about the major media, as follows: “CRUZ: Almost without exception they have a partisan agenda. And we understand - let's take a substantive issue: police officers. If you have one police officer somewhere who does something he shouldn't have, the press will breathlessly report on this terrible, horrible police officer and all the democratic politicians will jump in and demonize and vilify the cops. 

“Let me ask you something? How come the press doesn’t tell stories of heroism? 

“The great news is we don't live anymore in a world of three networks that have a stranglehold on information. We have got the internet. We have got the Drudge Report. We have got talk radio. We have got social media. We've got the ability to go directly around, and directly to the people.

Then just yesterday, James Hohmann @washingtonpost.com, also via Drudge, wrote: 

In a radio interview yesterday, the Texas senator ripped into Drudge as an arm of Donald Trump’s campaign. “In about the past month, the Drudge Report has basically become the attack site for the Trump campaign,” he told conservative host Mike Slater. “So every day they have the latest Trump attack. They’re directed at me. … Most days they have a six-month-old article that is some attack on me, and it’s whatever the Trump campaign is pushing that day will be the banner headline on Drudge.” 

“By the way, they no longer cover news,” Cruz added of Drudge. “When we win a state, suddenly the state doesn’t matter. You know Colorado — there was no red siren on Drudge when we won all 34 delegates in Colorado.” 

What’s truly amazing about Cruz’s change of gears is that, like everyone else in his business, the facts of the situations involved rarely, if ever, matter at all. In their world, anyone not backing them unconditionally is out to get them. Even those known to be predominately supportive. 

On another recurring favorite topic, Michael E. Kraft, a professor emeritus of political science and public and environmental affairs at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay wants to jail global-warming skeptics. 

@providencejournal.com, the retired professor opined: “Climate change deniers deserve punishment."

“Scientific findings and associated uncertainties should be scrutinized carefully and debated vigorously within the scientific community and among the public.

“However, denying the best scientific evidence we have is neither smart nor safe. It could lead to greater societal harm than if we had taken sensible action when reliable knowledge was first available.”

In trying to prove his point, Kraft presented an analogy between “climate science” and tobacco use, to wit: “Dismissal of well-established climate science has parallels to decades of debate over tobacco use and its effects on health. Tobacco companies long denied any causal relation between smoking and disease even when their own studies showed the opposite to be true.”

However, despite the effort expended to persuade his audience about global-warming's perils, as of mid-morning 1080 reader’s comments had been posted. A quick random search showed not one of them believing the professor or what he’d written. 

Here are a couple of samples: 

Bruce Goodmansen wrote: “Well, professor, this is exactly why you work on a college campus, for you are just too stupid to work anywhere else.”

Dave in MA added: “I'm sitting here on Wall Street with my swim bubble and flippers since Al Gore said downtown Manhattan would be under 12' of water by now. I've been here since 2001. Waiting . . . waiting . . . not wading. Not wading at all. It was pure science, or pure something else. He said it would happen so loudly in that movie he had to be right. Right? Maybe I should follow the money. Maybe we should look at where Prof. Climate is getting his money, which is really our money . . . still not wading . . . Wait, is that Al Gore's G5 flying overhead? Still not wading . . .”

Which leads one to think that, perhaps, if the professor received the same kind of disbelief from his students in class, that may be why he chose to become an “emeritus.”

Bringing us to today’s update on Bill Clinton's wife.

Erin Durkin @nydailynews.com writes today: “Mayor de Blasio and Hillary Clinton appeared on stage together, their comic turn became a tragic gaffe. 

“In a skit at Saturday night’s Inner Circle show, Clinton joined de Blasio as a surprise guest and ribbed him for delaying his endorsement of her presidential campaign. 

“Their big moment became a big blunder when a tasteless joke — built off the stereotype that black people are chronically late — fell flat. 

“Thanks for the endorsement. Took you long enough,” Clinton deadpanned.   

“Sorry, Hillary. I was running on C.P. Time,” de Blasio replied, riffing on the phrase “colored people time,” meaning always late. 

“Hamilton” star Leslie Odom Jr., who is black and plays Aaron Burr in the hit production, addressed the mayor from the stage. 

“That’s not — I don’t like jokes like that, Bill,” Odom said. 

“Clinton then stepped in to complete the brief gaggable gag with an assurance that her belated supporter meant, “‘Cautious Politician Time.’ I’ve been there.” 

“All three were in on the sketch at the annual charity show put on by the New York press corps to roast the mayor.  

While the skit itself was inane, childish and not worth discussion, the New York Daily News hit the ball out of the park with a front page photo that will likely earn well-deserved major national coverage.

As opposed to the banal skit, the newspaper cover was actually quite amusing. Which goes to support the premise that all good humor has a ring of truth to it. 

It also brings up the ongoing question again: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?    

That’s it for today folks.   

Adios