An article by the Editorial Board @investors.com, this morning sets
the stage for today.
The article refers to a “joint project of the American Press Institute and
the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, [which] finds the
American media’s popularity way down with that of Washington politicians. With
2,014 adults surveyed, only 6% expressed “a lot of confidence” in the press.
“That’s because they correctly view the major media as
virtually indistinguishable from that same political establishment.
“The public knows very well that most of the leading political reporters are
not the intrepid crusaders for truth they claim to be, that Robert Redford and
Dustin Hoffman played in “All the President’s Men,” but rather ideological
warriors devoted to one side winning and the other losing.”
And that premise became quite evident today. Whereas, headlines and reports
on FoxNews.com, would lead one to believe the Republican presidential
nomination has been just about been won by Trump. The same holds true for the
far more unbiased Drudge Report. Yet the numbers indicate something else
entirely.
While it’s true that Trump won his home state’s New York primary yesterday,
Cruz won in Texas, while Kasich took Ohio when those two home state races were
run. However, there’s another important factor to be considered before anointing Trump.
After yesterday’s win, Trump now has 844 delegates in total. Cruz, Kasich and
Rubio together have 861. Meaning Trump still hasn’t achieved a majority against
the field, with many more races left that aren’t nearly as favorable to him.
On the other side, although Bill’s wife has a considerable lead over Sanders,
that race isn’t finished either. The contest wasn’t a true runaway whereas,
Bill’s wife got 57.9% of the vote, but Sanders achieved a respectable 42.1%. Certainly not an embarrassing blowout for him.
Delegate-wise it’s also closer than any “media expert” expected, with Bill’s
wife now having 1443 in total. Yet, Sanders has 1223, far more than one would
have assumed just a short month ago.
Where Bill’s wife does have a commanding lead is in the “super” delegate
count. Yet, while the majority of the 712 super-delegates have declared support
for her, they could switch if she were to lose the lead in pledged delegates,
which are awarded based on election results. Thus, while Sanders is still a
long-shot by far, this race isn’t quite as “over” as biased media types claim it
is.
On another subject, yesterday it was mentioned here that it was likely that
Sanders knew quite little about fracking, although he claims to be vehemently
against it. At the same time, the economic value to the nation was
overlooked entirely by him. As was the harm being done to unhelpful foreign
nations by our capabilities to make the nation independent regarding oil
production.
And now today, Simeon Kerr and Elaine Moore @cnbc.com Financial
Times, report: “Saudi Arabia is raising $10bn from a consortium of global
banks as the kingdom embarks on its first international debt issuance in 25
years to counter dwindling oil revenues and reserves.
“The landmark five-year loan, a signal of Riyadh's newfound dependence on
foreign capital, opens the way for Saudi to launch its first international bond
issue. It comes as the sustained slump in crude encourages other Gulf
governments, such as Abu Dhabi, Qatar and Oman, to tap international bond
markets.”
Therefore, if Saudi Arabia finds itself forced to borrow in order to sustain
itself, and that information became available because of the funds they’re
seeking, how much trouble are their neighbors in who don’t publicize
their financial woes? The answer is, probably most of them.
Which means that, thanks in great part to fracking, oil prices are sinking to
levels that greatly affect many of those financially who wish to harm us and our
allies. And also indicates that those who take stands for purely political
purposes, such as Sanders, ought to first educate themselves before expounding
on subjects they know little to nothing about. And then explain to their
constituents what the truth really is, rather than pandering for votes.
And then, another unforced error's making the POTUS look like he’s been
fleeced again.
According to a story @latino.foxnews.com:”Weeks after President
Barack Obama’s historic trip to Cuba, officials from the Communist island have
ramped up their attacks on the U.S.
“On Monday, Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez called Obama's visit "an attack
on the foundation of our history, our culture and our symbols."
"Obama came here to dazzle the non-state sector, as if he wasn't the
representative of big corporations but the defender of hot dog vendors, of small
businesses in the United States, which he isn't," Rodriguez said.
“The foreign minister’s response came days after Cuba President Raul Castro
said that the United States is "the enemy" and warned Cubans to be vigilant
about the United States' efforts to undermine the Communist revolution,
according to Reuters.”
So, here again, one has to wonder where and how decisions are made in this
White House. Because the vast majority are beyond the ridiculous, as evidenced
by Cuba’s reaction to a presidential visit.
What’s more, if the Republicans weren’t doing such a miserable job selecting
candidates and finding a viable platform, there would be no way on Earth to
possibly lose the upcoming presidential race. And that’s because the POTUS has
been handing it to them for years now, continually compounding utterly
horrendous mistakes. But, sadly, in their own cause, Republicans find their own
ways to look more inept than he does.
Bringing us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.
Dan Balz @washingtonpost.com, writes about sinking poll numbers,
despite yesterday’s New York win, as follows:
“The damage to Clinton from her battle with Sanders is borne out in the
latest NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll. The longer this race has gone on, the
more she has shown vulnerabilities. The top-line number that caught the eyes of
so many analysts shows her now in a dead heat with Sanders nationally — ahead of
him by just two percentage points, 50 to 48 percent.”
Since October, when she had a 31-point advantage, her negative ratings have
been rising and now outweigh her positives by 24 points, according to the
NBC-Wall Street Journal poll.
The statistics are astounding: Her “image is at or near record lows among
major demographic groups. Among men, she is at minus 40. Among women, she is at
minus nine. Among whites, she is at minus 39. Among white women, she is at minus
25. Among white men, she is at minus 72.
“Minority voters have been the linchpin of Clinton’s nomination strategy and
were a key to her success in New York. Among African Americans nationally, the
NBC-Wall Street Journal poll shows her with a net positive of 51 points. But
that’s down 13 points from her first-quarter average and is about at her lowest
ever. Among Latinos, her net positive is just two points, down from plus 21
points during the first quarter.”
Bill McInturff, a Republican pollster who conducted the NBC-Wall Street
Journal poll with Democratic pollster Peter Hart said: “Her favorability among
whites at this point in the election cycle is worse than President Obama’s ever
has been, according to any conventional standard, this is a candidate who’s been
disqualified to be president [by the voters]. Her terrible numbers for months
have been masked because we have the one candidate in modern history who has
worse numbers. The spectacle of Donald Trump has gotten so much attention that
she’s slipped under the radar for what ought to be a real story. . . . Her
numbers have gone from terrible to historic and disqualifying.”
So, coming back to today’s theme, while the media present her as the
undeniable Democrat presidential candidate, the numbers indicate something else
altogether. And, although she very well might eventually win, the continuing
question arises 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
No comments:
Post a Comment