BloggeRhythms

Yesterday it was mentioned here that while Trump had won two recent major polls against Bill Clinton’s wife, the only poll won by her was conducted by CBS News/NY Times.

 

And now this morning, Paul Bedard @washingtonexaminer.com, writes: “It's not the headline, and it takes 219 words to get there, but a new Washington Post poll on the presidential race reveals that Republican Donald Trump leads Democrat Hillary Clinton among registered voters 46 percent to 44 percent. 

Then, farther along in the Post's story about the poll is this paragraph: 

"At this point, the two candidates are in a statistical dead heat among registered voters, with Trump favored by 46 percent and Clinton favored by 44 percent. That represents an 11-point shift toward the presumptive Republican nominee since March. Among all adults, Clinton holds a six-point lead (48 percent to 42 percent), down from 18 points in March."

“It is the first time Trump has vaulted over Clinton in the poll and shows the advancement of the New York businessman over the past six months.” 

Which goes to confirm once more what’s been said here quite often in the past. The more familiar voters become with Bill Clinton’s wife, the more they seek an alternative. And it doesn't really matter who that alternative is. Just ask Obama about that one. 

On another favorite topic Kerry Sheridan @yahoo.com, writes about a new project called “Climate Feedback.”  In the past year, a French scientist living in California has critiqued climate change stories in the New York Times, Rolling Stone, the Telegraph, Forbes magazine, the Wall Street Journal and more. 

“Interested readers can visit the website ClimateFeedback.org to see what climate scientists thought of the original article. 

“The site uses web annotation software to enable line-by-line critiques from more than 100 volunteer scientists, pointing out what they see as errors, falsehoods and misrepresentations. 

“Founder Emmanuel Vincent, 31, said the project is about communication, not activism. 

"We see it as a scientific endeavor," said Vincent, who is from the southern French village of Lignan sur Orb, near Montpellier, and works as a project scientist at the University of California, Merced. 

"We try to be neutral and explain the science and why some people get it wrong in the media." 

221 reader comments follow the article. All are well-written, properly punctuated and logical, with none of the typical hostility shown by typical, ranting dissenters. As a result, the comments say more than the article, are all in agreement that the “global warming” movement is basically a fraud, and are certainly well-worth reading.   

Here’s a link to the article: https://www.yahoo.com/news/climate-feedback-allows-scientists-correct-media-errors-031549253.html

And now, today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife. 

In an exclusive interview withy Matthew Boyle of Breitbart News @breitbart.com, Trump told Breitbart News that the difference between his immigration plan and Clinton’s plan is that he will actually secure America whereas Clinton will leave the border wide open. 

Trump said: “We’re going to have very strong borders, and people can come into the country, but they have to come in legally. They have to come in legally. And the Syrians, we won’t take them, because we don’t know who they are and where they’re from. They could be ISIS. So we won’t take them.” 

Mr. Boyle then writes: “Clinton, meanwhile, on her own website, does not even hide the fact that she supports a full-blown amnesty for all the illegal aliens inside America—and that she wants to expand President Barack Obama’s executive amnesty programs. Clinton’s website reads:

“As a senator, Hillary was a strong supporter of comprehensive immigration reform, cosponsoring Senator Ted Kennedy’s 2004 bill and supporting the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act in 2006 and 2007. She co-sponsored the DREAM Act in the Senate in 2003, 2005, and 2007 to give undocumented students who grew up in the U.S. a chance to contribute to our nation’s growth. As president, Hillary will fight for comprehensive immigration reform that provides a full and equal path to citizenship, treats every person with dignity, upholds the rule of law, protects our borders and national security, and brings millions of hardworking people into the formal economy.”

Furthermore, “She also says she would aim to expand those executive amnesty programs.

“If Congress continues its refusal to act on comprehensive immigration reform, Hillary will put in place a simple, straightforward, accessible system for parents of DREAMers and others with a history of service and contribution to their communities to be able to make their case and be eligible for deferred action as well,” Clinton’s website reads in the next section on immigration, entitled: “Do everything possible under the law to go further to protect families.” 

Thus, after reading and considering both candidates plans for immigrants, and sorting through the politicalese and gibberish it’s hard to see any difference between them, if there is one. 

As far as Trump’s concerned, he says: “We’re going to have very strong borders, and people can come into the country, but they have to come in legally.” 

On the other side, Clinton’s wife’s website says she “will fight for comprehensive immigration reform that provides a full and equal path to citizenship, treats every person with dignity, upholds the rule of law, protects our borders and national security, and brings millions of hardworking people into the formal economy.” 

Therefore, since both candidates state very clearly that anything  regarding immigrants must be done within the law, what’s the difference between them? The answer is, there is none, it’s only a question of semantics. 

Raising 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