BloggeRhythms

A while ago it was posted here that as a practical reality, like everyone else the far left has no idea who floods over their wide-open Southern border either. Nonetheless, they’ve obviously been assuming that the mass of thankful illegal newcomers would undoubtedly vote Democrat one way or another, giving their party millions of votes far into the future, perhaps in overwhelming numbers.

While the left’s premise certainly makes sense, an air of uncertainty still exists regarding illegal's politics whereas crossing itself isn’t free. According to an April 2019 study by the Rand Corporation,” in 2017, sources estimated the cost at somewhere between $4,000 and $10,000. The commonly accepted range now falls between $6,000 and $10,000.” Which means crossers must have had some financial success as individuals and acquired substantial sums if bringing families. Decreasing the chances of their being indigent, easily malleable sheep, voting or otherwise.

And now on Tuesday, confirmation came that crossers certainly can be other than sure-fire leftist newcomers. According to Jack Gournell @newsmax.com: “Republicans gained a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday when Mayra Flores edged out Democrat Dan Sanchez in the Texas District 34 special election.”

Flores had 51% of the vote to Sanchez's 43%, flipping an 84% Hispanic Rio Grande Valley seat red. She herself, “was born in Burgos, Tamaulipas, to migrant farmworkers. She moved to the U.S. when she was six years old and became a U.S. citizen at 14. Her family often moved yearly throughout Texas during her childhood because of her and her parents' work picking cotton, which began in Memphis, Texas, when she was 13. She graduated from South Texas College in 2019,” according to Wikipedia.

So, here we have one more example of the far-lefts lacking intellect, as they continue to predicate policy on unproven assumption, having no method or intention to reverse innumerable mistakes in judgement. But today’s case is exceptional whereas, instead of unbridled invitation to future Democrat voters, they’re actually importing Republicans who’ll some day run them out of office altogether.

Regarding what the far-left has done to the Democrat party and the nation, appearing on "The Cats Roundtable," Sunday, Newt Gingrich didn’t tell host John Catsimatidis anything really new, but put several key issues into well-formed political perspective.

“Regarding the House Jan. 6 Select Committee's first public hearing, Gingrich said, "I watched the entire two-hour committee and I thought it was Stalinist, Soviet-era, totally rigged, totally phony. It was an embarrassment. It's not a congressional hearing. It was a propaganda device, and Americans should be enraged that they're being subjected to this kind of dishonesty."

Gingrich summed up the fuel crisis, saying: “Regarding the president's energy policy, Gingrich, in paraphrasing Biden, said, "'I don't know why the price of gas has gone up.' You have to be an idiot to not have figured out that if you do everything you can to cripple the oil and gas industries, the result is going to be much higher prices. Democrats are going to have to go home and explain why you can't afford food. You can't afford gasoline. You talk about electric cars? You're going to have blackouts in California this summer because they're closing down electric-generating stations. And they don't seem to understand that if you have an electric car, you need electricity. I know this is a big, bold idea."

And then, Gingrich described the lunacy of Progressive oil policy. “Commenting on the Biden administration's importing of foreign oil rather than the focusing of efforts to produce domestically, Gingrich said, "It is not right or left; it is 'crazy' and 'not crazy' ... We just did a survey and found that if you ask people, 'Is it important to restore the America that works?' 87% of the country just wants it to work. It's not liberal or conservative. It's 'nuts' versus 'reality.' What the Biden administration is doing on almost every front is closer to insanity than to a political philosophy."

And it’s in that last paragraph that while Gingrich truly and succinctly summarizes the nation’s overriding quandary of “nuts' versus reality”, it goes beyond that. Because the dilemma‘s incurable, coming down to conceptual capability versus the far left’s mindlessness.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms

According to www.statista.com/statistics, there were 168.31 million registered voters in the U.S., last counted in 2020. For last night’s Democrat anti-Trump promotion, Lindsey Ellefson reports @www.thewrap.com, “From 8 p.m. to 11 p.m. ET, Fox News garnered 2.431 million total average viewers, of whom 347,000 were in the demo, for a win across both metrics.

“In second place was MSNBC with 1.639 million total average viewers and an average of 264,000 demo viewers. CNN brought in 834,000 average primetime viewers with only 201,000 in the demo.”

Which means, statistically, less than 3% of voters tuned in to the anti-Trump rally on those 3 channels. Considering the effort, time, and money the left puts into trying to keep the former president from running against them, he must have them scared skinny. However, Democrat efforts don’t seem to matter very much to the voting public, audience size not particularly large.

Unwatched here, foxnews.com reports, “Committee Vice Chair Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., said while former President Trump did not call for help from the U.S. government to protect the Capitol, former Vice President Pence did.

“Cheney played audio from the deposition of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, who detailed his conversations with Pence on Jan. 6.

"He was very animated and he issued very explicit, very direct, unambiguous orders--there was no question about that," Milley said. "He was very animated, very direct, very firm."

“Milley said Pence urged then-Defense Secretary Christopher Miller to "get military down here, get the guard down here, put down this situation."

“In contrast, Milley shared his conversation with then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.

"He said, we have we have to kill the narrative that the vice president is making all the decisions we need to establish the narrative that, you know, that the president is still in charge and that things are steady or stable," Milley testified, recalling his conversation on Jan. 6, 2021 with Meadows. "That's something I immediately interpret that as politics, politics, politics, red flag for me personally."

“Cheney said "there's no doubt that President Trump was well aware of the violence as it developed."

"White House staff urged President Trump to intervene and call off the mob," Cheney said, presenting a document written while the attack was underway at the Capitol.

“The document was written by a member of the White House staff "advising what the president needed to say."

"Anyone who entered the Capitol without proper authority should leave immediately," the note Cheney presented read. "This is exactly what his supporters on Capitol Hill and nationwide were urging the president to do. He would not."

"You will hear that leaders on Capitol Hill begged the president for help, including Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy, who was 'scared,' and called multiple members of President Trump's family after he could not persuade the president himself," Cheney said.

"Not only did President Trump refuse to tell the mob to leave the Capitol, he placed no call to any element of the United States government to instruct that the Capitol be defended."

Then getting specific, Cheney said Trump “did not call his Secretary of Defense on January 6th. He did not talk to his attorney general. He did not talk to the Department of Homeland Security."

"President Trump gave no order to deploy the National Guard that day, and he made no effort to work with the Department of Justice to coordinate and display and deploy law enforcement assets," Cheney said.

And in her specificity regarding those the president “did not call, ”nowhere does she say, “He did not call Mike Pence.” Yet, it would seem quite logical that one leaving the presidency of the United States would be somewhat depressed about the happening and therefore delegated the task of Capitol defense to his Vice President.

In the same vein, Cheney’s premise that Trump’s preference not to place calls himself to protect the Capitol indicates some sort of insurrection, is another attempt to stitch and weave selected language together to prove a point. But in the long run, her efforts don’t likely matter all that much, because politically and audience-wise she’s pretty much talking to herself.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios 

BloggeRhythms

The so-called January 6 Committee is one more example of leftist's inability, or undesirability, to think things completely through. While there is no merit to this inquisition, it’s purely another attempt to politically harm or eliminate Donald Trump, what happens if they are successful?

Should Trump not run for the presidency again, for any reason, that would simply open the door for Florida Governor, Ron DeSantis, who in most ways is exactly like Trump in policymaking but far more personally popular.

If hard-leftist radicals need any confirmation of DeSantis’ capabilities, they need look no further than his state wherein their faction hasn’t made the slightest dent. To the opposite, Florida in general, and particularly during Covid, produced the best performance in the nation stimulating relocation there in droves.

According to Wikipedia, “Born in Jacksonville, DeSantis spent most of his childhood in Dunedin, Florida. He graduated from Yale University and Harvard Law School. DeSantis joined the United States Navy in 2004, where he was promoted to lieutenant before serving as an advisor to SEAL Team One and being deployed to Iraq in 2007. When he returned to the U.S. a year later, the U.S. Department of Justice appointed DeSantis to serve as a Special Assistant U.S. attorney at the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Middle District of Florida, a position he held until his honorable discharge in 2010”

First elected to Congress in 2012, he became a founding member of the Freedom Caucus and was a Trump ally. Frequently criticizing Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, he briefly ran for U.S. Senate in 2016 but withdrew when incumbent senator Rubio sought reelection.

DeSantis studied history at Yale University, captained the varsity baseball team, joining Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity. An outfielder, as a senior in 2001, he had the team's best batting average at .336. At Yale he worked a variety of jobs, including an electrician's assistant and a baseball camp coach, graduating in 2001 with a B.A. magna cum laude. After spending a year as a history teacher at the Darlington School, he attended Harvard Law School, graduating in 2005 with a Juris Doctor cum laude.

Policy-wise and administratively, Wikipedia says: “During the Republican primary, DeSantis emphasized his support for Trump by running an ad in which DeSantis taught his children how to "build the wall" and say, "Make America Great Again" and dressed one of his children in a red "Make America Great Again" jumper. Asked if he could name an issue where he disagreed with Trump, DeSantis did not identify one."

While DeSantis is the most likely candidate should there be a Trump withdrawal, another name right behind is Trump’s oldest child and namesake, Donald John Trump Jr, 45 years old. According to constitutions.com: “He is known for his compelling strategies and the ability to transform losing entities into moneymakers and is worth approximately $25m. He has written various business-related books. He is also known for his political stand on various topics. From time to time, he has been involved with television productions.”

If it's time for a female, one step further away we find: “Lara Trump, 38, according to theguardian.com, [A] former personal trainer and TV producer who married into the family in 2014 and became the face of the Trump campaign’s online visual content.

“She’s very charismatic, she understands retail politics well and has a natural instinct for politics,” Mercedes Schlapp, a Trump adviser, told the Times. “In North Carolina, in particular, she’s a household name and people know her. She worked really hard on the campaign and was very involved in a lot of decisions throughout.”

So, other than Trump loyalists being quite upset, policy-wise it really doesn’t matter very much should the January 6 Committee actually fabricate some way to prevent another presidential run. What the left will wind up facing is not only another Trump politically, but one likely desirable to far more of the electorate than Trump himself. But just like what Forrest Gump understood about life, when it comes to the hard-left, "Stupid is as stupid does."

That’s it for today folks.

Adios 

BloggeRhythms

Charlie McCarthy writes @newsmax.com: “[M]ultiple sources say the Club for Growth has regularly tested Trump v DeSantis in its polls in different states.”

"Through a spokesman, a Club official says Trump wins ‘handily’ in every state but Georgia."

“However, DeSantis defeated Trump 71% to 67% during the weekend in a GOP presidential straw poll among attendees of the Western Conservative Summit. No other candidate earned 30% support.

“DeSantis (38%) also beat Trump (32%) in a May 21 survey of Wisconsin GOP state convention straw poll voters.

“Last month, Ed Rollins, one-time campaign chairman for former President Ronald Reagan, and conservative activist Lilian Rodriguez-Baz helped launch a political action committee in DeSantis' honor.

“Florida Politics reported that DeSantis also had been competitive with Trump in prediction markets tracking the 2024 election.”

While either one would serve the nation tremendously well, as a Floridian it would be preferable for DeSantis to stay here.

And then reader, Miket, provided the perfect solution. “Trump Pres & DeSantis VP 2024. DeSantis 2028 & 2032.”

Larry Bell, quoted here often, is greatly appreciated because of compiled data he posts which when taken together, provide an astounding summary of damage done to the nation by the far-left. His article @newsmax.com on June 6, is titled: “How's Progressive Paradise Working Out for You So Far?”

Bell asks, “[W]hy do a vastly disproportionate number of crimes seem to be happening in progressive Democrat-controlled cities?”

“Of six notable examples for rising homicide rates, including Chicago, Baltimore, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Los Angeles and Indianapolis, victims in each were disproportionately Black, and all but two had cut police budgets through defund movements.

“This is occurring at a time when the same administration is inviting Mexican cartels to deliver fatal narcotics, juvenile sex slaves, and unvetted illegal immigrants — including known terrorists — across our open southern border to a neighborhood near you.

Bell then presents some staggering numbers. “U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in South Texas reported a 1,066% 2021 fiscal year increase in fentanyl seizures, a deadly drug. With no thanks to Biden actions halting wall construction and rescinding Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy that exempted most aliens from arrest and deportation, Border Patrol agents encountered more than 220,000 migrants at the border in April … the highest number reported since 2000.which, along with other synthetic opioids, led to more than 71,000 American deaths last year.”

Then covered is the incredible cost to the public resultant of the purely political, fictional climate change issue. Here Bell writes: “Following Germany’s failed Green Party model, Joe Biden’s war on fossil energy which provides about 80% of all U.S. electricity (compared with a paltry 4% from wind and solar combined) contributed to raising power costs by 11.1% last year. This extra expense (and unreliability) will hit this summer’s California homeowners who already pay 80% more per kilowatt-hour than the national average.

“Destructive Democrat energy policies add to the costs of virtually everything that must be grown, manufactured, and transported to American consumers.

Bell then provides his opinion, predicated on homework performed: “Seems to me that we are the ones getting the worst of it,” he writes, “while climate isn’t benefitting a bit.”

“The Northern Hemisphere was just as warm, or warmer, two thousand years ago during the Roman Warm Period when sandals became fashionable, and again, a thousand years ago during the Medieval Warm Period when Eric the Red and his Nordic Viking band raised sheep and goats on Greenland’s coastal grasslands.

“These events occurred long before the advent of the Industrial Revolution invented fossil-fueled smokestacks and SUVs. Since then, temperatures have been up and down, but overall, the past century has seen negligible difference … nothing like the theoretical climate models predicted.

“And no, if anyone bothers to check the records, extreme weather events have not become either more frequent or severe.”

Bell’s climate conclusions remind one of both Rush and Donald Trump, having that same opinion themselves. But as far as climate issues are concerned specifically, considering that one would have to be dumber than a tree stump to “buy” any of the Progressives beliefs in the first place, it’s not surprising that their leadership keeps selling any of their ridiculous gibberish to those they’ve conned already.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios   

BloggeRhythms

Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe told Newsmax’s Fran Beyer: The Sussman “verdict was disappointing because it was contrary to the evidence. Michael Sussman’s own text messages confirmed exactly what the government said, which is that he claimed to just be a private citizen coming in when he had a story about a connection between the Trump campaign server and a Russian bank, which was clearly false, when the evidence clearly showed that he was acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign."

He went on to say: “the "bigger picture" is that though special counsel John Durham's prosecution may have lost this battle … "they're clearly winning the war."

"The most powerful testimony to come out of this was admissions by the Clinton campaign about the fact that the Trump-Russia collusion narrative was, in fact, approved by Hillary Clinton,” Ratcliffe said.

According to Ratcliffe, some people in the FBI misled the American people for political reasons.

"The leadership at the FBI has played a prominent role in the American people losing faith in that organization," he declared.

"Our law enforcement community was briefed on the fact that it was Hillary Clinton that created this entire Trump-Russia collusion narrative and that the FBI knew that from the beginning.”

"When that is the purpose of what your special counsel is to be, and you leave that out altogether, it shows that there was a deliberate effort here, unfortunately, on behalf of some folks in our law enforcement community to mislead the American people for political reasons," he said.

"That was deliberate, it was willful, it was political, it was intentional, and I think the American people see that now, and that's what's important about John Durham continuing … notwithstanding what individual juries will do."

Accountability, he said, however, "is going to have to come from the American people themselves in November in 2022 and in 2024 — in holding officials accountable from the Democratic Party that were involved and from the FBI that were involved that were clearly acting on behalf to advance a Democratic, progressive, liberal agenda."

At the same time from another source: “Ben Ashford and Daniel Bates write @www.dailymail.co.uk, “The family of a top advisor to Bill Clinton who admitted Jeffrey Epstein to the White House multiple times during his presidency is pulling out all the stops to keep details of his mysterious death becoming public.

 

“They have petitioned a judge to prevent pictures of Mark Middleton's death scene being released under the Freedom of Information Act.

“And now the local Arkansas sheriff is interpreting that to mean he can't talk or release any details of Middleton's May 7 suicide."

Middleton was “President Bill Clinton's special advisor who admitted Jeffrey Epstein to the White House seven of the at least 17 times the pedophile visited. Middleton had for decades run an air conditioning business in Little Rock but in the 1990s he was a special advisor to Clinton and finance director on his Presidential campaign.”

“The Clinton aide was also one of the many passengers to fly on Epstein's jet, known as the 'Lolita Express.”

Perry County Sheriff Scott Montgomery said “'He died from a self-inflicted shotgun wound to the chest. He found a tree and he pulled a table over there, and he got on that table, and he took an extension cord and put it around a limb, put it around his neck and he shot himself in the chest with a shotgun.

“It was very evident that the shotgun worked because there was not a lot of blood or anything on the scene. You can tell the shotgun blast was on his chest, you can tell that because there is a hole in the chest and pellets came out the back of his back. It was definitely self-inflicted in our opinion'.”

Quite a few of Bill Clinton's former associates have died over the years under mysterious circumstances, sparking a conspiracy theory known as the "Clinton Body Count."

“There is even a Wikipedia page that outlines the conspiracy.  It points the finger at Newsmax publisher Christopher Ruddy, Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Green and others for advancing the theory.

“The manner of death is diverse. Many died in small plane crashes, others committed suicide, some were shot. One dropped a barbell on his neck while exercising.

“The theory came to a head when Hillary Clinton was running for president in 2016 when five people died in a six-week span stretching from June 22 to August 2.

Former Clinton associate Larry Nichols told DailyMail.com then: ‘I’m not saying the Clintons kill people. I’m saying a lot of people around the Clintons turn up dead.’

Here’s what some readers posted:

Jusmeski wrote: "I just don't understand how this is acrobatically possible.”

MH903 wrote: “Which comes first  What is the logistical order of that feat?”

MeinNA commented: “This is why we need gun control! Hanging himself would've been sufficient, why did he have to also shoot himself in the chest with a shotgun?”

Bonnie Mincey posted: “How do you do both concurrently?”

Interesting details about the departed Clinton associates can be found included in the article. Here’s a link: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10882101/Family-late-Clinton-advisor-Mark-Middleton-block-release-files-relating-suicide.html#comments

All of which leads up to the most critical question for John Ratcliffe. Will he feel more self-fulfilled in seeing justice done regarding the Clinton’s or going down the same road as those listed among the: “Many others with links to Bill and Hillary Clinton [who] died in mysterious circumstances over the years.”

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms

As Lev Grossman wrote in The Magicians: “If there’s a single lesson that life teaches us, wishing doesn’t make it so.” Something that should be learned by Progressives in Congress.

Michael Goodwin, quite correct as usual on Saturday, June 4, writes about how The Gray Lady, the New York Times, is finally admitting the nation’s crime wave is out of control, requiring confrontation. Reiterating the newspaper’s agenda-setting role for the left, he believes “this one has the potential to be immediately consequential.”

The most amazing part of Goodwin’s analysis is where major complaints are now coming from. Headlined, ’Democrats Are Feeling The Pressure On Crime From Their Own Base,’ stressed is what he calls “police reform” giving way to a plague of violence, one of the biggest pushes for change now “largely from people of color.” 

“Citing Dem campaigns in Baltimore, Atlanta, San Francisco, and Seattle,” another reporter, Alexander Burns, concludes that motivation is not just Republican attacks but rather “mounting outcry from Black, Hispanic and Asian-American communities.” 

Often mentioned before, the far-left consistently demonstrates extremely limited intellect, habitually creating or promoting issues appearing worthwhile to them at the outset, but eventually blowing irreparable holes in their platform due to irrationality.

Combined short-sightedness and stupidity could not be seen more clearly than the current war on fossil-fuels, shutting down production with no viable replacement. As a result, their agenda will be terminated completely when Republicans take back control of Congress in November. Simply because the far-left’s political hatred always outweighs even the smallest indication of plain old common sense.

Far-left demand for police reform has enabled crime to rise across the nation in Democrat controlled populations, not even considering that one's most harmed are “largely people of color.” Outcry’s now come "from Black, Hispanic and Asian-American communities.“  With more of those areas now also voting Republican in far larger numbers.

Another long-range problem for the far-left stems from open-borders. Leadership apparently not considering that many of those freely entering the country are likely to succeed financially, one way or another. And when that happens, just like the minorities complaining about far-left crime policy today, they too will most like vote Republican in the future.

Thus, the real problem for the far-left is a failure to comprehend the American Dream themselves. Resulting in a consistent striving to bring third-world political theory to a population not only succeeding quite well in a free society, but strongly desiring to do so.

Another probable statistical problem for the far-left comes down to sheer arithmetic. “Gallup's latest update on lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender identification finds 5.6% of U.S. adults identifying as LGBT. The current estimate is up from 4.5% in Gallup's previous update based on 2017 data.”

“Currently, 86.7% of Americans say they are heterosexual or straight, and 7.6% do not answer the question about their sexual orientation. Gallup's 2012-2017 data had roughly 5% "no opinion" responses.

“More than half of LGBT adults (54.6%) identify as bisexual. About a quarter (24.5%) say they are gay, with 11.7% identifying as lesbian and 11.3% as transgender.”

Breaking the data down further, if only 24.5% of gays are truly so, that means there are roughly a miniscule 1.37% LGBT’s in the total population. Nonetheless, where they’ve evidently situated themselves has provided voluminous influence. An example of which surfaced routinely while researching statistics.

Advice is given to teachers, as follows:

5 Things You Can Do to Support Your LGBTQ Students

1. Post Safe Space Signs. You can designate your classroom a "safe zone" through stickers or posters on your classroom door. ...
2. Start an LGBTQ Organization at Your School. ...
3. Stand Up Against Homophobia. ...
4. Integrate LGBTQ Topics into the Curriculum. ...
5. Pursue Professional Development.

Taken purely on face value of the language itself, it seems there’s a definitive effort to promote LGBTQ as if it were a cause, up to and including “Stand[ing] Up Against Homophobia.”

The statistics also suggest perhaps why teachers groups and unions were so much against parental involvement in curriculum and subject matter covered in classrooms. Particularly during Covid when now housebound parents were able to see, perhaps for the first time, what was being promoted to their offspring in public schools. In fact, it was curricula like the preceding that helped elect Glenn Youngkin as Republican Governor of Virginia. He strongly supported opening classrooms to parental observation and review of curricula.

Thus, what’s occurring at present is increasing deterioration of the far-left’s platform as it deconstructs issue by issue. Out-of-control crime waves in strongly Democrat cities highlighted today, along with exposure of out of proportion LGBTQ influence in public schools. As at the same time, illegal border crossings continually mount as purposeless rise in the cost of oil spurs run-away inflation.

All of which goes back to Lev Grossman’s opening comment today from The Magicians: “If there’s a single lesson that life teaches us, wishing doesn’t make it so.” Already true to a great extent for the far-left, it will be proven undeniably in November when Republican hordes will show up at voting booths everywhere across the nation.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

 

 

BloggeRhythms

Several times over the past couple of years, Rush’s thoughts were posted concerning his belief that some kind of national split or separation was increasingly possible, today’s political left and right having such dramatically different credos and objectives. He had no specifics about what form the split would take, only that it seemed logically imminent.

And now, today, Geoff Earle, Deputy U.S. Political Editor for DailyMail.com, writes: “A new poll shows 44 percent of Americans believe the nation is headed toward another civil war – with a majority of Republicans believing it will happen.

“The data comes in a new poll by the Southern Poverty Law Center, which also found support for the 'Great Replacement Theory' referenced by the shooter who opened fire in a Buffalo supermarket last month.

“A total of 44 percent agree with the statement that the nation 'seems headed toward a civil war in the near future,' according to the poll. That includes 53 per cent of Republicans and 39 per cent of Democrats.”

“The poll by the group and Tulchin Research came in late April, before the horrific mass shooting in Buffalo, where the assailant's digital postings were filled with conspiratorial and racist ramblings. Nearly seven in ten agreed that left wing politicians were deliberately driving economic changes to gain power by 'replacing more conservative white voters' – terminology that suggests people are being 'replaced' by non-white voters coming into the country. 

'What we found was a great deal of hostility for people on the other side of the political aisle,' according to SPLC. 'A majority of both Republicans and Democrats believe their political opponents pose a threat to the country and want to harm their political opponents. That kind of animosity could fuel partisan violence.”

The poll results adding substance to Rush’s predictions, unfamiliarity led to homework on both Southern Poverty Law Center and Tulchin Research. According to Wikipedia: “The Southern Poverty Law Center is an American nonprofit legal advocacy organization specializing in civil rights and public interest litigation. Based in Montgomery, Alabama, it is known for its legal cases against white supremacist groups, its classification of hate groups and other extremist organizations, and for promoting tolerance education programs. It was founded by Morris Dees, Joseph J. Levin Jr., and Julian Bond in 1971 as a civil rights law firm in Montgomery, Alabama. Bond served as president of the board between 1971 and 1979.”

As for Tulchin, “In March 2010, Tulchin Research was named as the top new Democratic political consulting firm of the year by the American Association of Political Consultants.”

While discovery of both organizations makeup indicates a likelihood of strong bias, there is still considerable probability of validity to their findings. That led to further research on the topics of potential national separation and polling itself.

First comes a long and somewhat complex response from a reader, Lewis Lester, providing quite helpful background on the subject: “It’s unfortunate that polling can’t include an algorithm that accounts for increased or decreased support that is irrelevant. About half of Mr. Trumps poll improvement seems to be in places where it will not make any difference. We learned from 2016 that elections are decided by very specific conditions. We learned that you can take a state like Michigan concentrating on a number of key counties. This is to say the static vote generally remains the same in counties that have been red or blue for three contiguous Congressional elections by more than 10%. A congressional election has a maximum number of voters and has an historic turnout tracking number.

“Some districts actually have weak turnout because the “winner assumption“ is somewhat firm.

“In Michigan for example there are counties that would respond to a National poll but feel there is no need to vote, when you use these factors you will find that the more solid the district the less likely to vote. For about 20 years Republicans convinced voters to vote even though the vote could be hopeless or the vote could be surplus. While the polling is likely accurate and interesting it is becoming less predictive because of these intense micro conditions not being accounted for, someday we will be able to use a bank of questions to find areas that are susceptible to change or as the Trump/Russia group found out susceptible to manipulation.

“Micro lying is the only way to describe what happened.

“The base data was stolen from DNC voters lists, and the issues were researched to misrepresent the facts in a specific fashion to change voters preferences. With the internet you can codify 10 issues and then find the voters that would be responsive. The idea is to not effect specific voters but to find the pockets of voters susceptible to one or two of the specific issues from the 10 different manipulations.”

Thus, what reader Lester is saying is that cleverly timed or placed polling data can be employed to affect voter interest or turnout, thereby swinging electoral results effectively. With that empowerment carrying so much weight, it then becomes quite important as to whom exactly the pollster is.

Further research led to Nate Silver’s fivethirtyeight.com a “website that focuses on opinion poll analysis, politics, economics, and sports blogging. The website, which takes its name from the number of electors in the United States electoral college was founded on March 7, 2008, as a polling aggregation website with a blog created by analyst Nate Silver. In August 2010, the blog became a licensed feature of The New York Times online and renamed FiveThirtyEight: Nate Silver's Political Calculus.

Back on March 21, 2021, Silver wrote: “But while polling accuracy was mediocre in 2020, it also wasn’t any sort of historical outlier. The overall average error of 6.3 points in 2019-20 is only slightly worse than the average error across all polls since 1998, which is 6.0 points. There were also presidential years before the period our pollster ratings cover, such as in 1948 and 1980, when the polls exhibited notably larger errors than in 2020.”

Following that, Silver rated pollsters as follows:

What should provide Republicans some confidence and reassurance is that Rasmussen, stalwart pollster for them, is among the most reliably accurate in the nation. While at the same time, leftist leaning Quinnipiac, Monmouth and ABC News/The Washington Post are among the very worst.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios