• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

Is SRN “News” a Hate-Trump Center?

SRN is the headquaters for the distribution of a wide variety of American Conservative consciences and accomplishments….and errors.  Its greatest star of fame and influence in American world is our Dennis Prager…..according to my experience and belief.

Nearly every week since Donald Trump became America’s 45th President, SRN during its homeroom “news” broadcasts between Dennis world hours it announces and advertises “dirt” news to smear the President…….you know, the darker rooms of life which often overcome male politicians and Presidents of any ilk and/or talent.  SRN, however, is consistent in its weekly news segments from Washington ever since President Trump entered office.

Dennis Prager, SRN or no, by every measure is my favorite vocal American about good things American of anyone I have ever known during my 80 plus years of life.

Over 70% of today’s eligible and participating  Christian voters in 2016 voted Donald J. Trump for President…..May God forever bless every one  of them!!

SRN news seems excited, even  thrilled reporting these weekly negatives about President Trump.  It is advertised as a “Christian” outfit…..one perhaps unaware of any possibilities of human forgiveness in life.   “Shame!” is my response even if  the smears might be true.

“Handsome is as Handsome does!” was thrown at me by my Mother throughout the first fifteen years of my human aware life….:handsome” meaning good deeds rather than good haircuts.   My Lutheran background folks encouraged practicing forgiveness.

Despite my Church background, I cannot yet forgive SRN for its bigotry and/or poison  against the President, so I confine  my listening   hours to Dennis ONLY!

As much as I do respect the wonderful messages and persuasions of Our Dennis, Our Donald’s Presidency to save the USA from leftist CNN, MSNBC, PBS, New York Times, Soviet Brennan etc- type Marxist savagery,  is a greater cause  in the short run to restore Dennis’ democratic civility teachings to our world.

Today’s Fascistic Dem Party’s War Against Good and Decent Folk

There’s Much for Conservatives to Like in Brett Kavanaugh

(Both articles sent by Mark Waldeland.)
. . . the Left is already lining up for the cultural war over Kavanaugh, and he is more than prepared to acquit himself against their slings and arrows. His opinions on religious liberties and sexual privacy are well within the realm of mainstream conservativism. Indeed, as I’ve written, when he dissented on the highly novel issue of whether the federal government had an obligation to facilitate the abortion of an illegal-immigrant teenager detained at the border, Kavanaugh emphasized that the government “has permissible interests in favoring fetal life, protecting the best interests of a minor, and refraining from facilitating abortion” and that the Court should uphold “reasonable regulations” even when applying Supreme Court jurisprudence.
 
 

Don’t Worry, Conservatives — Everybody You Like Loves This Guy

Brett Kavanaugh is a fine pick for the Supreme Court.

Yes, Amy Coney Barrett might have triggered a clarifying culture war Ragnarök. Yes, at 53, if confirmed, Kavanaugh will probably be on the Court until “only” the 2040s.

Yes, some Democrats will point to Kavanaugh’s work with Ken Starr and his role in investigating the suicide of Vince Foster and attempt to demonize him with those long-ago tawdry chapters of presidential history. Yes, Kavanaugh is “establishment” in the sense that he worked on the Florida recount and in the Bush White House. Yes, twelve years on the D.C. Circuit Court mean he has a lot of rulings, and modern young progressive activists will attempt to pick out whichever ones seem surprising and paint him as some sort of cross between Torquemada and Pontius Pilate.

Please continue reading below:

Donald Trump….The Man in Charge!

Trump vs. the Democrats: Aces Galore!

by  Elad Hakim   at  American Thinker:

Have you ever watched a tennis match where the server consistently loses the point because the player returning the serve is simply better, smarter, and more talented? After a while, the server gets desperate and begins to throw everything over the net in the hopes that something works.

Welcome to the modern-day Democrat. Like the server, the Democrats have tried to throw everything against President Trump and/or Republicans, hoping that something would stop his/their momentum. Despite their efforts, each attempt has been swatted away and/or returned for an ace.

First, Democrats tried to pin President Trump’s triumphant election victory on alleged Russian collusion, the nature of which they have been unable to prove despite a long and costly investigation by Robert Mueller. To date, the investigation continues, additional money and resources are being wasted, and no evidence of collusion has been found. As a matter of fact, the investigation reeks of bias given the fact that the FBI agent who originally put the investigation into motion couldn’t stand the president (and wanted him to lose) as disclosed in the IG report.

After the tragic events in Parkland, the Democrats then turned their attention to the Second Amendment and politicized this tragedy because Republicans were not necessarily willing to severely limit their right to bear arms pursuant to the Second Amendment. In response, some Republicans, including Governor Rick Scott, addressed some of their concerns by signing new gun regulations. This was not enough for the Democrats, who called for an all-out ban on semi-automatic weapons (this would cover many handguns, etc. today). Fortunately, the Second Amendment remains strong. As Democrats saw that this issue was losing steam, they moved on.

Democrats then seized on the North Korea issue. President Trump was scheduled to meet the North Korean dictator in a history-making summit. While this was an incredible accomplishment, some Democrats criticized President Trump for making certain concessions during the negotiations and/or expressed displeasure with the way that the president described the release of several prisoners who were being detained by North Korea. Chuck Schumer stated:

“We can’t be fooled into giving the North Korean regime credit for turning (over) Americans that never should have been detained in the first place,” Schumer said. “It is so troubling to hear President Trump say that Kim Jong-Un treated the Americans excellently.”

Obviously, the summit took place and, while a lot of work remains to be done, the two countries have better diplomatic relations now than they had before President Trump took office. This was yet another Democratic misstep.

Democrats then turned to immigration as their next hot-topic issue. They argued that President Trump’s zero-tolerance policy tore kids away from their families. Of course, this was the law before President Trump took office, but that was a “technicality” that the left was willing to ignore to score political points. In response, President Trump issued an executive order keeping children and families who entered the country illegally together. Of course, even though this directly addressed their initial complaints, Democrats criticized the executive order because it allowed illegal immigrants to be held “indefinitely.” To their dismay, the Supreme Court also upheld President Trump’s travel ban. Once again, Democrats were on the losing end. They needed something else.

Recently, Justice Anthony Kennedy announced that he will be retiring from the Supreme Court. Upon hearing this, Democrats immediately began to attack President Trump’s potential list of nominees before he even narrowed down the list of prospects. For example, Chuck Schumer threatened that no Republican nominee would be confirmed from Trump’s list of twenty-five potential candidates.

Democrats started painting a picture that a Republican-leaning Supreme Court would overturn Rose v. Wade, take away a woman’s right to choose, limit the rights of immigrants, etc. President Trump is scheduled to announce his nominee on July 9, 2018. Even though Democrats will likely refuse to confirm a Republican nominee, Republicans, including Mitch McConnell, can always resort to the “nuclear” option if need be (this does not create good precedent, however). Time will tell what happens in this chapter.

Although this piece only covers several issues, many would argue that the set and match ended long ago. Democrats are suffering losses everywhere, including in the courts, within their own party (e.g. the #WalkAway movement), and in the important court of public opinion. Americans want results, which the president and Republicans are delivering.  So long as this continues, it should be game, set, and match for the president, Republicans, and their followers.

Mr. Hakim is a writer and a practicing attorney.  His articles have been published in the Palm Beach Post, Sun-Sentinel, Florida Jewish Journal, World Net Daily, American Thinker, and other online publications.   
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/07/trump_vs_the_democrats_aces_galore.html

Democrat Party’s CBS Claims Trump’s Down to Two Finalists

CBS: Trump’s Down To Two Finalists For SCOTUS Picks

by Ed Morrissey  at HotAir:

Will the nomination to replace Anthony Kennedy come sooner than expected? According to CBS News, Donald Trump has narrowed down his short list to two finalists. It’s between a longtime conservative favorite and … a more recent conservative favorite:

CBS News has learned that D.C. Circuit Court Judge Brett Kavanaugh and Chicago Circuit Court Judge Amy Coney Barrett are currently Mr. Trump’s leading contenders for the appointment to the nation’s highest court.

Kavanaugh and Barrett both appear on Mr. Trump’s list of 25 possible nominees and he’s said he plans to interview about half a dozen potential candidates before announcing his selection. …

Over the weekend, Mr. Trump was in Bedminster, New Jersey. Although the president hinted last week that he might meet with potential nominees there, CBS News has confirmed that no candidates were present on the weekend trip.

How seriously can we take this? There isn’t any reporting other than CBS to back up the idea that Trump has already narrowed his consideration to Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. Furthermore as Blair Guild notes in the follow-up, Nancy Cordes also reports that none of the contenders met with Trump over the weekend, so the interviews haven’t even yet begun. It seems unlikely that Trump would have narrowed down his list without conducting any interviews at all on a nomination that will be key to his presidential legacy. On the other hand, Ramesh Ponnuru apparently hears the same thing.

Perhaps Kavanaugh and Barrett are the “top contenders” going into the narrowing process because they’re archetypes of the two strategies Trump has open to him. Kavanaugh has extensive experience in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, is well known to conservative activists, and will be reliably conservative at the Supreme Court. That’s the recipe for the low-key strategy, or at least as low-key as this can get. Barrett exemplifies the in-your-face strategy — small amount of experience, solid conservative track record, and the ability to make this into a high-tension fight with Democrats, as her confirmation last year to the appellate court amply demonstrated. Trump’s long list has potential nominees that fit into either or both slots, but none personify the two tracks as well as these do.

One dark horse could be Raymond Kethledge in the Kavanaugh track. Despite his recent reversal in Carpenter (or perhaps in addition to it), conservatives have started to take note of his originalist bent and the potential sharp departure from Kennedy that it might take on the Supreme Court. Ed Whelan points out Kethledge’s textual approach to the separation of powers, but his hostility to Chevron might put him on the Barrett track with Senate Democrats:

Judge Kethledge’s views on Chevron originate with the text of the Constitution. As he has explained, “Article III of the Constitution vests in Article III courts ‘[t]he judicial Power of the United States’—which means not some of it, but all of it.” Raymond M. Kethledge, Ambiguities and Agency Cases: Reflections After (Almost) Ten Years on the Bench, 70 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 315, 323 (2017). The Framers agreed: “Hamilton said in Federalist No. 78 that ‘[t]he interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts,’” and “Chief Justice Marshall said almost verbatim the same thing in Marbury v. Madison, with all but an exclamation point at the end.” Id. Under Chevron, however, the interpretation of an ambiguous statute “becomes the province of an executive agency.” Id. “One may fairly ask, therefore, whether the doctrine allocates core judicial power to the executive—or perhaps simply blocks the exercise of judicial power in cases where the doctrine applies.” Ambiguities and Agency Cases at 323. …

Some have tried to sidestep the conflict between Chevron and Article III by arguing that agencies are not really “interpreting” ambiguous statutes; they are making policy judgments that have the force of law. To be sure, this way of thinking has one advantage—it better describes how agencies often go about their business. As Judge Kethledge has recognized, agencies that ask for deference often are “not trying to answer the same question that [courts] are.” Ambiguities and Agency Cases at 323. When courts interpret statutes, they look (or should look) for the “best objective interpretation” of the text: in other words, “the meaning that the citizens bound by the law would have ascribed to it at the time it was approved.” Ambiguities and Agency Cases at 316, 323. When agencies “interpret” statutes, however, they are often looking for a “colorable interpretation that will support the policy result that [they] want[] to reach.” Id. at 323.

Although this approach better describes reality, it simply trades one separation-of-powers problem for another. When judges read their policy preferences into a statute, Judge Kethledge explains, “we call it judicial activism”—something that “most observers condemn … as an arrogation of legislative power to the judiciary.” Id. And it is unclear “why the result is any better when the arrogation is done by the executive.” Id. at 323–24. This way of understanding Chevron may “escape the jaws of Article III’s Vesting Clause,” therefore, but “it runs headlong into the teeth of Article I’s.” Michigan, 135 S. Ct. at 2713 (Thomas, J., concurring); see alsoGutierrez-Brizuela, 834 F.3d at 1152–55 (Gorsuch, J., concurring).

As a judge on the court of appeals, Judge Kethledge remains bound by Chevron. But Chevron is not an inflexible doctrine, and it can properly be applied in ways that minimize its harm to the separation of powers. Judge Kethledge has done so in two ways: first, he works hard to find the objective meaning of the statutory text before declaring it ambiguous, and second, he refuses to defer to agencies that fail to justify their interpretations.

Be sure to read both all the way through. Kethledge ended up on Trump’s list for a reason, and the new reading of Chevron might make for a nuanced redirection of the court to oppose regulatory overreach and demand more clarity from Congress. However, it seems a lot more likely that Trump would choose bombast over nuance and try to stick a finger in Chuck Schumer’s eye by nominating Barrett.

 

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/07/02/cbs-trumps-two-finalists-scotus-picks/

Civilized America Relies on Donald Trump and the Senate to Strengthen the Supreme Court

Conservatives Should Unite Behind Judge Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court

Many Americans were blindsided when a Supreme Court vacancy opened up last week. One conservative lawyer has been weighing the President’s list for two years.

On March 9, 2018, Judge Amy Coney Barrett addressed Georgetown Law School students in Washington, D.C. at a conference on “First Principles of the Constitution.”

by Phillip Jauregui     at the Stream

Days before celebrating our nation’s 242nd birthday, Americans received a long-awaited gift. Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement last Wednesday. The respected jurist has been controversial as the “swing vote” on the U.S. Supreme Court.

For the first time in two generations, the nation’s highest court could have a solid conservative majority. A compelling case can be made that the next Supreme Court selection will be the single most important decision President Trump will make.

President Trump is deciding on his nominee this week. He plans to announce the nominee on July 9. If this next nomination is a miss, history informs us that another such opportunity may not arise for 30 more years.

This week, most Americans are going to focus on fireworks and barbeque with family and friends. I hope to as well. Yet we cannot be silent in this hour, despite a charged political climate.

Indeed, we must see the Supreme Court as much more than politics. The impact of the nine Justices on culture, ethics and public morality cannot be overstated.

Whether or Not We Like It, The Court Matters

Constitutional conservatives rightly lament how the high court has become the center of national political power.

In June 2015, the Obergefell decision purported to impose same-sex marriage across our land. Dozens of state laws defining marriage as between a man and woman were declared unconstitutional, without any textual support in the Constitution. In a close 5-4 vote, Kennedy “swung” towards the left.

This is one of several controversial cases Kennedy decided. Now he is vacating his seat. Lest we forget, the Supreme Court decisions of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton in 1973 opened the door to the loss of 60 million American lives in the womb since then. The stakes could not be higher.

A compelling case can be made that the next Supreme Court selection will be the single most important decision President Trump will make.

One of my dreams in life is to witness judicial renewal. We define it as restoring the Judiciary to the honorable role of deciding cases rather than legislating from the bench.

Accordingly, I have gladly researched all 25 names on the President’s Supreme Court list — especially those in the top tier. At this moment in history, I believe the one nominee all conservative constitutionalists should rally behind is Judge Amy Coney Barrett.

Many informed voices have arrived at this conclusion. On Thursday, eminent legal scholar Professor Robert George shared (but did not author) an article strongly backing Barrett as the nominee. Evangelical leaders praise her record of upholding religious liberty. Contributors at National Review and Washington Examiner have endorsed her.

Let’s review her record, then consider some of the popular objections to selecting her now.

Scalia Law Clerk Takes After Her Former Boss

A former law clerk to the late Justice Antonin Scalia, Judge Amy Coney Barrett, age 46, mirrors his judicial philosophy.

“What we want in a Justice [is] someone who applies the law,” she said in a 2016 lecture. “[A Justice] follows the law where it goes and doesn’t decide simply on the basis of partisan preference.”

Her judicial philosophy, honed at the University of Notre Dame where she served 15 years as law professor, is well known. Barrett has written extensively on the limitedrole of the judiciary, precedent and judicial intrusion into legislative affairs.

Last year, Barrett was nominated and confirmed to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. During her Senate confirmation hearing, liberals had a miserable time. They turned to their tired playbook of personal attacks.

She was treated with hostility for her Christian faith, the same tactic used against other recent Trump nominees. Senator Dianne Feinstein famously said to Barrett: “The dogma [of your faith] lives loudly within you.”

Despite the drama, Barrett was confirmed with the votes of all Republicans and three Democrats. Those same three Democrats recently met with President Trump in a meeting to discuss his Supreme Court nominee.

Sarah Sanders

@PressSec

Tonight @POTUS met w/ Senators Grassley, Collins, Murkowski, Manchin, Donnelly, and Heitkamp to discuss the Supreme Court vacancy. @POTUS team also talked w/ more than a dozen other Senators today as part of ongoing outreach to get views and advice from both sides of the aisle.

Less than three weeks after her confirmation, President Trump added her to his Supreme Court prospect list.

Life and the Scales of Justice

Barrett would be a solid constitutionalist on the Supreme Court. “A justice’s duty is to the Constitution,” she once wrote. “It is thus more legitimate for her to enforce her best understanding of the Constitution rather than a precedent she thinks clearly in conflict with it.”

This brings us to one of society’s most contentious issues — that of abortion rights. Roeis surely the most-debated precedent, decided on faulty legal reasoning.

Having a holistic view of life issues brings into focus the compelling, compassionate life story of Amy Coney Barrett. She and her husband have seven children, one with special needs. Several were adopted from Haiti.

One never knows with certainty how a judge will decide a case before them. Yet conservatives must demand that a prospective nominee get the key questions right. One 2013 story from Notre Dame Magazine gives a good example.

Barrett has a clear understanding of the value of every life, aligned with constitutional principles.

It addressed the so-called “right to privacy” upon which Roe and Doe are founded. “Abortion deals with the life of a child, so it differs from the earlier case[s] relating to privacy,” stated Barrett in the article. Such reasoning shows how one may begin to question precedents that have long plagued our society.

Barrett also recognizes how society must uphold conscientious objection. In 2012, the new health care law mandated even Catholic sisters’ insurance cover drugs and devices that may induce abortion. A broad coalition of legal scholars responded. Barrett was one of those scholars.

It described how Obamacare required “purchase of a health insurance contract that provides abortion-inducing drugs, contraception and sterilization.” They responded: “This is a grave violation of religious freedom and cannot stand.” The Little Sisters of the Poor had their day in court and prevailed in the end.

Barrett understands the value of every life, and her view aligns with constitutional principles. She also has shown the courage to maintain these principles once on the Supreme Court.

Answering the Barrett Critics

There is always some degree of risk with any Supreme Court nominee. Yet in this former Scalia law clerk and Notre Dame law professor, we have someone as solid as Justice Neil Gorsuch. In fact, I believe she would be even better. And that’s saying a lot.

Because Barrett is female, talk has turned to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Some say Barrett should be “held in reserve” to replace Ginsburg, since the 85 year-old Justice might vacate the court soon.

This wager fails to account for the chance that Ginsburg may remain on the court during President Trump’s term. More importantly, if Barrett is the best prospect now — then she should be put on the court now. The chance missed now may never come around again.

Conservative constitutionalists should seek to identify the best nominee for the Supreme Court. Then we should humbly but boldly make our voices heard. This is our opportunity, duty and call.

Some in D.C. have voiced a concern that Barrett may be “young” or need “more judicial experience.” Another view is that her age and experience are beneficial and historically appropriate.

If confirmed, she would be older than Justice Clarence Thomas was when he was confirmed. Barrett would also have more judicial experience than Justice Elena Kagan had when she was confirmed. By Republican and Democratic standards, she clearly has the age and experience to serve on the Supreme Court.

A Clarion Call of Truth and Justice

We’ve seen this past term what a difference one vote can make. In a 5-4 decision, a California law forcing pregnancy help centers in California to advertise abortion was overturned.

More challenges to free speech — not to mention questions on the value and definition of life itself — will inevitably arrive at the nation’s highest court. Will a voice of compassion, wisdom and courage be there to tip the Supreme Court from activist to constitutional?

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity.Support The Stream »

Conservative constitutionalists should seek to find the best nominee for the Supreme Court. Then we should humbly but boldly make our voices heard. This is our opportunity, duty and call.

So if headlines come up as you chat around the grill with family and friends this week, remember the name Amy Barrett. And enjoy the fireworks!

https://stream.org/conservative-unite-behind-judge-amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court/

Pray for Our Donald to Win Florida’s American Puerto Rican Vote!!

Poll of Puerto Ricans in Florida shows Scott better-liked than Nelson

 Gov. Rick Scott is better-known and better-liked than Sen. Bill Nelson among Puerto Ricans in Florida, according to a new poll that spells trouble for the incumbent as this Democratic-leaning group leans toward the Republican challenger ahead of the November election.

About 75 percent have a good opinion of Scott, while just 18 percent do not, according to the poll of 1,000 Puerto Ricans in the state commissioned by Florida International University.

Only 7 percent didn’t know enough about Scott to hazard an opinion of him — a sign the governor’s seven trips to Puerto Rico and his aggressive campaigning welcoming evacuees from the island after Hurricane Maria have paid dividends.

Nelson’s numbers: 62 percent favor him, 26 percent don’t and 13 percent don’t know enough to voice an opinion, the poll shows.

Calculated another way, Scott’s net approval rating is 57 percent and Nelson’s is 36 percent among Puerto Ricans. So the Republican is running ahead of the Democrat by about 21 percentage points.

The numbers are even more striking because 57 percent of the poll’s respondents say they’re registered as Democrats; only 12 percent are Republicans. And almost 57 percent said they would vote for a generic Democrat while only 7 percent would vote for an unnamed Republican.

“This is not necessarily the best news for Democrats,” FIU professor Eduardo Gamarra — who analyzed the survey data along with his colleague, Jorge Duany — told POLITICO. “It’s not necessarily ideological. I think they thought this man [Scott] was genuinely interested in their well-being.”

The poll — which has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points and surveyed people in the Orlando, Tampa, Miami and Fort Lauderdale areas — didn’t test a head-to-head horse race between Nelson and Scott, however, because it surveyed all Puerto Ricans in the state who have arrived both before and after the hurricane. About 75 percent of the respondents said they have registered to vote, and most plan to vote.

The poll numbers are making Democrats fret even more about Nelson’s Hispanic, and specifically Puerto Rican, outreach after POLITICO reported the depths of his struggles. In some focus groups of Puerto Ricans in Central Florida, few knew much about Nelson. Many knew and liked Scott.

That’s a huge danger for Nelson and a big advantage for Scott because, historically, Democrats have counted on the growing Puerto Rican vote in Central Florida as a counterweight to Republican-leaning Cuban-Americans in South Florida. Puerto Ricans are now the largest Hispanic group in Florida, with more than 1.1 million residents, and experts estimate about 500,000 are voters.

But Cuban-American turnout is among the highest in the state, experts say, while Puerto Rican turnout fluctuates with other non-Cuban Hispanics, who are also Democratic and whose turnout rate has historically collapsed in midterm elections. Scott won his last two elections, during midterms, by 1.2 and 1 percentage points, respectively, amid poor turnout by non-Cuban Hispanics in counties with big Puerto Rican communities.

However, Nelson has a not-so-secret weapon he can wield against Scott: the name of President Donald Trump, who is deeply disliked by Puerto Ricans over the lackluster response to Hurricane Maria. Trump urged Scott to run for Senate, and Scott raised money for Trump’s presidential bid. Focus groups showed Scott’s approval plummeting when he was tied to Trump.

Only 18 percent approve of the president, and 72 percent disapprove. His net rating is a negative 53 percent. So Scott is running 104 percentage points better than the president of his own party among Puerto Rican voters.

Jose Parra, a Democratic strategist and CEO of the Prospero Latino consulting firm, said Nelson can turn things around with Puerto Rican voters. But time is short.

“This is a solvable problem if it’s done now. If you do this two months before the election, it’s too late. We’re getting very close to that already,” Parra said. “The fact you point out that the Trump numbers are so low, it’s more than a sliver of light for Nelson, it’s a massive flash of light. But they need to act aggressively on it and act on it now.”

Parra said Nelson has a good record for most Hispanic voters and Puerto Ricans specifically, but Democrats “need to take his record and weaponize it, and they haven’t done it up until this point.”

For his part, Scott has said Nelson has failed to show up for Latinos as well as all Floridians. “I haven’t seen him around the state,” Scott said recently.

Nelson and Scott also have better numbers among Puerto Ricans than the bilingual Sen. Marco Rubio, whose net approval rating is 33 percent.

Scott, who is learning to speak Spanish and conducts Spanish-language interviews more often than Nelson, has traveled to Puerto Rico seven times since Hurricane Maria. Nelson has been there three times.

Among Puerto Ricans who’ve come to Florida since 2017, more than 37 percent have a “very good” opinion of Scott. Just over 10 percent of new arrivals share the same opinion of Nelson. New arrivals are also the most independent voters. While 57 percent of those surveyed are still registered as Democrats, that trend is declining among new arrivals. A quarter of those who migrated to Florida in the past year are registered independent — the largest group in that category.

The pollster, Gamarra, pointed out that the Federal Emergency Management Agency money supporting displaced Puerto Ricans while they look for employment is set to run out on Saturday, saying, “they will lose their benefits and no longer stay in their hotels for free.” If they are displaced again, he added, their favorable opinion of Scott could turn.

Island evacuees living in Central Florida set up a “tent city” this week in protest of the voucher program’s expiration and to demand that Scott help them with housing, the Orlando Weekly reported.

About 90 percent of those polled have received some public assistance. About 61 percent were able to find work soon after arriving in Florida. Those who have been in Florida the longest report more employment: 53 percent of those who arrived in 2017 say they were employed, and about 69 percent of those who have been in the state the longest report employment.

About 56 percent of Puerto Ricans plan to stay in Florida “indefinitely.” But almost 18 percent said they are having trouble learning English, and about 17 percent said finding work was a problem, the second-highest challenge for those polled.

The poll found that the top reason for leaving the island or moving to Florida was economic conditions or work, with 57 percent citing the tough conditions in Puerto Rico or the lure of jobs in the Sunshine State. Fewer than 11 percent cited the hurricane.

The Puerto Rican Alliance of Florida paid for the poll and, along with FIU and the Puerto Rican Leadership Council of South Florida, will present its findings on Saturday at a “Nuestro Futuro” symposium attended by representatives from business, government, academia and the media.

 

https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2018/06/30/poll-of-florida-puerto-ricans-shows-scott-better-liked-than-nelson-495614

DJT, America’s Great Problem Solver, is Winning New Followers!!

Trump is Winning Over Blacks, Hispanics, Millennials, and Even Gays

by Karin McQuillan  at American Thinker:

Democrat hate speech targeting deplorables has always worked — on their own voters.  Libeling Republicans as racist, homophobic morons has kept Democrat voters in line.  President Trump laughs at their insults, and just gets stronger.  Suddenly, one more Trump success.  The Democrat line is breaking.  Our minorities are breaking free.

President Trump’s off the charts achievements on jobs and security are improving the lives of every single Democrat identity voting bloc.  A small, but increasingly significant number are noticing.  With his MAGA gains on the economy and foreign affairs, President Trump is slowly chipping away at the Democrat Party’s foundations.  The white working class already belongs to Trump.  Fed up blacks, Hispanics, millennials and gays are starting to follow.

Ordinary people, including our minorities, are focused on the reality of their lives.  Most Americans actually care about exactly the two big issues Trump cares about:  jobs and personal safety.  They notice more money in their paychecks.  They notice when they get off food stamps and the unemployment line.  They notice when they move from flipping hamburgers to a high-paying construction or assembly-line jobs.  Securing our border, supporting cops, defeating ISIS in Syria, pressuring North Korea to “denuke” — ordinary people get that we are safer than we were under Obama. Democrats can scream as loud as they want, but they cannot drown out reality.

On top of it, the screaming is turning people off.  In the words of a gay woman, member of the #WalkAway movement,

Lea Anna Bright, in a mohawk, looks into the camera and says in a slow, simmering voice: “This is a Vice article I am reading right now. It says, ‘The activist left doesn’t give a shit about your calls for civility. Get ready for a summer of rage.’” She looks up. “This is where the party is going, and this is why I chose to walk away. Peace. Not for me. Bye.”

As Michael Goodwin notes in the New York Post, Trump is gaining inside Democrat strongholds.  He is reaching women and non-whites.  A Harvard/Harriss poll shows a 10-point upswing among Hispanic voters.  He has made a four-point gain among Democrats.

Pollsters attributed the rise to the strong economy and that a whopping 75 percent approved of the president’s decision to meet with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un.

Finally, a Pew finding about Trump supporters upends stereotypes: Just 31 percent are white men without college degrees, while 66 percent are college graduates, women or nonwhites.

Millennials are growing up, getting jobs and paying taxes.  They are still turned off by the Republican Party (as are Trump supporters).  They are stubbornly unwilling to give President Trump personal credit.  But they recognize his pro-growth agenda is a good thing, and they don’t want Pelosi to wreck the economy.

Millennials are telling Reuter/Ipsos pollsters that they are going to vote Republican in the mid-terms.  In 2016, white millennials supported Democrats for Congress by a whopping 47 to 33 percent.  No more.  Millennial support for Democrats has fallen by almost 10 percent.  If sustained, this is seriously bad news for Democrats.

For the first time, millennials will be the largest eligible voting bloc surpassing baby boomers come November. Historically Democrats have relied on the youth vote to carry them over the finish line. This new polling suggests a blue wave may be less likely than previously thought.

Racial appeals are at long last getting old.  Race-baiting is less effective delivered by Maxine Waters than by the nation’s first black president.  A redpill video by a young black woman named Candace Owens, praised by Kanye West, is credited with creating a fateful first chink in the black voting bloc.  Following Kanye’s tweet, President Trump’s approval among black men doubled, to 22 percent, and among all blacks, to over 16 percent.

This is bigger than Kanye.  Trump promised blacks that if they gave him a chance, they would see real economic progress and he has delivered, big time.  Blacks are working more than ever, many at better jobs.  They like it — and have been voting differently in Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.  According to a June Rasmussen poll, twice as many black voters will now admit they are better off under President Trump.

Unbelievably, thanks to an honest gay man’s viral video, #WalkAway, we are hearing from the ultimate Democrat stronghold, the LGBQT community.  It turns out white gay men are not appreciating the blatant anti-white and anti-gender hate speech of the new Democrat left.  “They’ll come for me, and then they’ll come for you,” Straka tells his listeners.

He shows a handout about the “privilege hierarchy’:  white gay men are near the top of the privileged bad guys list.  They get less victim points than white women, black women, trans and non-genders.  Most gay men are quite successful financially.  Democrat’s ginning up rage against successful white men is a turn-off.  But it is more than that.

One gay man declares that before being gay, he’s a patriotic American.  He appreciated President Trump’s Muslim travel ban, as a rational security measure.  The two parties’ reaction to the Orlando massacre changed everything for him.

“Trump said he was going to protect gay men, and he did, [with] the travel ban. Hillary was telling Americans not to ‘pick on all Muslims because of this,’” and that did not feel like protection, Roberts says. “I swear to God, wanted to throw my shoe through the TV.  “At that point I was like, I can’t do it anymore. I really can’t. (snip)

His assessment of the Democrats: “From immigration to everything, they are just a disaster.  “They’re anti-American, anti-common sense, rational — anything good, they’re against it.”

We have seen astroturf movements, like Occupy Wall Street and the anti-gun children’s crusade.  They soon fizzle away.  The #WalkAway movement feels more like the Tea Party.  It is based on people’s gut reality.  The voices are not echoing talking points, they are from the heart, and carry a lot of power.  The Tea Party stayed within the GOP and morphed into the Freedom Caucus.  #Walkaway are lifelong Democrats totally leaving the blue tribe.

Conservatives have been watching the anti-Trump hysteria with growing revulsion.  In one corner, President Trump, delivering the goods on jobs, national, and personal security.  In the opposing corner, Democrats’ rejection of our electoral system, fake news and calls to violence.  We’ve been wondering how ordinary, decent Democrat voters will react.

They are starting to break free.

Democrat hate speech targeting deplorables has always worked — on their own voters.  Libeling Republicans as racist, homophobic morons has kept Democrat voters in line.  President Trump laughs at their insults, and just gets stronger.  Suddenly, one more Trump success.  The Democrat line is breaking.  Our minorities are breaking free.

President Trump’s off the charts achievements on jobs and security are improving the lives of every single Democrat identity voting bloc.  A small, but increasingly significant number are noticing.  With his MAGA gains on the economy and foreign affairs, President Trump is slowly chipping away at the Democrat Party’s foundations.  The white working class already belongs to Trump.  Fed up blacks, Hispanics, millennials and gays are starting to follow.

Ordinary people, including our minorities, are focused on the reality of their lives.  Most Americans actually care about exactly the two big issues Trump cares about:  jobs and personal safety.  They notice more money in their paychecks.  They notice when they get off food stamps and the unemployment line.  They notice when they move from flipping hamburgers to a high-paying construction or assembly-line jobs.  Securing our border, supporting cops, defeating ISIS in Syria, pressuring North Korea to “denuke” — ordinary people get that we are safer than we were under Obama. Democrats can scream as loud as they want, but they cannot drown out reality.

On top of it, the screaming is turning people off.  In the words of a gay woman, member of the #WalkAway movement,

Lea Anna Bright, in a mohawk, looks into the camera and says in a slow, simmering voice: “This is a Vice article I am reading right now. It says, ‘The activist left doesn’t give a shit about your calls for civility. Get ready for a summer of rage.’” She looks up. “This is where the party is going, and this is why I chose to walk away. Peace. Not for me. Bye.”

As Michael Goodwin notes in the New York Post, Trump is gaining inside Democrat strongholds.  He is reaching women and non-whites.  A Harvard/Harriss poll shows a 10-point upswing among Hispanic voters.  He has made a four-point gain among Democrats.

Pollsters attributed the rise to the strong economy and that a whopping 75 percent approved of the president’s decision to meet with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un.

Finally, a Pew finding about Trump supporters upends stereotypes: Just 31 percent are white men without college degrees, while 66 percent are college graduates, women or nonwhites.

Millennials are growing up, getting jobs and paying taxes.  They are still turned off by the Republican Party (as are Trump supporters).  They are stubbornly unwilling to give President Trump personal credit.  But they recognize his pro-growth agenda is a good thing, and they don’t want Pelosi to wreck the economy.

Millennials are telling Reuter/Ipsos pollsters that they are going to vote Republican in the mid-terms.  In 2016, white millennials supported Democrats for Congress by a whopping 47 to 33 percent.  No more.  Millennial support for Democrats has fallen by almost 10 percent.  If sustained, this is seriously bad news for Democrats.

For the first time, millennials will be the largest eligible voting bloc surpassing baby boomers come November. Historically Democrats have relied on the youth vote to carry them over the finish line. This new polling suggests a blue wave may be less likely than previously thought.

Racial appeals are at long last getting old.  Race-baiting is less effective delivered by Maxine Waters than by the nation’s first black president.  A redpill video by a young black woman named Candace Owens, praised by Kanye West, is credited with creating a fateful first chink in the black voting bloc.  Following Kanye’s tweet, President Trump’s approval among black men doubled, to 22 percent, and among all blacks, to over 16 percent.

This is bigger than Kanye.  Trump promised blacks that if they gave him a chance, they would see real economic progress and he has delivered, big time.  Blacks are working more than ever, many at better jobs.  They like it — and have been voting differently in Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.  According to a June Rasmussen poll, twice as many black voters will now admit they are better off under President Trump.

Unbelievably, thanks to an honest gay man’s viral video, #WalkAway, we are hearing from the ultimate Democrat stronghold, the LGBQT community.  It turns out white gay men are not appreciating the blatant anti-white and anti-gender hate speech of the new Democrat left.  “They’ll come for me, and then they’ll come for you,” Straka tells his listeners.

He shows a handout about the “privilege hierarchy’:  white gay men are near the top of the privileged bad guys list.  They get less victim points than white women, black women, trans and non-genders.  Most gay men are quite successful financially.  Democrat’s ginning up rage against successful white men is a turn-off.  But it is more than that.

One gay man declares that before being gay, he’s a patriotic American.  He appreciated President Trump’s Muslim travel ban, as a rational security measure.  The two parties’ reaction to the Orlando massacre changed everything for him.

“Trump said he was going to protect gay men, and he did, [with] the travel ban. Hillary was telling Americans not to ‘pick on all Muslims because of this,’” and that did not feel like protection, Roberts says. “I swear to God, wanted to throw my shoe through the TV.  “At that point I was like, I can’t do it anymore. I really can’t. (snip)

His assessment of the Democrats: “From immigration to everything, they are just a disaster.  “They’re anti-American, anti-common sense, rational — anything good, they’re against it.”

We have seen astroturf movements, like Occupy Wall Street and the anti-gun children’s crusade.  They soon fizzle away.  The #WalkAway movement feels more like the Tea Party.  It is based on people’s gut reality.  The voices are not echoing talking points, they are from the heart, and carry a lot of power.  The Tea Party stayed within the GOP and morphed into the Freedom Caucus.  #Walkaway are lifelong Democrats totally leaving the blue tribe.

Conservatives have been watching the anti-Trump hysteria with growing revulsion.  In one corner, President Trump, delivering the goods on jobs, national, and personal security.  In the opposing corner, Democrats’ rejection of our electoral system, fake news and calls to violence.  We’ve been wondering how ordinary, decent Democrat voters will react.

They are starting to break free.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/07/trump_is_winning_over_blacks_hispanics_millennials_and_even_gays.html