Tag Archives: Democrat

A Representative Democracy: It’s NOT All About You

13 Monday Sep 2021

Posted by in Communication, Government, Politicians, Politics, Public Relations, Representative Democracy, Republic, United States

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

“You Represent ME, Dammit!!!!”

One of the most misunderstood and abused aspects about elected officials is that it is her or his job to represent the individual. The deeper you dig into that concept, the more absurd it becomes. Even under minimal consideration, the idea is ridiculous. How can one person represent the individual needs, wants, and hopes of every citizen?

A Representative Democracy:  Senators of the 117th Congress

Simple Explanations Fail a Representative Democracy

A representative democracy, or a republic, is a very complex idea, formed over thousands of years. It allows individuals to have a say in his or her laws, rules, and policies, but it does not mean that every individual will be satisfied with the outcome.

However, many people think that politicians are to represent only their point of view. That explanation fails to describe the actual responsibilities of an elected official.

Unfortunately, those with limited education may prefer simpler explanations of complex concepts. News media and public relations professionals often ‘dumb down’ information to a sixth-grade reading level. If they don’t, that person may not stay engaged and fail to grasp the information.

However, a simple explanation may pacify a person’s need to know, but fail to adequately inform. This gives a false feeling that one understands the full scope of the problem or idea; however, this is not the case

The Dunning-Kruger Effect on a Citizen’s Competence

Understanding the role of an elected official based on a citizen’s knowledge of a representative democracy

In 1995, a man spread lemon juice on his face and robbed two banks, believing that the lemon juice would make his face invisible to security cameras. He knew that lemon juice could be used as invisible ink on paper and he was confident it would work the same on his face. This is an example of illusory superiority studied by David Dunning and Justin Kruger. Their work led to the theory of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

The Dunning-Kruger Effect indicates that a person’s confidence in understanding a concept or problem leaps upon learning a little information. Confidence typically drops significantly with more information; however, confidence then improves as the person becomes more informed.

The common misunderstanding a representative democracy is a good example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Most citizens have a simple understanding of the role of an elected official. They may believe that the role of a politician is to represent only his or her interests. This belief can result in dissatisfaction when a politician doesn’t appease their point of view. 

What IS the Role of an Elected Official in a Representative Democracy?

An elected official is to represent the best interests of all of the citizens in his/her district. Not only the ones that voted for her or him but all the citizens. It may be obvious, but not everyone holds the same values, nor has the same vision, so some may not agree with every choice a politician makes on their behalf.

But a representative democracy has further complications. If any of the citizens sought to create laws and policies that could potentially harm others, a politician should not assist them. For example, if a group of citizens sought a law to require three eyewitnesses to a rape, a politician would be wrong to represent that point of view. It would mean that almost every rape would be unprovable in court and all women would be at risk. Even if it is the view of the majority, a politician is duty-bound to act in the best interest of all citizens.

A politician’s role can be stated simply; however, it differs from common beliefs:

An elected official’s role is to serve the best interests of her or his constituency to the best of their ability, ignoring political ideologies, biases of race, color, national origin, religion, gender, or creed.

 

Colorado’s 17 Dying Counties

23 Tuesday Jun 2020

Posted by in Colorado, Conservatives, Donald Trump, Economy, Education, Government, jobs, Mining, Politicians, Politics, Small town, Taxes, United States, Voting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

From 2010 to 2019, Colorado has enjoyed a 14.5% growth in population. Urban areas, such as Denver, have had more significant growth than rural areas. The growth has led to more jobs, more paid taxes, and a general boost to the economy of the State.

However, Colorado consists of 64 counties and many of the rural counties struggle to maintain a viable economy. A declining economy means fewer jobs, fewer jobs means less income for residents, and less income means a decline in the tax base for essential county services. It is the death spiral that a rural county suffers, leading to a collapse of its economy. When the 2020 Census is complete, there are seventeen rural Colorado counties that will likely show a decline in population. 

Colorado counties with population declines (2010 to 2019 est.) Percentages indicate the amount of decline, other numbers indicate the population of counties under 10,000. [Number colors indicate the last 40 years of political party support. Red-Republican, Blue-Democrat, Purple-Split]

Typical Economic History

Colorado, like many other U.S. States, established an economy on agriculture and mining. Also like many other States, as businesses became more centralized and industrialized, rural areas became outpaced by the income potential of urban areas. This conversion of the foundation of our economy left rural areas isolated from the economic benefits of newer industries.

Rural Colorado is isolated from the economic power that exists in Denver and other urban areas.

Arteries of the Economy

Geographic location has played a major role in the economic fortunes for Colorado counties. Most pioneers heading west avoided the difficult mountain passes of Colorado and traveled through Wyoming. It wasn’t until the trains came to Colorado that significant growth began. In the 20th century, paved roads allowed smaller towns to emerge along highways that could provide services to the traveler.

The completion of Interstate 80 (I-80) through Wyoming, and Interstate 70 (I-70) through Colorado, siphoned off the traffic that fed the economy of many smaller communities. Even communities located on I-70 found that faster roads and improved gas mileage hurt their economy. The result was a loss of jobs and revenue in small towns outside of urban corridors. By the end of the 20th century, many of Colorado’s remote communities began seeing stagnation and decline in their population. 

Off The Path

The counties experiencing population decline since 2010, indicate that isolation from Colorado’s central urban core is continuing to impact communities in the State. Thirteen of the counties experiencing a population decline are located on the Colorado State border. The other four are adjacent to a county located on the border.

Colorado has 26 counties that have a population under 10,000 (2019 est.) Most of these counties are also located at or near the State border. Eleven of the seventeen counties experiencing a decline in population also have less than 10,000 residents. This means that many of the counties losing residents are exacerbating the crisis for the county.

But not every county on the fringes of Colorado’s borders is losing population. Are there common traits of dying counties? The answer is yes, and the attitudes of the residents may be a factor.

Five Common Characteristics of a Dying Colorado County

1.  Small Population

The total population of all 17 dying counties is just over 130,000 people. That means that the average population for the counties is well below 10,000 people.

2.  Large ‘White Only’ Population

The average ‘White Only’ demographic for Colorado is 68%. The 17 dying counties have an average ‘White Only’ demographic of 73%.

3.  Fewer College Degrees…by almost half

Over 40% of Colorado residents have college degrees. In the 17 dying counties, only 21% have college degrees.

4.  Average per Capita Income is Less…about one-third less

The average per capita income for a Colorado resident is $36,415. The average for the 17 dying counties is $24,735.

5.  Strong Republican Support

Rural counties tend to be more conservative, but these 17 dying counties are diehard Republican fanatics. All of the 17 dying counties voted for Donald Trump in 2016 by an average of 71% of the vote. In addition, almost all of the counties have voted for a Republican candidate for President in each election for the past 40 years.

Table 1.0 – Colorado Counties Decreasing in Population. [Source: U.S. Census Bureau and Wikipedia]

Not All Small Counties Vote Red

It is easy to assume that all rural counties with a small population are conservative and vote Republican. That is not true in Colorado. Most of the 26 smaller counties do vote Republican, but there are eight small counties that have voted for the Democratic Presidential candidate a majority of the time during the last 40 years.

Those eight Blue counties with populations under 10,000 have a ‘White Only’ demographic slightly less than Colorado’s average, an average population growth rate of 8.5%, have a college degree rate of about 50% greater than the dying counties, and have an average per capita income that is about halfway between the dying counties average and the State average.

Table 2.0 – Colorado Blue counties with a population of less than 10,000. [Source: U.S. Census Bureau and Wikipedia]

Does Political Ideology Determine the Fate of a County?

The correlation between a county’s fate and the political leanings of its citizens does seem to exist, but does ideology determine the fate of a county, or does the county’s situation determine the political ideology? There is no obvious answer to that question.

Still, the political ideology reflects the attitudes of its citizens in decision-making and the fact that all of the counties in Colorado that are losing population, voted for Trump in the last election, and that the long term history of those counties has been to vote Republican, it would seem that the traditional political leanings of a county have an impact on the success or failure of a Colorado county.

Dying Counties Don’t Die

The tragedy of dying counties is that they don’t die.

Colorado has three counties with a population under 900 people each. These three counties have their own county commissioners, their own county administrative offices, and their own county sheriff’s department. All three of these counties are adjacent to each other and yet they exist as separate entities.

It would be logical to fold a failed county into an adjacent county; however, that is not what happens to counties that no longer are viable. These counties become wards of the State, dependent on State tax revenues to exist.

In the end, dying counties become dependent on the rest of the citizens of Colorado.

Timid Democrats in Power Haunts the United States of America

02 Monday Mar 2020

Posted by in Assault Weapons, Business, Conservatives, Crime, Donald Trump, Economy, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, History, Honor, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, racism, Stock Market, Taxes, Technology, United States, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The decline of the United States of America under the conservative boot has occurred for almost 40 years. Unfortunately, during those few times when the Democratic party has managed to wrench back power for brief periods, timid Democrats have failed to move boldly. The result is that now Democrats are seen as weak and ineffective in power, giving conservatives the opportunity to quickly regain a majority.

Former Vice President Joe Biden: Running away from the left

Conservatives History of Economic Disaster

The United States was driven into the 1930’s Great Depression by a Republican party that had changed direction after the Civil War. Prior to the Civil War, Lincoln’s Republican party had championed the end to slavery. After the Civil War, the party, centered in the northeastern industrial States focused on using the government to promote business interests at any cost.

Prior to the Great Depression, business and the stock market ran amok with no government safeguards to protect individual citizens. In the months leading up to the October 1929 crash, the stock markets ramped up into a delirium of expansion when world markets were collapsing. 

Graphic 1.0 – The Dow Jones wild surge while the world economies were collapsing. [NOTE: Graph uses a logarithmic scale to magnify change.]

The Great Depression demonstrated that government regulation and protections were necessary for a healthy economy. The conservative’s economy based on greed resulted in temporary gains resulting in massive collapses of the world economy. By 1933, a decade of Republican control of the government ended with the loss of the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the office of the President.

The Golden Age of the United States

With the exception of four years, (1947 to 1949 and 1953 to 1955,) Democrats controlled Congress from 1933 to 1981. During this period the United States recovered from the Great Depression, developed into a major world power, became a major force in winning World War II, and created a technologically superior economy that landed humans on the Moon in only ten years.

Under Democratic control, individuals and corporations were protected by a government that balanced profit with societal obligations. It was our Golden Age.

End of Government For the People

In the late 1970s, inflation, the retreat from further space exploration, and rising terrorism in the Arab world combined to create an opportunity for conservatives to sow dissatisfaction in the country. The 444-day hostage crisis in Iran during the Presidential election weakened President Jimmy Carter and opened the door for Republicans to take control of our country. 

Ronald Reagan began a dynasty of conservative control of the government of the United States of America. He was bolstered by a friendly Republican-led Senate and a timid Democratic-led House that provided minimal resistance to conservative reforms.

Actor Ronald Reagan from The Bad Man

Prior to his election in 1981, this former ‘B’ movie actor-turned, rightwing conservative-turned, FBI informant-turned-politician, had declared to enact conservative initiatives aimed to dismantle the government and replace it with a Wild West-style society where ethics were secondary to profit. 

Reagan used a ploy of patriotism and tax breaks to mask the true nature of his plan to dismantle protections of individuals and move power from government to the corporations and the wealthy. His tax plan gave small tax breaks to the middle class, which were later rescinded and even increased; however, the wealthy enjoyed the top rate bracket being slashed from 70% down to 50%, followed by an additional cut down to 38.5%.

The result was to shift the tax burden on to the middle class and cut federal government revenues drastically. Changes in the tax structure and government protections was an abrupt 180° change in course for the nation. It ended a government for the people and replaced it with a government for corporations and the wealthy.

The Rise of Republican Bullies and Timid Democrats

House Democrats adopted a position of acquiescence to Reagan, possibly under the belief that the popularism that brought Reagan into power would falter after his policies led to economic failure. If so, it worked to some degree. Republicans lost control of the Senate in 1987, and in 1993, Bill Clinton became President.

For a brief moment, it seemed that the United States might return to the Golden Age. Clinton used Democratic control of the government to reverse several conservative policies put into place by Reagan and President George Bush (41st.) In his first term, Clinton pushed forward the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, cut taxes on the poorest citizens and raised taxes on the wealthiest, began work on a Universal Health Plan, passed gun reform legislation known as the Brady Bill, enacted the  North American Free Trade Agreement, and passed the Omnibus Crime Bill, that included a ten-year ban on assault weapons.

Bill Clinton Under Siege

At the same time, conservatives began a relentless campaign of attacks on the President and Hillary Clinton including smear campaigns regarding his time as Governor of Arkansas. These efforts were unprecedented in our country’s history. Arkansas State Troopers with ‘slimy motives’ claimed they had arranged private engagements with then-Governor Clinton and other women. The Clintons were accused of abuse of power in what became known as the Whitewater controversy.

In 1994, the Democrats lost control of both houses of Congress for the first time in forty years. Republicans, led by Newt Gingrich, ran on a united plan known as the Contract With America that put forward a mix of popular ideas (require Congress to abide by any new law, term limits, etc.) and proposals to dismantle government protections (deregulations, reducing government, etc.) In large part, the Contract With America was ineffective. Some issues were defeated, some were vetoed by President Clinton, and some were ignored. At least one item was enacted but was later ruled unconstitutional.

Picking up where Reagan left off

However, Republican control of Congress began a resurgence of conservative power that effectively beat Clinton into submission. Clinton did win a second term but even before the election he signaled his surrender to conservatism. During his 1996 State of the Union address, he announced that the “…era of Big Government is over.”

The era of the Timid Democrat had begun.

Florida Fiasco

In 2000, Republicans completed their coup of the government by retaining both houses of Congress and winning the Presidency. George W. Bush (43rd) was elected when the Supreme Court interceded in vote recounts that gave a micro margin lead to Bush over Vice President Al Gore. Bush was elected by the smallest number of popular votes in over 100 years and a subsequent State-wide recount indicated that Gore actually won.

Without a majority in Congress and a Republican President, Democrats essentially gave up. It would be six years until Democrats would win back Congress and that was only possible after Republicans had mismanaged the economy into a near second Great Depression. 

Change Undelivered

In 2007, the United States began a Recession that nearly destroyed the country. The cause of the financial crisis was unethical practices by the banking industry that placed greed over common sense. The lack of government regulation, forced by conservatives, resulted in massive packaged loans that were laced with bad debt. When the investors realized the depth of the deception, the value of the investments went into freefall.

The crisis led to the restoration of the Democrats to power. In 2008, Barack Obama, the first African American President, won over Senator John McCain. Focused on restoring the economy, Democrats, led by Obama, took bold actions that were chastised by rightwing conservatives and their media feeds, including Fox News. The action taken by the Democrats saved the country, but rightwing media worked diligently to underplay the role of liberals in restoring the economy.

Obama’s election was heralded as the great change to reverse the destruction of government. Democrats united to push for a massive new healthcare system during Obama’s first term. Unfortunately, saving the economy and implementing a new, heavily compromised healthcare plan would be the highlights of the first two years of Democratic control of the government. 

In 2010, Democrats lost the House and in 2014, they lost the Senate. Republicans adopted a strict ‘no-cooperation’ with President Obama and effectively stopped any effort to restore the country to a government for the people. The President did attempt to use his authority to effect change through executive action; however, the rightwing media severely criticized him for adopting any non-conservative approved policy.

By 2016, Democrats had completely settled into acquiescence and even Hillary Clinton adopted a conciliatory platform when she led the Democratic ticket for President. Clinton was blindsided by Donald Trump, who used his conman skills to consolidate the vote of the uneducated, religious Evangelicals, and racists. The results of the election left Democrats devastated. The party leadership had no response to a person who had no ethics, played by no rules, and was supported by people who were blind to his behavior and actions.

Lessons Unlearned

The current situation in the Democratic party reflects a continuation of the mistakes of the past 40 years. Former Vice President Joe Biden is a symbol of the Timid Democrats. His positions are to continue subservience to conservatives under the mask of a Democrat. His campaign is based solely on defeating Trump by moving farther right to collect more conservative moderates.

The party has a long list of candidates who are trying to carve out the moderate vote while ignoring the need to reverse the course. Only Senator Bernie Sanders and Senator Elizabeth Warren seem to understand that the actions of conservatives are the problem.

Unfortunately, with Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klochubar dropping out, the moderate vote will now be more consolidated for Biden. In addition, Billionaire Mike Bloomberg is apparently setting himself up for an independent run for President. The long-standing moderate Republican suddenly declared himself as a Democrat in 2018, followed by a delayed entrance into the race for President. His late run virtually guarantees that he cannot win the nomination; however, he likely will lure Democrats to vote for him as an independent.

It may end up that people will have a choice of Biden or Bloomberg to oppose Trump. Both of them will be champions of continuing conservative ideals, and that will mean the era of the Timid Democrat is to live on.

Nevada Democratic Primary State and Federal Choices

26 Saturday May 2018

Posted by in About Reno, All Rights Reserved, Branding, Business, Communication, Conservatives, Economy, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Gun control, Higher Education, Honor, jobs, Life, Nevada, Opinion, Passionate People, Politicians, Politics, Reno, Republic, Second Amendment, Taxes, Universities, Voting, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Early voting in Nevada’s 2018 Primary begins today. Because Republicans have damaged themselves severely in attempting to create a Soviet-type government, some conservatives have shifted to the Democratic party in order to be elected. This makes the Nevada primary more critical than the General election, as the Democratic Primary nominee is likely to win.

Casinos and mining industries are heavy contributors in Nevada elections and an informed voter will note that any candidate that has a well-funded campaign is possibly being propped up by those special interests. In this Primary, there are several candidates that seem to have an unusual amount of money to spend.

Based on my research, here is who I’m voting for in the Nevada Democratic Primary for Federal and State offices, and why:

Governor of Nevada

MY VOTE:  Christina ‘Chris G.’ Giunchigliani

Casinos and mining have managed to control the Governor’s race for at least the last twelve years. Jim Gibbons and Brian Sandoval have been noted to follow an agenda that has favored those industries over the needs of the citizens of Nevada. This year, the two candidates for Governor that seem to have the nod of casinos and mining are Republican Adam Laxalt and alleged Democrat Steve Sisolak. If Sisolak wins the Democratic primary, Nevada will end up being the stooge of those two industries.

The only plausible candidate is Christina ‘Chris G.’ Giunchigliani. She has a consistent record of Democratic ideals as opposed to Steve Sisolak who has suddenly become a champion of a few Democratic issues. Sisolak has a reputation of being arrogant, unintelligent, and Trump-like in his behavior. He is the ideal candidate that casino overlord Sheldon Adelson would want as his errand boy.

Candidate Chris G for Nevada Governor

All other Democratic candidates lack the support to win in the General election.

U.S. Senate

MY VOTE:  Jacky Rosen

Why not Danny Burleigh? Impotent campaign.

Why not David Drew Knight? He wants more vocational training in public schools. We don’t need to spend more public money to train workers for businesses. Businesses should train their own workers through internships where workers are paid to learn to do the job instead of taxpayers and workers paying for their own industry-specific training.

Why not Sujeet ‘Bobby’ Mahendra? Ignorance. Mahendra wants to reduce corporate and personal taxes in a State that doesn’t have corporate tax and income tax, but has one of the highest rates of violent crime in the U.S. and the worst education system in the U.S. Mahendra is a Soviet Republican running as a Democrat.

Why not Allen Rheinhart? Wants to join with Russia in a fight against fake Islamists? WTF?

Why not Jesse Sbaih? He would be my second choice, but he is inexperienced and would be a weak candidate against the incumbent Soviet Republican Dean Heller.

I have some issues with Jacky Rosen. One red flag is the award she received from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. That organization has devolved into an extreme right-wing organization, and any recognition by them is not good.

However, she is likely to defeat Heller and she is the best choice of the field.

U.S. House of Representatives District 2

MY VOTE:  Rick Shephard

Why not Dr. Vance Alm? Weak campaign.

Why not Patrick Fogarty? I like his positions on the issues, but I don’t see him as a strong candidate in the General election.

Why not Jesse Douglas Hurley?  Impotent campaign.

Why not Clint Koble? He would be my second choice because of his stance on issues and work with rural communities.

Why not Jack L. Schofield, Jr.? Impotent campaign.

Why Rick Shepherd? Shepherd is passionate about many issues. In everything I read, I couldn’t find any issue with which I significantly disagreed. We need a passionate Democrat to contrast the Good Ole Boy Republican Mark Amodei.

Lieutenant Governor

MY VOTE:  Kate Marshall

Why not Laurie L. Hansen? Impotent campaign.

Why Kate Marshall? Experience, dedication to Nevada, and intelligence.

Attorney General

MY VOTE:  Aaron Ford

Why not Stuart J. MacKie? Impotent campaign.

Why Aaron Ford? Only logical choice and has the experience for the job.

State Assembly District 24

MY VOTE:  Sarah Peters

Why not Edward Coleman? I believe Sarah Peters demonstrates a stronger passion, which I feel is important in battling Republican bullying; however, Coleman seems to be qualified and a strong alternative.

Why not Deonne Contine? There are two issues I have with Deonne that concern me. First, she doesn’t have her children in a public school. I’m not criticizing the personal choice of education for her children, but we need an advocate for public schools and Brian Sandoval has demonstrated that when you don’t have your own children in public school it is easier to cut public school budgets.

My second issue is the funding of her campaign. She seems to have a lot of money to spend, which makes me concerned as to who is pulling the strings in her campaign.

Why not Tom Stewart? Again, the key for me is a passion to move forward and Stewart’s campaign seems a little generic to me.

Why Sarah Peters? I feel Peters has a desire to call out bad decisions and she seems highly intelligent in her assessment of key public issues.

Government Shutdown An Opportunity

18 Thursday Jan 2018

Posted by in Business, Crisis Management, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Taxes, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

DACA protesters in San Francisco 5 September 2017

Time for Democrats to take a stand

A government shutdown is a bad thing. It creates a lot of problems and it affects a lot of people. Typically, one political party is blamed, and that creates a risk of losing elections.

But this is a different moment in time. People are tired of being mowed over by the Republican party. People are tired of the Democrats always giving up concessions only to have the Republican take more away later. It’s time for Democrats to take a stand and not flinch.

Provisions To Avoid a Government Shutdown

Democrats can’t take the stand for just one issue. It has to be for several core issues and they cannot negotiate away any of the issues. Democrats should demand the following Provisions:

  1. All DACA recipients will be given a 20-year deferral and shall have preferred status in obtaining citizenship provided they are employed, a full-time student, are not convicted of a felony and pay all taxes as required.
  2. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will be restricted from taking any action on any immigrant unless the person has committed a felony. All immigrants in custody that have not committed a felony will be released.
  3. Net Neutrality must be restored.
  4. All measures passed by the House or Senate must achieve a two-thirds majority for the remainder of the 115th Congress, and for the 116th Congress if Republicans maintain a majority in the House or Senate.
  5. The 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act is repealed except for those tax cuts for those earning under $250,000.
  6. All Trump appointees must be removed from office and all acts by those appointees are to be rescinded. All new appointees must be meet Provision 4, above.
  7. President Donald Trump will not be allowed to make any Executive Orders for the remainder of his term, and all of his previous Executive Orders by President Donald Trump are rescinded.
  8. All funding for a wall between Mexico and the United States will be void, with the exception of sections of the border that both Mexico and the United States agree upon.
  9. President Donald Trump will not be allowed to have a Twitter account.
  10. President Donald Trump must pay for all services and costs when not staying in the White House or other government-owned facilities.

Shutdown Better Than Alternative?

These ten provisions may seem harsh. The alternative may be mass work stoppages, strikes, and protests, which is what will likely happen if the Democrats fail to stop the Republicans from destroying our country.

Need a New Plan for Gaining Political Support

02 Tuesday Jan 2018

Posted by in About Reno, Aging, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Green, Health, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Relationships, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Taxes, Technology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

 

About thirty percent of my emails are requests from political interests. They implore me to give them money to avoid the dire consequences that will surely happen if their cause is not successful. These are from progressive causes targeting liberals, not wealthy conservatives who actually have spendable incomes. 

Begging for money works on the street sometimes, but I can’t imagine any intelligent person that will be motivated by street tactics. It is embarrassing that the liberal viewpoint is being represented by groups that have all the skills and tact of a late-night, off-channel, ACT NOW television commercial.

If you want my attention, tell me what you’ve done and why you’ve done it. Tell me how you’ve spent money up to now. Give me a link to a website that I can go to if I want to learn more. Don’t threaten dire circumstances. Don’t beg for money. Don’t send me emails on a daily or even weekly basis. If I support your cause I might follow-up on it, but not if you annoy me.

We have major problems in this country and if a group’s best plan to solve the problem is to send me an email begging for money, then they’ve failed. Political causes HAVE TO STOP listening to political media hacks that tell them how they raised money in 2008 and start thinking of how to mobilize people to respond to the issues of 2018.

In case they haven’t noticed, the wealthy have figured out how to win politics with money, and they are really good at it. It’s time to out think Soviet Republicans and that shouldn’t be difficult, but outspending mega-corporations and the wealthy is not a competition in which I will participate.

1968: The Year of Fear and Hate

04 Thursday May 2017

Posted by in Aging, Communication, Crime, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Respect, Taxes, Traditional Media, Universities, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 1968. Richard Nixon, Hubert Humphrey, and George Wallace, and were desperately trying to win the Presidential election. Former Vice President Nixon had moderate conservatives and war-hawks backing him. Vice President Humphrey had Democratic core voters and intelligent liberals backing him, and Alabama Governor George Wallace was the darling of racists and right wing extremists.

1968 Democratic Convention (The LIFE Picture Collection/Getty Images)

1968:  A Year of Chaos
In 1967, most had assumed President Lyndon Johnson would run, and likely win reelection. Those in his administration’s military leadership offered an optimistic view of the Vietnam War, with one of his recent close advisors publicly saying that the enemy was losing their will to fight.

Despite the rosy picture, over 70,000 U.S. soldiers had been killed or wounded during the war, and 1,000 more were being killed each month. Opposition to the war was tearing the Democratic party apart, and it overshadowed almost all other political issues.

In late January 1968, North Vietnam launched the Tet Offensive. Ultimately, the invading armies were beaten back, but the offensive shocked the United States. Those confident of Johnson’s ability to bring a successful end to the war waned in their support, and in March, the New Hampshire primary gave Johnson an uncomfortably narrow win over Eugene McCarthy, who was considered a relatively minor candidate that focused on an anti-war campaign.

Sen. Robert F. Kennedy (AP Photo/Dick Strobel)

Soon after the primary, Robert Kennedy entered the race, and Johnson ended his campaign. (Although Johnson probably dropped out because he doubted he could beat Kennedy, it is noteworthy that President Johnson’s decision to drop out was heavily influenced by his health concerns. Specifically, that he would likely not live through another term.) Without Johnson in the race, there was no single, obvious choice for President.

The year became more chaotic after Johnson dropped out. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated on April 4. Robert Kennedy was assassinated on June 6. Anti-war and civil rights protests and riots, along with mounting U.S. casualties in Vietnam dominated the news everyday.

Baltimore, Maryland, 1968 (Photo by Afro-American Newspapers/Gado/Getty Images)

By October, voters were reacting to the the presidential election as the prescription moment in the United States. The next President would either cure or kill our country, depending on the point of view. People who sought a calm return to normalcy were split between Nixon and Humphrey.

However, there were people who sought a disruptive choice for President, in the hopes that he would revive the Confederacy’s goal of remaking the United States into a white dominated government that would undo decades of work to create equal rights for all citizens. Their choice was George Wallace.

While many may believe that Wallace was a bigger threat to Nixon’s campaign, the reality was that the Governor from Alabama was luring as much as half of the support of the unions that normally support the Democratic ticket. Uneducated, Caucasian, blue-collar workers were taken in by Wallace’s hardline racist positions.

The civil rights riots generated fear among white voters, many of whom, felt they were not racist, but were of the opinion that life for the African-American would be fine if they would just settle down and accept their lot in life.

In the end, Nixon won with less than half the vote, and was in a statistical tie with Humphrey, but he had a significant electoral college margin. Wallace won over almost ten million voters, and certainly had an impact on the outcome.

Both Nixon and President Johnson used last-minute tactics to sway voters in the final weeks. President Johnson publicly suggested that a Vietnam peace deal was imminent, and Nixon’s campaign used back channels to interfere with those peace efforts, coupled with a spy in the White House that kept the Nixon campaign informed of Johnson’s diplomatic efforts.

NEXT:  A hard look at the Wallace voter

Clinton Wraps Up Nomination

06 Monday Jun 2016

Posted by in Aging, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Politics, Religion, Taxes, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Inevitability of President-elect Clinton

The Inevitability of President-Elect Clinton

Hillary Clinton will take the next step to being our country’s 45th President tomorrow. Despite what the Sanders Desparitas say, the race is over. Clinton’s quiet wins in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands put her only 26 pledged delegates from clinching the nomination. Shortly after the voting ends in New Jersey tomorrow, she will have the over 80 more pledged delegates to clinch the nomination as the Democratic Presidential nominee.

With a near tie in California, Clinton will win another 270 pledged delegates, and Sanders will be about 300 pledged delegates behind. The four other races tomorrow will have no impact on the outcome, as each of those States have fewer delegates at stake than the District of Columbia.

It is likely that Sanders and some of his supporters will follow through on their threat to violently disrupt the National Democratic Convention; however, many Sanders supporters joined the campaign to work for positive change, and Sanders is demonstrating that he cares less about building, than destroying.

On the other end of the spectrum, Donald Trump is heading toward political bankruptcy as each news cycle becomes less about his campaign, and more about his unethical behavior. Even Trump’s tweets make him look pitiful and stupid.

Unfortunately for the Party of Stupidity (POS,) Trump delegates are locked in for the July National Convention, and regardless of how dismal his poll numbers, Trump will be the POS nominee, as thousands of our country’s worst citizens will be in Cleveland to cheer him on to failure. 

Nine months ago, I said that the GOP Presidential Race is Over and this has continued to be true. All we have left to do is watch how bad the Republicans lose.

Sanders is Still DOA: Math Trumps Rhetoric

04 Wednesday May 2016

Posted by in Ethics, Generational, Government, Honor, Politics, The Tipping Point, Women

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Bernie Sanders Math: If I lose, I should still win!

Bernie Sanders Math: If I lose, I should still win!

Bernie Sanders won Indiana. Well, sort of. 

If by winning, you mean he received 34,466 more votes, then yes, he won.

However, exit polls showed him pulling a surprise 12% win, which would have helped his famous, and endless claim of ‘momentum,’ but he only came in with less than half of that percentage.

But the real contest is who wins the most delegates. Before Indiana Sanders was 327 delegates behind, and his Indiana ‘win’ nets him six more. Six more delegates is not even close to what he needed. Now he is has a deficit of 321 delegates, and between now and the June 7th California primary there are only 262 delegates available. Even if Sanders won one hundred percent of every primary and caucus between now and June 7th, he would still be behind Hillary Clinton in delegates.

California is the end of the road for Sanders. He can refuse to concede, but it won’t matter. There are 548 delegates available in the California primary. Clinton needs 181 of those delegates, along with the superdelegates who’ve pledged their vote to her, and she has the nomination.

Sanders needed to have a stunning win in Indiana to keep up the appearances of a contender, and he didn’t. His campaign has even given up the idea that he has to win the most pledged delegates, and is now focusing on converting the superdelegates to vote for him even if he can’t win the majority of regular delegates. That’s just a fantasy.

Hillary Clinton: In her 3rd decade of fighting for a government by the people

Hillary Clinton: Coasting to the nomination

The superdelegates are loyal Democrats. That’s how they earned the honor of being a superdelegate. Sanders is not a Democrat. He is an Independent who refused to join the Democratic party until he decided to run for President. His plan to ‘convert’ the superdelegates would require that some of the most loyal Democrats abandon the real Democrat who has won the most pledged delegates, to give the nomination to a candidate who is a Democrat in name only. It is not going to happen.

Under the rosiest scenario, Sanders will 129 delegates between now and June 7th. That would only give 66 more delegates to Clinton, but she would then only need 115 more delegates to win the nomination. Currently she is ahead of Sanders in California by ten points, but lets assume that Sanders wins by ten points. He would win 329 delegates, and Clinton 219.

Clinton will clinch the nomination in California by over one hundred delegates, even if Sanders wins every primary/caucus up to, and including California. Not only does Clinton win, but she also will still have over one hundred more pledged delegates than Sanders.

Sanders is claiming the system is rigged. He’s correct. It’s rigged to nominate the person who wins the most delegates, and that is Hillary Clinton.

The only question left is who she will face in the general election. Will it be the Donald Trump, or will there be an eleventh hour switch to Paul Ryan?

Five Fixes For Our Primary/Caucus Fiasco

04 Thursday Feb 2016

Posted by in Government, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Taxes, US History

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Voting FAIL

Voting FAIL

For decades we have been given this advice about our system for electing Presidents:  “If it’s broken, don’t try to fix it.”

People get nervous about elections and major changes are automatically assumed to create new problems…and it’s true. Any change will create new issues; however, the question is whether or not the new issues are really significant, or whether they are just the Elmer’s in the room who try to find a problem even if it is absurd.

First, we have to accept that our current political system works for some people. People with money and power really, really like the current system because it is easy to manipulate. In addition, people who have more pull in the political system than they should have really, really like it because the current system gives a handful of Iowans and New Hampshirites much more of a punch to our political system than they should have under an all voices are equal” system.

But the United States of America is spiraling out of control because our system of electing our leaders has become a type of reality TV show where entertainment is rewarded and common sense is punished. So how do we fix it?

ONE:  Corporations Are NOT People
It is hard to fathom how absurd the justification was for the Supreme Court to rule in favor of Citizens United. Free speech is our greatest foundation of democracy. Each person has a right to voice his or her opinion. What the Supreme Court did was to dilute our voice and say that not only do individuals have free speech rights, but some privileged individuals can amplify their voice to have a greater access to free speech than the common individual. It’s a perversion of the First Amendment and everyone knows it.

The ruling has to be reversed if our political system is to be restored.

TWO:  Tax Big Donors
The mega-contributor to political campaigns is now the tail wagging the political dog. Our country’s dignity has been slowly eroded by the wholesale purchasing of politicians by wealthy individuals and organizations. Yes, that means unions and corporations.

Contributions that exceed $500 in a two-year period given directly or indirectly to a campaign or cause should be taxed at 100%. Give a million dollars  to a campaign, pay an additional $999,500 to the government entity the candidate or cause will serve or impact.

THREE:  Government Established Primaries
The idea that political parties can establish any method of choosing a candidate is ridiculous. It plays into the hands of the buffoon who suddenly  decides that the method was unfair and then we are off to the courts. Every State should have a Primary, not a Caucus and it should be done under the same rules in every State.

FOUR:  Fifty Primaries in Fifty Days
By lottery pull the names of each State. The first State pulled holds their primary on February 1st. The second State pulled has their primary on February 2nd, etc. Candidates can begin campaigning in a State three weeks before the primary for that State.

FIVE:  Use both Internet and In-Person Voting
Voting is going to be done by the Internet. It’s coming. Why not start with the primaries? Keep the in-person option available, but allow people to vote on a secure website.

Each registered voter is given a unique code for each election. They register for the election website and set up a password. On the election date they sign in, enter their unique code, and vote.

This is Why (2015 vs the 1970’s)

15 Sunday Mar 2015

Posted by in Aging, Business, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Taxes, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The 1970’s – American Implosion

The Decade of Oil Domination

ENEMIES DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN
America was rocked by the internal conflicts during the 1960’s, and the 1970’s did little to sooth the hearts and minds of the citizens. Inflation slowed slightly in 1970, only to be followed by recession. Then the White House was rocked in 1972, by an ever-growing scandal called ‘Watergate’ after the place where Republican operatives attempted to break into Democratic headquarters. Over the next year it would be revealed that the Republican party, including President Richard Nixon played dirty politics during the President’s re-election campaign and then used power tactics to cover up their misdeeds.

In the Fall of 1972, the world was shaken by a group of Palestinians that took Israeli athletes hostage in Germany’s Summer Olympic Games. The Palestinians were given logistical assistance by German Neo-Nazis which helped them penetrate the athlete’s living area and capture eleven of the Israel delegation (two of the eleven were killed during the invasion of the Israeli rooms.) As the world watched, the Germans eventually attempted a botched night rescue as the hostages were moved to an airport. The German snipers were untrained and had no night vision equipment. Every aspect of the German rescue plan was flawed and the Palestinians eventually made a decision to kill all hostages during a stalemate in the fighting.

In October of 1973, Israel responded to a surprise attack by Egypt and Syria (the Yom Kipper War) with a counter attack. The United States and Russia quickly began resupplying their allies (US/Israel and USSR/Syria-Egypt) with arms and materials. In response the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC, later OPEC) began a six month oil embargo that created massive fuel shortages in the United States. This caused the price of oil to rise from $3/barrel to $12/barrel and sparked a new round of inflation.

OUTCOME: American Politics
By the late 1974, the Watergate scandal had ended in resignations by the Vice President and President. Gerald Ford, who had just replaced the Vice President, became the President and limped his administration through the end of Nixon’s term. By the 1976 elections people were done with the Republican party and Jimmy Carter was thrust into the job of restoring faith in government.

OUTCOME:  Oil, Greed, and the Middle East
The OPEC oil embargo and the Munich Massacre sent a message that America should be focusing on the Middle East, but the Watergate scandal had caused an information overload, so many Americans still saw Russia as the main foreign threat. However, because the Middle East had massive oil reserves it became the most strategic region in the world for oil consuming countries. This caused the governments of Russia and the United States to attempt to secure the region for each country’s own self-interest.

The questionable tactics of unscrupulous American oil companies opened new wounds in the Arab world.  Our public image had been defined by U.S. business and political interference in internal matters of many Arab countries. Americans were caught off guard by the festering hate for America in the Middle East.

OUTCOME:  Economic Instability
The roller coaster of inflation, recession, inflation left Americans with a sense of fear about the economy. The typical American was caught by surprise in 1973 when the oil embargo practically put the United States on its knees. The pride America had after beating the odds in World War II and putting a man on the Moon were all erased by one unethical President and our country’s economic vulnerabilities.

THE NEW HOPE EXTINGUISHED
Jimmy Carter’s election in 1976, brought a new hope to America. That produced a new fear for Republicans. Nothing could hurt conservatives more than to have a Democratic President restore America’s self-confidence. President Carter focused on peace and humanitarian initiatives that conservatives said made America look weak. Fortunately for conservatives, the Middle East would be what they needed to derail the Democrats and return to power.

In 1979, Russia invaded Afghanistan and students in Iran overran the American Embassy and took hostages. At the same time a mythical oil crisis (world oil supply dropped by only 4%) drove oil prices up to $39.50 per barrel in one year. The events dominated the news and overshadowed Carter’s re-election campaign. Republicans successfully used political ads to paint Democrats as out of touch during the worst political crisis of Carter’s administration. The events of 1979 could not have been more perfect for the resurgence of the disgraced conservatives.

NEXT:  The 1980’s

THE SERIES:  The 1950’s    The 1960’s    The 1990’s    2000’s    Epilogue