Mediaboss Marketing

There is an old story in politics from the 1950s, where Democratic nominee Adlai Stevenson is approached by a confident aide who tells him that he has the thinking people on his side, to which Stevenson replies, ah, but I need a majority. Liberalism is rooted in condescension, which is hidden under the veneer of tolerance andsupportingfree speech. It is actuallyremarkable: a group of overly indoctrinated individuals have managed to successfully polish a turd--until now.

For liberals, Hillary Clinton was so amazingly qualified to be president. She could have been the first female president, and she had a long history of publicservice etc. except no one liked her. No one has ever really liked Hillary except hard-core liberals, and theyre not the majority of the country. She was also dishonest, inauthentic, not trustworthy, and overly secretive. These characteristics were hurled at her in the 1990s, and rehashed when her campaign stumbled endlessly trying to explain how her unsecure and unauthorized private email server was okay for her to use for official business secretary of state. The ethical quid pro quo allegations at the Clinton Foundationwere also another source of heartburn for the campaign. Though there was an absence of hard evidence, it appears a pattern as common: good things happened to big donors to the Clinton Foundation. Just take a look at the Rosatom takeover of Uranium One as an example. All feed into the notion that voters couldnt trust Hillary, that she was in it for herself, and that she was a typical politician:all talk, no action. She lost in one of the biggest political upsets in American history.

As liberals deal with ruins of their movement and the Democratic Party struggles to find its way out of political exile, theyre lashing out at Trump voters, even reluctant ones who theycould flip in 2020. Those who out themselves are then besieged by judgment by the urban-based elite, who still haven't noticed that their way of thinking failed to win over voters. In fact, it was the opposite; millions of Obama voters voted for Trump. Talk about compounding the suck that is Hillary Rodham Clinton.

So, as liberals think theyre gaining ground with a Tea Party of their own (i.e. town hall protests)and continue to embrace identity politics because nothing says insanity than smashing your face against the same wall twice for a different result, they also have to know that its only emboldening Trump voters. The New York Times had an article that showed how even Democrats from the Clinton era are sick of the progressive antics that have taken over their party, namely that fact that BillClinton pretty much reiterated much of what Trump said about immigration. The only difference is that Bill was lauded for it; Trump is smeared as a racist. It also delves into how dating is becoming a game of cloak and dagger for some, with dates lying to their friends about political affiliations to avoid being shunned. While others make it very clear that theyre not interested in Trump supporters. So, in liberal America, your vote is all that defines you. And they say the GOP has an outreach problem.

ViaNYT:

Mr. Medford should be a natural ally for liberals trying to convince the country that Mr. Trump was a bad choice. But it is not working out that way. Every time Mr. Medford dips into the political debate either with strangers on Facebook or friends in New York and Los Angeles he comes away feeling battered by contempt and an attitude of moral superiority.

[]

Liberals may feel energized by a surge in political activism, and a unified stance against a president they see as irresponsible and even dangerous. But that momentum is provoking an equal and opposite reaction on the right. In recent interviews, conservative voters said they felt assaulted by what they said was a kind of moral Bolshevism the belief that the liberal vision for the country was the only right one. Disagreeing meant being publicly shamed.

Protests and righteous indignation on social media and in Hollywood may seem to liberals to be about policy and persuasion. But moderate conservatives say they are having the opposite effect, chipping away at their middle ground and pushing them closer to Mr. Trump.

[]

Conservatives have gotten vicious, too, sometimes with Mr. Trumps encouragement. But if political action is meant to persuade people that Mr. Trump is bad for the country, then people on the fence would seem a logical place to start. Yet many seemingly persuadable conservatives say that liberals are burning bridges rather than building them.

[]

It is tempting to blame Mr. Trump for Americas toxic political state of mind. He has wreaked havoc on political civility and is putting American democratic institutions through the most robust stress test in decades. But many experts argue that he is a symptom, not a cause, and that the roots go deeper.

[]

The Democratic Party has changed so much that I dont even recognize it anymore, she said. These people are destroying our democracy. They are scarier to me than these Islamic terrorists. I feel absolutely disgusted with them and their antics. It strengthens peoples resolve in wanting to support President Trump. It really does.

Polling data suggest many center-right voters feel the same way. The first poll by the Pew Research Center on presidential job performance since Mr. Trump took office showed last week that while he has almost no support from Democrats, he has high marks among moderates who lean Republican: 70 percent approve, while 20 percent disapprove.

Looks like liberals are doing a bang up job getting Trump that second term, especially those who work in Hollywood.

Milo Now OUT at CPAC After Shocking Video Emerges

Calls to Boycott Wegmans Backfire as Stores Sell Out of Trump Wine

Originally posted here:
NYT: Yep, Liberal Tantrums and Identity Politics Are Helping Trump (Secure That Second Term) - Townhall

Every time I hear someone use the term liberal in reference to the criminals literally attempting to tear our country apart, I want to scream, No! I know plenty of actual liberals. Those people are not liberals!

After all, the dictionary definition of liberal includes phrases like open-minded and generous. Thats a pretty apt description of most of my center-left friends. We may not always see eye to eye, but for the most part theyre good people who want the same things I want: peace, prosperity, safe neighborhoods, good schools.

The same cannot be said for those using the presidential election as a pretext for rioting, looting, assaulting innocents, engaging in intimidation tactics and fomenting violent rebellion. They are neither open-minded nor generous, nor do they want the same things normal, rational Americans want.

Thats why todays political landscape is so much more fraught than it was even a few years ago. Once upon a time, I assumed virtually all Americans, whether they typically voted Democrat or Republican, had essentially the same values they just disagreed on the mechanics.

I no longer believe that. It is now obvious to me that a significant percentage of people who identify as Democrats, or at least vote for Democrat candidates, want nothing less than the utter destruction of our nation its borders, its culture, its identity, its moral code. I used to think that if the two sides could just sit down and talk, we could come to some sort of mutual understanding. Now I wonder how those of us in the normal and rational category can even begin to have a conversation with people like the Berkeley rioters. We dont even speak the same language, much less share similar values.

A bigger problem, however, is that those who vote Democrat but are still rational, what we might call classical liberals a steadily shrinking percentage of Democrat voters have been largely silent about the violence and intimidation perpetrated by others in their party. Ive heard very few voices on the left condemning riots or calls for the wholesale slaughter of police officers and white people.

In this way, the center-left has become very much like the moderate Muslims we keep hearing so much about, but all too rarely hear from.

I, for one, am perfectly willing eager, even to accept that the vast majority of Muslims do not condone terrorism. But that becomes more difficult when so few denounce the atrocities carried out in the name of Islam. We must conclude that most Muslims either support those atrocities or else are afraid to speak out and the latter seems far more likely.

So it is now with moderate Democrats. We assume they dont really want to see police officers or other innocents murdered, or the fabric of our society ripped to shreds. But silence can only persist for so long before it becomes consent.

Rob Jenkins is a local freelance writer and the author of four books, including Family Man: The Art of Surviving Domestic Tranquility, available at Books for Less in Buford and on Amazon. Email Rob at rjenkinsgdp@yahoo.com.

Follow this link:
JENKINS: It's time for liberals to renounce the radical left - Gwinnettdailypost.com

Austin, Texas As president, he cut a grandiose figure. He was a braggart and a frequent liar. He was suspicious of other countries, frequently saying, Foreigners are not like the folks I am used to. He had a reckless disregard for limits. He belittled and browbeat others to intimidate them and give him what he wanted. Historian Robert Dallek said that he viewed criticism of his policies as personal attacks and opponents of his policies as disloyal to him and the country.

He would bully and insult reporters, saying of one that he always knew when he was around, because he could smell him. He told whoppers about voter fraud in his elections. But he did get things done, dominating the political scene for good and for ill.

No, were not talking about Donald Trump. During a visit to the LBJ Presidential Library in Austin, I was struck by just how many parallels there are between Lyndon Johnson and Trump. Liberals knew all about Johnsons faults in the 1960s. But it was a different, more respectful media era, and his faults were underreported. The media were also willing to overlook them until Vietnam became a fiasco, because reporters liked his domestic-policy priorities in civil rights and his new government spending. Would America have been better off without Lyndon Johnson in the Senate? And, consequently, without Lyndon Johnson as president? asked historian Torsten Kathke, writing at his blog Thus, History! It is a question of means and ends. Any answer can only be uncomfortable, but that is, precisely, the ground on which politics thrives.

The answer that 91 mostly liberal historians gave for CSPANs new Presidential Historians Survey is clear. Despite all of Johnsons character flaws and the Vietnam disaster, he was ranked as the tenth-best president. LBJ lost ninth place, by a historians hair, to Ronald Reagan, despite the Gippers manifestly greater integrity and honesty. Where Johnson excelled was in the category Pursued Equal Justice for All. There, he barely lost out to Abraham Lincoln, taking second placebut still outscoringthird-place finisher Barack Obama. In other words, Johnsons ends canceled out his means.

With President Trump, conservatives are having to make similar calculations. Many Republicans on Capitol Hill are appalled by Trumps bouts of pettiness and near-paranoia. But they also believe that theyre worth tolerating if it means that tax reform will pass, Obamacare will be replaced, and U.S. military strength will be restored.

Some conservatives go beyond that realpolitik and argue that there is a method to Trumps menace. Writing in the latest issue ofNational Review, Heather Higgins, CEO of the Independent Womens Voice, notes:

Trump repeatedly reverses tone with neck-whipping speed when it suits his purpose to pivot from aggressive attack to gracious conciliation. These are clues that his bravado and bluster are an act. Trump has learned that intimidation, misdirection, controlling the conversation, graciousness, and conciliation all have their uses.

If its true that Trumps grandiosity is all an act, he deserves to retire the Academy Award. But there is evidence to buttress Higginss contention. In the biggest crisis of his business career, he really cared about the art of one deal.

In 1990, Trump nearly went bankrupt and was forced to ask creditors to change the terms on their loans and forgive some of his debts. Trump has said he focused on it with more intensity and purpose than anything hed done in his life to that point. In PBSs documentary The Choice 2016, Gwenda Blair, author of The Trumps, said that bankers held gigantic meetings at Trump Tower with, like, 40 banks all sitting around in a room, Donald very sober, looking like not quite penitent perhaps, but serious. According to Blair, Trump convinced his creditors that he was more valuable to them financially alive than financially dead. So Trump shifted from real-estate deals to licensing his well-known name. The brand was worth now so much that bankers were willing to take a haircut in order to hang onto the name, Blair said.

But for the media it makes little difference if Trumps excesses are habitual or calculated. Media outlets have declared war on him because he represents what they view as an unprecedented danger. On the front page of the New York Times in August, the papers media columnist, Jim Rutenberg, observed that balance has been on vacation when it comes to coverage of Trump:

If you view a Trump presidency as something thats potentially dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that. You would move closer than youve ever been to being oppositional. Thats uncomfortable and uncharted territory for every mainstream, nonopinion journalist Ive ever known, and by normal standards, untenable.

But normal standards, as Rutenberg suggested, may not apply when it comes to Trump.

There was a time when conservatives made the same argument about LBJ, insisting he was a unique threat to democracy. In 1964, conservative Democrat J. Evetts Haley sold 7.5 million copies of his self-published polemic A Texan Looks at Lyndon: A Study in Illegitimate Power. According to the Texas Monthly, Haley portrayed Johnson as a vain and vicious man whose climb to the presidency was wrought with malevolence on every rung of the ladder.

Some of Haleys charges such as Johnsons involvement in winning his fraud-ridden 1948 Senate election by getting 202 of his purported supporters to vote in exact alphabetical order were later confirmed in historian Robert Caros magisterial four-volume biography of Johnson.

Some of LBJs former aides also confirmed Haleys view of Johnsons character. George Reedy, who was LBJs White House press secretary, recalled:

As a human being, he was a miserable person. ...a bully, sadist, lout, and egotist. His lapses from civilized conduct were deliberate and usually intended to subordinate someone else to his will.

Were there nothing to look at save LBJs personal relationships with other people, it would be merciful to forget him altogether. But there is much more to look at. He may have been a son of a bitch, but he was a colossal son of a bitch....Nevertheless, he was capable of inspiring strong attachments even with people who knew him for what he was.

I dont know just how much of a miserable person Donald Trump is. I do know that many conservatives have decided that regardless of their personal feelings about him, he is now president and its important to work with him to push through policies that will help the country. Liberals in the 1960s knew what an SOB Johnson was, but they demanded that Republicans work with him to pass legislation. And legislate they did, passing the Civil Rights Act and achieving bipartisan support for the passage of Medicare.

I left my tour of the Johnson Library and its archives this month with a question. Sure, it was easy for people in both parties to hate Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s. Its certainly easy for people in both parties to hate Donald Trump today. But in the 1960s, there was a sense that the legislative process and the wheels of government still had to turn. Back then, the country didnt tolerate blind obstructionism and attempts to delegitimize the presidency.

If were going to increase economic growth, limit racial tensions, and move effectively against terrorism, those who Hate Trump need to ask themselves, Is there any point at which resisting his administration becomes counterproductive? So far, their answer appears to be no.

John Fund is NROs national-affairs correspondent.

More here:
Lyndon Johnson & Donald Trump: Grandiose, Bullying, Colossal ... - National Review

Introducing her husband at Saturdays rally in Melbourne, Florida, Melania Trump began by reading the Lords Prayer, but while the crowd loved it, leftists on social media were not so kind.

Liberals attacked the first lady for everything from her accent and faith to the fact that she read the prayer instead of having it memorized.

With an hours practice I could probably say the Lords Prayer better in Slovene than Melania Trump does it in English, @adrianshort wrote.

@NicoleAngeleen tweeted: I could recite the Our Father backwards, drugged with a gun to my head. If you need to read this prayer, youre not Christian (re: Melania).

God Bless her, but listening to Melania do 'The Lords Prayer' sounds like someone getting cursed to become a 'Dracula,'@carnojoe wrote.

Melania starts the dictatorship rally with the Lords Prayer? NOT EVERY AMERICAN IS CHRISTIAN!!!! Country over party, tweeted @JaimePrimak.

Some even took personal shots at the first lady, calling her a whore.

plus melania read the 'our father' like a whore in confession after a night of escorting, @TrumpUriNation wrote in a tweet that has since been deleted.

Stay classy.

Milo Now OUT at CPAC After Shocking Video Emerges

Calls to Boycott Wegmans Backfire as Stores Sell Out of Trump Wine

Here is the original post:
Liberals Attack Melania For Reciting Lord's Prayer at Rally - Townhall

New York Times

Liberals Are Still Angry, but Merrick Garland Has Reached Acceptance New York Times Judge Merrick B. Garland on Capitol Hill last March, soon after President Barack Obama nominated him for the Supreme Court. Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times. WASHINGTON You might think it would take a toll on a person, being nominated for the ... and more »

Read more here:
Liberals Are Still Angry, but Merrick Garland Has Reached Acceptance - New York Times