Mediaboss Marketing

A very nice liberal broadcaster asked me earlier this week whether I am worried about the future of the Republican party.

Funny question.

There are 25 states in which the state legislatures and governorships are controlled by Republicans, and two states with executive/legislative divides in which there are Republican legislative majorities large enough to override a veto from the Democratic governor. Sixty-eight of the countrys 98partisan state legislative chambers are Republican-run. There are only four states with Democratic governors and legislatures; it is true that these include one of our most populous states (California), but the majority of Americans live in states in which there are Republican trifectas or veto-proof legislative majorities. Two-thirds of the nations governors are Republicans; more than two-thirds of our state legislative houses are under Republican control. Republicans control both houses of Congress and have just won the presidency.

Democrats control the dean of students office at Oberlin.

And Democrats have responded to their recent electoral defeat with riots, arson, and Alex Joneslevel conspiracy theories. Progressives have just raised $5 million to press for a recount in several states. Clinton sycophant Paul Krugman, sounding exactly like every well-mannered conspiracy nut youve ever known, says the election probably wasnt hacked, but conspiracies do happen and now that its out there (who put it out there?) an independent investigation is called for.

Maybe it isnt the Republican party whose future needs worrying about.

In one sense, what is happening in American politics is a convergence of partisan styles.

Beginning with the nomination of Barry Goldwater, and thanks in no small part to the efforts of many men associated with this magazine, the Republican party spent half a century as a highly ideological enterprise. But highly ideological political parties are not the norm in the English-speaking world, especially not in the United States, and the conservative fusion of American libertarianism, social traditionalism, and national-security assertiveness probably is not stable enough to cohere, having now long outlived the Cold War, in which it was forged. Trumps lack of conservative principle is unwelcome, but it points to an ideological looseness that is arguably more normal, a return to the model of party as loose coalition of interest groups.

The Democrats, on the other hand, are becoming more ideological, or at least more openly and self-consciously ideological, as the partys progressivism becomes more and more a catechism. This has the effect of making the Democratic party less democratic. American progressives have a long and genuine commitment to mass democracy, having supported not only various expansions of the franchise but also many instruments of direct democracy such as the ballot initiative, but they also have a long and genuine commitment to frustrating democracy when it gets in the way of the progressive agenda, which is why they have spent the better part of a century working to politicize the courts, the bureaucracies, and the non-governmental institutions they control in order to ensure they get their way even when they lose at the ballot box. Democrats did not pay much attention when they started suffering losses at the state level, because they were working against federalism and toward a unitary national government controlled from Washington. And they did not fight as hard as they might to recover from their losses in Congress while Barack Obama sat in the White House, obstructing Republican legislative initiatives and attempting to govern through executive fiat an innovation that the Democrats surely are about to regret in the direst way.

For the moment, the stylistic convergence the Republicans becoming a little more like the selfish-coalition Democratic party, and the Democrats becoming a little more like the ideological Republican party works to the Republicans advantage, though there is no reason to believe that always will be the case. The GOP had a very good run of it as a highly ideological enterprise.

The longer-term problem for the Democrats is that they are finding out that they have to play by their own rules, which are the rules of identity politics. This is a larger problem for the Democratic party than is generally appreciated. The Democratic party is an odd apparatus in which most of the power is held by sanctimonious little old liberal white ladies with graduate degrees and very high incomes Hillary Rodham Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, Randi Weingarten while the manpower, the vote-power, and the money-power (often in the form of union dues) comes from a disproportionately young and non-white base made up of people who, if they are doing well, might earn one-tenth of the half-million dollars a year Weingarten was paid as the boss of the teachers union. They are more likely to be cutting the grass in front of Elizabeth Warrens multi-million-dollar mansion than moving into one of their own. They roll their eyes at Hillary Rodham Clintons risible abuela act, having actual abuelas of their own.

It is far from obvious that Senator Cherokee Cheekbones or anyone standing alongside Debbie Wasserman Schultz will feel more right to Democratic voters who have almost nothing in common with them. A coalition in which elderly rich white faculty-lounge liberals have all the power and enjoy all the perks while the work and money come from younger and browner people is not going to be very stable.

Especially when it has been stripped of the one thing that has held that coalition together so far: power.

Kevin D. Williamson is National Reviews roving correspondent.

Editors Note: This piece has been emended since its publication.

See the original post here:
Progressives without Power - nationalreview.com

The 21st century leftists have proven themselves to be utterly ignorant and incapable time and time again. And I believe there are specific reasons for this that has to do with their very core nature. The following demonstrates all the loser characteristics embedded in their psyches that draws the leftists to their equalist beliefs. And because they compensate their own shortcomings with their ideology rather improving themselves, it ultimately leads to a cycle of loserdom which they cannot escape from.

For the sake of simplicity, I will group liberals, progressives, SJWs, feminists, degenerates, and all the rest under the title of leftist.

I think Im beautiful, therefore I am.

The leftists are such losers that they do very little to take care of themselves. As well as being short-term thinking hedonists, they dont want to put any effort in life, so youll often see them eat unhealthy food and shun working out. This is why the leftist females tend to look like painted hogs while the men are usually low-T twigs. Youll also see them do little to dress properly or maintain their looks other than to exaggerate their own ugliness for attention and shock effect.

Leftists never take responsibility for their own lives. This is why they must constantly blame others for their problems, cry for resources and sympathy, and expect everyone else to respect them when they deserve none. Its no surprise that many of these individuals tend to be in favor of nanny-governments.

For every inch you give them, theyll ask for another mile.

Because they have no accountability, because theyve been coddled all their lives, and because they view themselves as victims who need to be compensated for, the leftists have the most deranged and shameless sense of entitlement. They seem to think that the world owes them everything, which is why they have such arrogant and hostile attitude towards everyone else. The whole concept of working to earn something for yourself is lost to them.

Instead of trying to be better and stronger, leftists prefer to rationalize their pitiful existence and turn their status as the oppressed into a source of pride. Because being a victim is such a coveted status, they dont seem to want to move on from their real or perceived victimhood by trying to improve themselves. This is why the leftists always behave like perpetual infants.

Brought to you by Soros and co.

As much as they claim to be against the elites and the established order, the leftists are the most reliant on those on top for their livelihood. Like the sucklings with no agency they are, the leftists depend on everyone else to take care of all their needs. This is also why they are so easy to manipulate into serving as the pawns of the elites.

Do you really think feminism and BLM would be able to continue on as they do without the Patriarchal and racist system tolerating and openly supporting their movements?

The leftists will always lose because they are arrogant enough to think that the spirit of times is on their side. With their smug faces, theyll tell you that its time for women to rule because its the current year. They truly believe that were all on a one-directional path towards some rainbow utopia where everyone lives in total peace and harmony. And they do so all the while berating everyone else they disagree as Neanderthals who are not getting on with the times.

Their flawed logic is as follows: A) Anything that challenges the status quo is progress, B) Progress is good for humanity, C) Challenging the status quo is therefore good. This is why they always target and assault the traditional order, ignoring the fact that it was exactly those time-tested values that enabled them the prosperity they take for granted.

The leftists are inferior in many waysand they know it. And for that reason, they need to spew hatred for anyone who is better than they are and pretend that theyre not interested in having the qualities they envy in secret.

The leftists hate healthy body, family, beauty, masculinity, honor, life, and more. If they see a strong and masculine white man, theyll feel threatened as they see him as an oppressor. If they see a beautiful, traditional woman, theyll spit venom as they see her as a traitor who is conforming to Patriarchal standards. Instead of trying to be decent themselves, they prefer to promote degeneracy while destroying all standards so that everyone can be equal losers rather than just themselves.

Leftists cannot escape their loserdom because they refuse to grow strong by facing challenges. Instead, these pampered children choose to shield their fragile feelings, only to dig themselves into a deeper hole. The more they guard their emotions, the more sensitive they become, and the more they demand others to meet their need for safety. This is why you see these spoiled brats clinging onto their infantile safe spaces, trigger warnings, and so on.

Because the leftists have a fixed mindset where they believe nothing can be changed through ones own effort, they expect everyone else to revolve around them. In their world, whites will always be privileged while blacks are oppressed due to slavery from generations ago. Rich will always be rich and poor will always be poor because the system is designed to be oppressive. Men will always be rapists and women will always be victims because of Patriarchy. Individual initiative doesnt exist to them, only the collective identity.

The ugly truth the leftists will never admit is that they secretly hate themselves. The somewhat normal ones have been conditioned to feel guilty about being white or masculine while the deviant oneseven as they pretend to be proud of their aberrant identitiesfeel guilty about their subnormal nature. This explains why suicide rate among the trans-whatevers is far above the normal population. Back home in Sodom, I had a gay friend who revealed to me that the majority of the homosexuals in the city were severely depressed and consumed excessive amounts of drugs and alcohol to sedate themselves.

The guilt is also why you see white people hating their own race to virtue signal, along with the male-feminist turds who bash other men like its going to get them laid. In a way, they have to direct all that negative energy onto others so that theyll stop hurting themselves.

Jonestown or SJWs protesting? Who cares, theyre both equally crazy.

The leftists have no respect for themselves as they are incapable of generating it within themselves. This explains why they constantly seek external approval by demanding that everyone else accept them just for being oppressed and praise them for promulgating ideas about equality. When you have no accomplishments and nothing of value to be proud of, the next best thing is to have politically correct opinions that youve been taught to have which requires no effort at all.

The leftists are usually unable to create anything worthwhile on their own, which is why they try to deconstruct what they dont like without offering any real alternative. And because of their destructive nature, they would rather shut down others from speaking than have a dialogue, theyll criticize those who makes things happen rather than do things on their own, and so on. They like to go against all that is sacred and tear things down for the sake of progress and ceaselessly challenge the norms without any tangible end goal in mind.

The leftists are their own worst enemies and the only way they ever win is when the opposition slips or fails to put up a fight. That said, I would like to leave a word of warning to all the readers here: Just because Brexit happened and Trump was elected, it doesnt mean the leftists will concede defeat and magically disappear from the society. Theyll cry even louder and try to be more disruptive than ever before. Eight years of Reagan and eight years of Bush didnt do away with these freaks, it only set the stage for them to return with greater fanaticism. Theyre already protesting en masse across the country, so dont let your guard downthe real fight hasnt even begun yet.

Read More: 6 Reasons Progressives, Leftists, And SJWs Are (Literally) Hitler

Nov 28, 2016Corey Savage

Original post:
12 Reasons Why Liberals And Progressives Will Always Be Losers

The Eleanor Roosevelt Papers Project is a university-chartered research center associated with the Department of History of The George Washington University

Progressivism is the term applied to a variety of responses to the economic and social problems rapid industrialization introduced to America. Progressivism began as a social movement and grew into a political movement. The early progressives rejected Social Darwinism. In other words, they were people who believed that the problems society faced (poverty, violence, greed, racism, class warfare) could best be addressed by providing good education, a safe environment, and an efficient workplace. Progressives lived mainly in the cities, were college educated, and believed that government could be a tool for change. Social reformers, like Jane Addams, and journalists, like Jacob Riis and Ida Tarbel, were powerful voices for progressivism. They concentrated on exposing the evils of corporate greed, combating fear of immigrants, and urging Americans to think hard about what democracy meant. Other local leaders encouraged Americans to register to vote, fight political corruption, and let the voting public decide how issues should best be addressed (the initiative, the referendum, and the recall). On a national level, progressivism gained a strong voice in the White House when Theodore Roosevelt became president in 1901. TR believed that strong corporations were good for America, but he also believed that corporate behavior must be watched to ensure that corporate greed did not get out of hand (trust-busting and federal regulation of business). Progressivism ended with World War I when the horrors of war exposed people's cruelty and many Americans associated President Woodrow Wilson's use of progressive language ("the war to make the world safe for democracy") with the war.

For more information on progressivism see the following web sites:

Continue reading here:
The Progressive Era (1890 - 1920) - gwu.edu

The All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) is a political party in Nigeria. At the legislative elections held on 12 April 2003, the party won 1.4% of popular votes and 2 of 360 seats in the House of Representatives of Nigeria and no seats in the Senate. Its candidate at the presidential elections of 19 April 2003, Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu won 3.3% of the vote.

In governatorial elections of April 2011, Chief Rochas Okorocha (APGA), was elected governor of Imo state, by polling 15% more votes than incumbent governor Ikedi Ohakim (PDP) making the party present in two states with Anambra state as the party's first presence.

In February 2013, a faction of the party merged with the Action Congress of Nigeria, the All Nigeria Peoples Party, and the Congress for Progressive Change to form the All Progressives Congress.[1]

It is only a dissident faction of APGA led by Governor Okorocha of Imo State that merged with APC. The National chairman of APGA Chief Victor Umeh has distanced the party from Okorocha's action. They have expelled governor Okorocha from the party for his move and are contemplating of initiating a judicial process of removing him from office for decamping from APGA. Governor Peter Obi of Anambra State and many other faithfuls of APGA are still keeping the party strong.

See the original post here:
All Progressives Grand Alliance - Wikipedia

Donald Trump's presidential victory was cold waterin the face for many progressives.

It was a stunning election night. After an exhausting eighteen-month campaign and a vote count that went into the wee hours, we learned that the next President of the United States will be a rightwing authoritarian populist whose explicit racism prompted KKK leader David Duke to tweet, triumphantly:

Two terms of the nations first African-American President, a broad expansion of health care, the rescue of the auto industry, and an infusion of federal infrastructure spending that staved off a Great Depression, end like this. Black people, Latinos, Muslims, and immigrants cannot help but feel the blow the hardest.

The explicit misogyny and gleeful boasting about abusing women by Trump, which appeared to drive a surge for Hillary Clintons historic candidacy as the first woman major party nominee, ended with a definitive victory for the benighted macho aggressor.

There will be plenty to chew on over the next days and months for progressives.

There is, of course what might have been: Had Bernie Sanders been the nominee, would the outcome have been different? Had Sanders lost to Trump (which he might have done), the mainstream pundits would have been unified in smug disdain for his outsider candidacyas they were from the beginning.

But the establishment candidate lost instead.

Will Democrats and their friends and allies question their belief that the political professionals are best suited to decide who runs?

Voter turnout numbers suggest that the optimism and energy that drove Bernie Sanderss primary campaign was not fully transferable to his Democratic rival. Little wonder. Sanders captured many of the same frustrations Trump voters expressed. As Trump put it in his victory speech, The forgotten men and women of this country will be forgotten no longer.

The difference, of course, is that while Sanders offered a vision of economic and racial justice, universal health care, free college, and taxes on the obscene wealth of the top 1 percent to pay for a more equal society, Trump offered immigrant-bashing, tax cuts for the wealthy, and a restoration of white, male supremacy. The only area of overlap was on changing U.S. trade policyand there the details are fuzzy.

Democrats and progressives must grapple with the deep sense of alienation that drove both the Sanders and Trump campaigns. A status-quo, insider candidate who is a close to both the Washington establishment and Wall Street was never going to be a credible vehicle for populist concerns.

It will be tempting for Democrats to make fun of Trump, and of the people who support him. Cultural disdain for white trash voters helped feed those voters sense of alienation. Democrats have to offer more comfort to the afflicted and affliction to the comfortable if they hope to build a real and effective opposition.

Then there are the agonizing details.

FBI Director James Comey played a unique role with his announcement to Congress that the FBI was examining Hillary Clintons emails in the last few days of the campaignonly to announce, two days before the election, when the political damage was done, that there was nothing there. Never mind.

Republicans now control all branches of government. They cannot pretend to be outsiders anymore. The harm they can do is daunting. Democrats and progressives must unite in opposition, and figure out how to truly represent the better vision of America that we hold in common.

We have no choice. Lets get going.

Ruth Conniff is editor-in-chief of The Progressive.

Original post:
What Does Trumps Victory Mean for Progressives? | The ...