With the replacement of Renice Priebus we are seeing all of the “Trump in disarray” “Trump is doomed”, “Trump is a failure” memes trotted out again complemented by another set of poor arguments forecasting disaster. Most of the critiques are spurious but there is at least one that has basis in fact.

Of all the critiques of President Donald Trump that have come from the lips of the media there is one that is completely accurate, his polling numbers are less than one might desire in a president.  In fact if you look at the Real clear politics average of polling you will find that since the day he announced his candidacy to this moment Donald Trump has not had a single day when his favorable rating exceeded his unfavorable rating.  In fact he has not had a single day when his average favorable rating hit 45%.  Not one!

And if his personal ratings are bad his job approval ratings are even worse with a 14 point gap as of this writing and numbers that hit 46% one day of his presidency (Feb 4th 2017).

Given these polling figures augmented by “expert” pundits amplifying them, this special election cycle President Trump’s foes, like a gambling man seeing a run of cards he likes, bet millions these numbers meant the smart money was on defeat for this president and the party he leads.

Yet in every special election when polling numbers are replaced by actual voting numbers we have seen the President’s party prevail.  From Montana to Georgia and beyond, Trump keeps winning in defiance of what these poll numbers say.

The question is why? Is he beating the odds or are the polls wrong?

It would be no shock if the polls are suspect. Given the constant drumbeat of the press against Trump it would not be unwise to question the poll results they offer.

I think however there is something more than that going on and it comes down to two things we have seen from Donald Trump.

Firstly while he and his job approval numbers have been dismal the things the policies he supports are actually popular.  For example, his temporary travel ban while excoriated by the media in a poll at Politico hit 60% meanwhile Obamacare which he opposes, while enjoying its first ever surge of popularity since it was passed has never once hit 50% approval.

But what I really think has been the difference is Trump himself is a doer rather than a talker.  All his life President Trump, while famous for his showmanship has been a doer, a builder, a person who knows how to get things done.  You may not like him on a personal level, you may not approve of his tweets, but he’s all about doing things and it’s in the nature of things for people to go with doers.

Or to put in another way, when you need a set of breaks for your car your first criteria isn’t:  Is this mechanic likable?  , If you need a plumber to fix your toilet you don’t worry:  Does this plumber tweet the wrong things?   If you need minor surgery the #1 criteria to pick your surgeon isn’t:  Is this doctor “woke” to the media’s culturally approved gender norms?

No, what people want is a mechanic who knows how to fix breaks, a plumber who knows how to fix toilets and a surgeon who knows how to repair that hernia because if said mechanic, plumber or surgeon can’t do those things nothing else matters.

This is the real secret of the success of Donald Trump in the White House.  The polls can say what they want and the pundits can complain loudly, but as long as he gets laws passed, keeps getting judges approved, keeps American energy flowing and the economy booming, builds up the military and protects us from terror when it comes time for the American people to vote the smart money will be on him, Particularly as the Obamacare debacle demonstrates DC insiders seem determined to take credit for any failures that might take place

Last week I mentioned how the Chris Christie Bridge scandal was a golden opportunity for the GOP:

they should use every moment on the air to compare and contrast the media reaction to this Christie Scandal to the IRS scandal.

How horrible that in view of the ongoing IRS scandal where a government agency was used to go after conservatives that such a thing would happen.

They should wonder aloud if any of Chris Christie’s aides will plead the 5th under oath like the IRS people did.

They should talk about how Chris Christie should not stonewall or put up roadblocks as the Obama administration has continued to do with the IRS scandal.

And they should of course talk about the contrast between the media interest, saying perhaps Christie might use the Obama strategy on the IRS scandal, deny and stonewall in the hope that the media will ignore it over time.

They should POUND this there should be no answer that comes out of their lips that doesn’t use the words “IRS Scandal” and “Bridge Scandal” in the same sentence. Every article written on it by any conservative source should mention it, contrast it play on the difference in media interest between the pair.

And while I’m not a republican (people forget I left the party in a rather public way a year ago) it looks like some people who are republican have been paying attention:

Let’s start with Rudy Giuliani on This Week he starts the comparisons with the very first question from Martha Raddatz:

Giuliani: You know, Martha, that’s always kind of simplistic after some like this happens, you know, how could it happen, how could you not have known? How did President Obama not know about the IRS targeting right wing groups? You know, massive numbers of right wing groups…

Raddatz interrupts almost at once with saying…

 But this is traffic, this affects everybody. This seems very different.

Because the IRS certainly isn’t something that affects everybody but Rudy was just getting started

Giuliani: Well, that affects a lot of people. And the reality is, things go wrong in an administration. And frankly, you know, he was in campaign-mode at the time, during campaign-mode you miss a lot of things. You’re not paying as much attention. We see that with Benghazi.

I’ll give you plenty of examples. Every administration, every president, every mayor, every governor, something goes wrong below them and then the press ask, gosh, how do they not know? How did they not realize?

Note how Rudy leads with “every president” and keeps going back there all through the interview

Giuliani: But this is what happens in political operations. I mean, people get wrong messages. It happens all the time. It happened, again, I go back to the IRS scandal. The people in the IRS though President Obama wanted them to do this. President Obama didn’t want them to do this. But they got the sense because of that culture that they were supposed to target right wing groups. It was totally wrong.

I think it was totally wrong for these people to have interpreted Chris Christie this way.

But, look, he’s handled it the best way you can possibly handle it. He’s held a press conference, he’s flatly denied it.

There a reason why Morning Joe took a swing at him today and when GOP chairman Renice Priebus said this on Meet the Press:

He stood there for 111 minutes, in an open dialogue with the press. Now only if Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton would give us 111 seconds of that would we find out some things we want to find out about Obamacare, Benghazi, the I.R.S.. I mean Chris Christie’s– (Gregory Interrupts) –been (CHUCKLE) totally open here.

David Gregory went on full defense mode defending the president emphatically

Let me pick up on that point, Chairman. So you had said about the president and the I.R.S. scandal, and there’s been no direct tie, of course, to what happened to the I.R.S. to the president, just as there has not been a direct tie to Governor Christie here.

and then when Chairman Priebus he again made the contrast

No. He– no, he– no. The– here’s the– he trusted people that lied to him, and he fired those people. The president doubles down on Eric Holder. He doubles down on Hillary Clinton and Lois Lerner and Susan Rice. It’s the opposite–

Gregory interrupts,  asked a new question about tone and then kept interrupting as Priebus made his point.

 Because Chris Christie– here’s why. Because Chris Christie gave us almost two hours of open dialogue and open– (Gregory interrupts)  –examination with the press. Because you can judge a person. You can judge a person’s character. We had an opportunity to do that. And so that’s what Chris Christie offered, not only to the people of New Jersey, but the people across the country. The president never offered–  (Gregory interrupts) –that open dialogue so that people– (Gregory interrupts) –character– (Gregory interrupts) –of the president.

Given these performances that were seen by many viewers who didn’t get a lot of IRS coverage from these outlets it’s no wonder Meet the Press went to Iowa to see how much a traffic jam in NJ would effect their vote in 2 years and and the aptly named Crooks & Liars is defending Gregory, it sure beats having GOP pols making uncomfortable comparisons for people to hear. After all it’s personal

Even Rand Paul a Christie rival for 2016 gets it. He is interviewed and goes after Christie and is uninterrupted by his media until he gets over the target:

Sen Rand Paul: Nobody wants the power of government to be used against somebody just cause you lost. A good example of this is the IRS scandal President Obama used the IRS or is alleged to have used the IRS to go after conservative groups and tea party groups…

Interviewer: (Loudly) “And Progressives”

I don’t like autoplay in video but go to the AZcentral site and listen to the tone when the interview interrupts. God forbid any person who hears that interview understand that the IRS targeted conservatives and tea party members. There is a reason why every time I bring the subject in comparison I’m challenged by the left and also a reason why Tax Prof Blog’s update today on the IRS scandal day 249 is as Glenn Reynolds put it a big one.

I have absolutely no idea if Chris Christie had direct involvement in the bridge stuff, but I do know this.  The MSM is going to be pretty careful about who they bring on to talk about it.

I think the Left is scared of that connection, let’s keep them that way.

Update: This cartoon via A. F. Branco at Legal Insurrection nails the problem for the left.

Media-Scales-590-LI

They have to do something about those damned pictures.

********************************************************

Olimometer 2.52

It’s Monday, and we have so far moved the ball only $22 dollars toward a full paycheck.

While part of that is a new subscriber which moves us closer to our goals in a permanent way one new subscriber still doesn’t do the trick to permanently secure the mortgage and pay DaMagnificent Seven plus our new villager.

But lets focus on the positive with 13 tip jar hits of $25 we will get our first full paycheck of 2014.

Olimometer 2.52

Once we manage that then we’ll worry about catching up on the ground we’re behind.

That new subscriber means we’re now only 57 1/4 more subscribers @ at $20 a month the bills will be paid every week and the problem will be solved on a more permanent basis. It won’t cover CPAC but it will do all the base bills and that’s what counts

What do you say?




The Administration has taken some heat for putting up the Barrycades to hold back WW 2 Vets and threatening them with Arrest for visiting the WW 2 Memorial.

But it would be wrong to say they were there alone there were people protesting in favor of Obama there too.

At least they said they were protesters, it sounds like they were temp workers to me:

After about an hour about 20 SEIU protesters arrived on the scene chanting “Boehner get us back to work” and claiming they were federal employees furloughed because of the shutdown.

In the video below these protesters were marching towards the press gaggle and I was asking them to show their federal IDs to prove they were in fact federal workers. No one wore their Federal Employee ID and none would provide it to prove their claim.

Then, remarkably, a guy carrying sign passed by wearing a McDonald’s employee shirt, which I noted. I then began asking them how much they had been paid to protest, at which point the guy wearing the McDonald’s shirt came back and admitted he had been paid $15 to attend the protest.

$15 an hour, that’s $30,000 a year. Apparently protesting in favor of this administration is something people won’t do cheap.

But I shouldn’t complain, apparently the GOP and Reince Priebus & the GOP plan on spending money at the WW 2 Memorial as well:

I guess that explains why Democrats were so willing to vote against that funding yesterday. Why support parks for vets when you can drain GOP funds instead.

There were two open on the 2nd day of the RNC the first was the GOP Town Hall:

Reince Priebus introduced the panel RNC Town hall Boston Introducing Marilinda Garica (R-NH) Scott Erickson (CA)

Then TW Shannon who was REALLY impressive

And Karin Agness who is doing the single most important thing for Conservatism by organizing conservative women’s groups on campus: the Network of Enlightened women

The Panel first took questions first from Reince:

On GOP principles

On attracting reaching women

…and getting them to run

Obama’s foreign policy

attracting Hispanics

A question concerning Truth

(at this point my batteries died and had to be replaced so I missed the final question)

Then it was opened up to the audience a question came on Community policing

Some time was given to introduce GOP candidate for NYC Comptroller John Burnett

(and given the MSM disinterest in him it was a good idea)

Another question came of working with Police

On the Snowden case

and on “phrasing” concerning women

My take. It was a good event and the panel was full of interesting people but there was something I didn’t like.

I understand, particularly because this was a media event that a lot of the question concerned about countering the false narrative concerning women blacks and Hispanics but I think with the exception of Ms. Agness who specifically deals with said problem we are missing an important point.

TW Shannon isn’t the “Black” speaker of the Oklahoma House of Representatives, nor the “Choctaw” Speaker of the Oklahoma House, he is the SPEAKER of the House PERIOD. Likewise Marilinda Garcia is not the “Spanish” rep for the NH 8th or the women rep of NH 8th. She is the State Rep from NH 8th and her record and if you go to her web site this is what it leads with:

State Representative Marilinda Garcia was first elected to the New Hampshire House of Representatives in 2006, at 23 years of age. Elected to her fourth term in 2012, she currently serves on the Finance Committee. She has previously served on the Committees on Finance, Children and Family Law, Election Law, and Legislative Administration respectively, as well as co-chair of a House Caucus and as a Majority Whip.

These accomplishments and positions are not predicated on her ethnicity or on her sex, they are predicated on her competence.

and THAT is the message the GOP & Conservatives need to play. Conservatism doesn’t care about the color of your skin nor which chromosomes you possess. We have a set of values, personal responsibility, more freedom, less government, upward mobility, getting out of the way of the small business that are going to hire you and/or getting out of your way so you can start your OWN business.

While it’s important to have people a group can relate to and have them present our case as appealingly as possible, it is the message not the person who delivers it that is the star and that message that makes us one.

The Master:  Oh!  Now I can say I was provoked.

Doctor Who: Utopia 2007

Sam Houston: In 1815, Napoleon escaped from Elba. He moved swiftly to consolidate before the Grand Alliance could move against him. Wellington, with fewer men, retreated ahead of Napoleon, forcing Napoleon to chase him through Belgium. Wellington had a vision of a battlefield, he did not know where it was, but he knew he would know it when he saw it. He continued moving waiting for that ground and for Napoleon to make a mistake. Gentlemen, I do not consider myself to be Wellington; Santa Ana, however, considers himself to be Napoleon – the Napoleon of the West. I will continue to retreat gentlemen, until I find the ground in my vision and, when Santa Ana makes his mistake, I will attack.

The Alamo 2004

Yesterday I was behind in my day because of an evening learning and playing Lords of Waterdeep (a simple and enjoyable board game btw) so I got home late, crashed on the couch, woke up late and spent the entire day catching up

While in the middle of trying to get things moving I saw a tweet that caught my eye:

Interesting. I remember when Reince first announced he would not be allowing CNN & MSNBC to do the debates over the Clinton movie I was a little surprised to see Mika Brizenski say he had a point.

 

That didn’t raise alarm bells, over the years I’ve noticed a difference between when Mika is shilling and when Mika is thinking and I didn’t see the Shilling language in place but when I saw this became the opinion of David Brock’s Media Matters Crowd

In his own letters to Zucker and Greenblatt, Brock said, “Given that this project could coincide with a potential Clinton campaign, the timing raises too many questions about fairness and conflicts of interest ahead of the 2016 election.”

He asks Greenblatt, “Will you allow NBC News’ name to be tarnished by NBC Entertainment’s pursuit of ratings?” adding, “NBC has a reputation for objectivity and fairness. Yet NBC Entertainment acknowledged that it will be evaluating the content not by journalistic standards, but rather purely by entertainment value. A fictionalized caricature of Clinton may make for more dramatic appeal, but diversions from reality are likely to blow back on NBC News.”

and Maureen Dowd:

Films can dramatically alter the way famous people are viewed, making them cooler, more glamorous, more sympathetic — and the reverse. Clever filmmakers can offer up delicious soufflés of propaganda and storytelling, putting a new imprint on the historical record.

THAT, got my alarm bells running loudly.

First of all there is the Sarah Palin film Game Change.

The HBO films production was designed, timed and scheduled to hurt Palin when everyone and I mean EVERYONE thought she was running. When it came out it received massive attention from the MSM than things Palin actually was saying at the time

So the president attacks Sarah Palin and Palin answers, offering to debate the president on these issues any time any place and how does MSM react? How does Morning Joe answer?

Silence.

Why would that be? Haven’t we heard for a week how Sarah Palin was over her head, an object of pity?

Nope not a word. Even today Richard Cohen attacks not the real Sarah Palin but the Sarah Palin of the movie

The production raised a lot of eyebrows from conservatives but didn’t produce the same soul-searching that the Hillary film is suddenly creating among liberals.

 

Now my first thought here in the middle of Weinermania is the Dowds and Brocks are concerned about reminding the voters of Bill back in the White House and Hillary’s decision to stick with him but voters didn’t remember Barack Obama’s record when it was staring them right in the paycheck.

My second thought was perhaps they were afraid of handling her tenure of Secretary of State, the last thing the left needs is a reminder during an election year of who was actually the lead foreign policy person during the current debacles:

for a couple of weeks the left and MSNBC while touting Hillary Clinton as the inevitable Democrat nominee are not only doing their best to ignore her time as Secretary of State but they, when challenged are unable to name a single accomplishment she achieved in that office.

The lack of any such success would normally, under the Peter Principle disqualify her from any kind of office beyond Secretary of State, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.

John Nolte comes closest to figuring out what is going on

if past is prologue, CNN and NBC hosting GOP primary debates is a much more effective way to put Clinton in the White House than a Hillary miniseries and documentary.

The left understand that CNN and NBC are at their most effective at winning elections for Democrats when they hide behind a phony shield of objectivity. For good reason, the left is concerned these Hillary projects might weaken that shield.

Very VERY close but not quite right. Their worry is not that it hurts the “shield of objectivity”, it’s that this move gives Renice an excuse to do something that conservatives have wanted done for a very long time.

One of the problems with the liberal networks moderating debates is who the people in the networks actually are. This Week for example is hosted by a former Clinton Hack George Stephanopoulos and yet everyone is amazed that in the ABC debate during the GOP primary the question of contraception which was on nobody’s screen at the time is asked just before the Sandra Fluke.

The problem becomes if you pull out of these debates or keep these people from moderating them then the MSM storyline becomes: “GOP candidates duck real journalists.” and that would be the meme on every single network and their excuse to duck out of coverage.

However the Hillary Movies solve this problem admirably. It provides an excuse, a justification, well of COURSE we can’t have our debates with the people from CNN or NBC. as Renice put it:

The question is, if the party is going to spend time and money and resources in organizing an intelligent and reasonable debate calendar, should we have networks and moderators that are promoting Hillary Clinton depose our candidates and I say: No Way!

It’s a good argument to make against CNN & NBC but the truth is that description fits ABC, CBS & PBS too regardless of the lack of Movies or documentary on the subject.

As long as the MSM is able to frame the questions they are able to frame the debate, if they are cut out of debate questioning then they are left to report what the candidates actually say in post-debate coverage and while the media are experts at taking GOP candidates out of context it’s a lot harder to do it when people have just seen them IN context a few moments before.

While Prebius’ decision only eliminates 2/5 of this problem for the GOP it has potential to expand beyond that. Dowd & Brock understand that a few more days of press on the subject could lead to a statement sounding something like:

You know this the best way to solve this problem long-term is to just have our debates independent of the MSM. We can use local media or new media to moderate or operate Lincoln Douglas style and just provide the networks with the feed to broadcast if they wish and make live streams available on the net & via smart phones.

For the Dowds & Brocks That would be the worst of all possible worlds. Not only would such a decision be hugely popular with the GOP base that the MSM wants to pry from the party, not only would it establish a narrative that would not directly aid Democrats in general and liberalism in particular but it elevates the new media that the MSM has been hemorrhaging their viewer & reader base to for years.

Can you imagine the networks having to play clips of a debate featuring all those bloggers & radio talk hosts that they continue to ignore and belittle? And what happens when viewers find these people can ask questions just as relevant as “professional” journalists, if not better?

That’s the disaster Brock, Dowd and the rest see before them and want to stop at all costs. The only question is will the GOP leadership be smart enough to see opportunity when it is knocking right in front of them?

Update: Newsbusters remembers with two quotes one from a debate:

STEPHANOPOULOS: But I do want to get that core question. Governor Romney, do you believe that states have the right to ban contraception? Or is that trumped by a constitutional right to privacy?

MITT ROMNEY: George, this is an unusual topic that you’re raising. States have a right to ban contraception? I can’t imagine a state banning contraception. I can’t imagine the circumstances where a state would want to do so, and if I were governor of a state-

and one from Hannity

HANNITY: You think he was doing this under direct orders?

MORRIS: Under orders. And I think, and now he comes out with this thing on contraception. They want to create the idea, and it’s no coincidence, that he came out with it after Minnesota and Colorado which was Santorum’s victories. They want to create the impression that the Republicans will ban contraception, which is totally insane, but they’re floating it out and they’re bringing it out there. And this move on Obama’s part was part of injecting that issue.

and Rand Paul from this week:

PAUL: I’m saying that there, it makes you wonder, and he’s also said publicly that he has frequent correspondence with his friends who are still involved with the White House. So the question is, are you going to get a fair shake, and I think it’s a reasonable question for Republicans to ask, should we be scheduling debates and allowing people who used to and still do have active contact with the active Democrat Party, should we be subjecting ourselves to that, or should we try to have more neutral or objective type of moderators?

*****************************************

Olimometer 2.52

Yesterday was pretty quiet for DaTipJar, the meter moved only $2 yesterday leaving me a full $231 shy with only three days to make it up.

Only you can decide if that changes. If you think this site is worth your time and investment hit DaTipJar Below.

.

I didn’t have a horse in this race myself. I heard good things about Ann Wagner and people I respect supported her (big tea party favorite). Other people I respect as well supported Michael Steele (on the he was in charge when we won theory).

The problem? The RNC is having is grass-roots fundraising problem. The conservative grass-roots does not like the idea of hundreds of thousands of dollars being spent on, shall we say, less that loyal conservatives/republicans (read Dede Scozzafava, Charlie Crist). Combine this with the internet and the ability of individuals to give cash directly to candidates the actually like, and poof the RNC becomes irrelevant.

Establishment republicans who really don’t like the rise of the tea party (because they understand a true anti-spending movement decreases the perks and the power that are the rewards of office) wanted to keep their favorite out of the chair. Those big donors are looking for a return on their investment. The tax payer spigot being turned off is the last thing they want.

The winner Reince Priebus as a former Steele is likely a safe choice who can hopefully navigate the shoal between those rocks that Steele didn’t.

The thing about being a party chairman is that by definition you have to support any person with a (R) next to their name. If the leaders were really devious they could have supported Wagner and then hit her if she didn’t give moderates the time of day.

The real smart move would be to build a structure to advance republican thought. Such a move would create republicans. The National party could rather than funding candidates, steer funds to groups closer to the ground while allowing the sub groups such as the tea party to give to specific candidates perhaps using funding in an emergency manner to push a close or promising candidate over the top.

It’s a tough job but if we win, there will be plenty of kudos to go around. It all depends of if the idea is to advance a philosophy or to get a meal ticket. The choices made by the party will tell us which goal really counts.