Skip to main content

The primaries is all bullshit?

When I heard Sara Palin refer to Native Americans as people who should go back to Nativia I suddenly realised that the objective was not to say anything smart, in fact saying something stupid made sure that you were in the news.  It seems that the new game plan for Republicans is to say stuff that is so dumb that it will bring notoriety to the person saying it, and coverage.  Scott Walker's Canadian Wall was a case of very stupid idea -- this is a country that cannot find money to maintain its bridges and overpasses and would spent 10 of billion building a wall.  It got Walker press for 24 hours -- granted unlike Teflon Trump (TT for short) it didn't work out as intended.  There use to be a saying good or bad press it doesn't matter as long as they talk about you!  It seems that the 16, 17 37 36 candidates to the GOP presidential primaries are now taking this strategy to heart.  Don't know if it will work -- it worked for TT and for Carson because they were the only ones really going "full retard" but if all of them try that strategy it may backfire; so many candidates saying stupid things will get lost in the overall noise.  However, what its doing to the Republican Party is something else entirely.  The nativiste racist and bigoted statement made by the various candidates will impact the party's brand for a long time:  

(1)  Walking back the stupid is going to be hard in the age of internet:  Eventually, one of these guys is going to be the GOP's candidate to the White House, and what's been said -- some of it simply terrible, is going to be hard to walk back.  Granted the electorate has short memory span, but this is not the 1990's we've got YouTube now -- so any pronouncement can be replayed as if they took place yesterday, and who's to say differently.  Jon Stuart was a brilliant user of the format.

(2) Citizen United is killing the GOP:  The stupid season will last a long long time.  Even candidates that are polling less then 1% support are staying in the race, because these candidates are funded by the "plutocrats"  who don't mind spending a bit of cash on their favorite candidate -- even if he doesn't resonate.  The likes of Perry, Santorum, Pataki, Gilmore and Graham have zero chance of going anywhere, and yet they stay in the race; and there's a long list of candidates who hardly resonate at all.

(3) PAC money is of poor quality:  The GOP is realising that PAC money is of little value; Karl Rove spent more than $100 million (Crossroad America) on a dozen races -- all for nothing, PAC spending had little impact on voting turnout.

(4) Donald Trump and Ben Carson are a real problem; the first is a loud mouth self promotor the second is simply nuts!  These two account for nearly 5053% of all primary voters! voting intention; and their crazy is keeping them on top of the more serious candidates.

(5) Summer polling is showing a distressing trend; All candidates (except the above)  are converging towards three groups:  5%, 3% 2% and lower.  The non traditional cash available to candidates from their favorite billionaires will make the race wide open, as there are few distinguishing features between the candidates (aside from the crazy remarks).  This will prolonge the race to the convention, with all these candidates and many proportional state races no one candidate will have enough votes to win the nomination prior to the convention.  A brokered convention could be interesting (and not in a good way as far as the GOP is concerned).

UPDATE:  Trump & Carson are now at 53% combined 33% and 20% respectively.  Perry is out -- first off its not his fault, secondly he didn't raise enough own money to pay his staff, and I forget the third reason...

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

what people get wrong about tariffs

 The issue is simple. What percentage of the economy is dependent on tariff goods? The truth, is that the US economy is far more closed than people understand. People genuinely believe that all manufacturing has ceased to exist in the United States all given to China on the altar of woke policy the truth can be further from That statement. Only about 15% of US GDP is related to foreign trade. Of that amount, slightly more than half is from Canada in Mexico. And half of that is energy. What that means, is that about 7% of US GDP is tariff dependent. The proof in the pudding, is how little money tariff generates. People think that 30 or 50 billion is a lot it’s not in an economy that has $3 trillion. The impact on the US economy will be less visible but not absent. Inflation hasn’t occurred yet first because tests have hardly started to bite, but more importantly it’s such a small percent of the economy. Now certain things are critical. The rare earth metals from China were critical....
Post a Comment
Read more

The end of Tesla?

 it takes a special kind of idiot, to think that he can antagonize his entire customer base, and think that it will not impact his business. When Elon Musk went to work for Donald Trump, and created the doge department, he antagonized every liberal, and these people represent 90% of his client base.That’s not a brilliant move. Now Elon Musk is worth hundreds of billions of dollar, so he shouldn’t care a great deal, however, he needs to care because of several other issues. The cyber truck has been a disaster, most have had to be recalled because of defective glue, it’s not a truck, it’s not a car, it’s noisy, relatively uncomfortable, but great as a development platform. What Tesla has learned in making car manufacturing more seamless is truly amazing. The problem was that Elon Musk was so pissed with the Democrats, and with Joe Biden, in particular because of some slight, which were just plain stupid too. By the way, that he decided to support with hundreds of millions of dollar, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Demographics

 I am preparing a kind of family tree for our children so that they know where they came from.  In my family I am the only survivor, although my brother and sister died recently they were both in their seventies (a story I told already).    It was a fun process, but it provided more than that.  First, I married relatively young I was 26 when I married and nearly 30 when our first child was born.   I was looking at my ancestors.  On my mother's side, she had 6 siblings, Four died before the age of 30, two in war, and two from illnesses.  Only she and a single sister survived.   The two boys had a child each but they died in WWII, and the other sister died as an infant.   what is interesting is that every one of my mother's siblings had children in their early 20s.   I know that my mom was hardly 20 when my brother was born.    What is remarkable is that among our friends, we are the only ones to have fou...
Post a Comment
Read more