We are the drain the swamp people

Below are two message from Gary Bauer at American Values and Catholic Vote .  The messages are similar  but compelling in their own way. Easy to do links are provided. It will take you a few seconds to let Ernst know what she needs to do.

As a matter of intelligence gathering  if anyone has heard anything at church from the pulpit, or flyer, encouraging the congregation to contact Ernst about this matter please let us know — a simple message in the comment section will do.   For example the National Conference of Catholic Bishops has come out against approval of an unamended Respect for Marriage Act, seeing clearly the danger to individual liberty and connected institutions but what are individual Bishops doing?                              Bold our emphasis.

From Gary Bauer American Values:

Fight For Religious Liberty

The battle raging in the U.S. Senate to redefine marriage is far from over. There will be another critical vote this coming Monday on the (Dis)Respect for Marriage Act.

Senator Mike Lee and 20 of his GOP colleagues are fighting hard to ensure that religious liberty is adequately protected.  And we must stand with them now.

As you know, 12 Republican senators broke ranks and supported Chuck Schumer’s effort to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman. They did so after they trusted Senate liberals to safeguard religious liberty. Seriously, what were they thinking?!

This is not a hypothetical issue. Prominent progressive politicians are not shy about threatening the tax-exempt status of churches and faith-based institutions that do not affirm men “marrying” other men.

Monday’s vote involves the rewritten legislation with the left’s version of religious liberty protections. They are too weak. (You can read more here.)

They do not protect individuals and small businesses, and we have already seen too many individuals and small businesses get dragged through the mud because they refused to compromise their deeply held religious beliefs. (Here, here and here.)

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops blasted the legislation as a “bad deal for Americans of faith,” and warned that its so-called “religious liberty” protections are “insufficient.”

The National Religious Broadcasters called the legislation a “betrayal,” adding that the “bipartisan amendment that purported to remedy the bill’s lack of religious liberty protections failed to address the critical issues.”

The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, the public policy arm of the Southern Baptist Convention, warns, “This bill, even as amended, does not provide meaningful protection for those that maintain a traditional view of marriage. This amendment invites further confusion and litigation.”

We need at least three of the 12 Republican senators listed below to change their votes. The following links will direct you to their Capitol Hill and state offices. Please call both!

Roy Blunt (MO)

Richard Burr (NC)

Shelley Moore Capito (WV)

Susan Collins (ME)

Joni Ernst (IA)

Cynthia Lummis (WY) — Scroll to the bottom of the page.

Lisa Murkowski (AK)

Rob Portman (OH)

Mitt Romney (UT)

Dan Sullivan (AK)

Thom Tillis (NC)

Todd Young (IN)

If these senators represent you, you must make your voice heard on this critically important issue. Melt their phone lines down!

Tell the aide who answers that you expect your senators to protect religious liberty. Tell them to support the Lee Amendment, and to oppose the Respect for Marriage Act until the Lee Amendment is adopted.

0

0

The entire Iowa congressional delegation has provided on multiple issues fodder for conservative primary challengers. (See Iowa Standard article linked below)  Indeed every one of them seems bent on inviting a primary challenge not because of peccadillo matters, although the more they stack those up the more they will have to convince no-party people to vote in a primary and save their bacon. On their votes on bigger issues, one might think they relish a primary challenge perhaps because they believe it will prove something to their new favorite constituency — hand-wringers and non-Republicans.

Now I happen to think it is folly for a two year term congressman who won their first election courting conservatives in the primary and the general to want to toy with the emotions of a party raw with distaste for most of what comes out of DC — the dishonesty the disassembly.  Creating disgust in the base increases the likelihood of a Democrat candidate of substance willing to go after an incumbent.   Scratch that, in actuality the Democrats no longer need a strong candidate, the machine works its wonders on its own only overwhelmed when Republicans have someone to turn out and vote for with enthusiasm.   Ladies and gentlemen of the GOP, it is better to dance with who brung ya.

Instead they too often put themselves on the defensive from the right but will never be considered authentic by the left.  Who you caucus with is key for Democrats.

So what turns their head? Well we all have feet of clay and failings, let that be well understood.  But actual conservatives have a guide post citadel to orient themselves 95% of the time — the Bible and culture, the Constitution, excellent think tanks and platforms.

On the recent obscenely named Respect for Marriage Act codifying the SCOTUS Obergefell gay marriage decision Ernst, Hinson, Miller-Meeks, and Nunn (in spirit) rejected the citadel of truth and the judgement of generations for weak rationalizations or misplaced emotions.

We wrote to Ernst and Grassley on the matter:

Subj: Vote against the misnamed (Respect for Marriage Act)

Your political convenience, posturing, whatever,  is not worth the cultural persecution that this bill will bring. The bill does not refine Obergefell it inculcates it into a prosecutorial tool that will more effectively be used as a cudgel against orthodox Christians and others.  . . .

Grassley opposed it but Ernst was one of the 12 Republicans (the rest mostly the gang of usual suspects) that brought it over the top in the Senate (subject to some reconciliation of sorts with the House version which Miller-Meeks and Hinson supported). When signed by Biden the act will bring persecution to orthodox religious people (focused on Christians of course) and works to federalize marriage, and not in a good way. Supposed religious liberty protections are window dressing. But heck it will be another opportunity for their GOP  ilk to be outraged at how it is being used and promise to fix it if we will only return them to office, never mind that they they foreseeably created the problem.

As pointed out by Jacob Hall writing at The Iowa Standard while this is a serious affront  the conservative  apostasies are not limited to such a deep cultural offense. And while Grassley opposed the act  he votes with Biden far more than Ernst on other matters. So Ernst has some reserve to work from although blowing any of it on this is stupid. It is perhaps also due in part to lack of intellectual grounding within her (and the other Iowa delegates in support) and their staff in failing to understand the legal implications of the act and advise accordingly. Or . . . all of them support those implications?

AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH: Why Ernst voted for DisRespect for Marriage Act

Related reading:

0

0

• A vote is a vote and the best way to insure it is counted is to vote in person
• Iowa has a lot of voting by mail, regrettably so in a good government sense
• It can be done with a degree of reliability depending on the jurisdiction but demographics in Iowa and sociological considerations make it costly in time and inefficient
• Flooding the zone  can be a real problem even for the most assiduous county if vote by mail becomes the overwhelming thing
• Republicans should push satellite voting  with only selective focus on vote by mail
• More important than anything –  inoculate people beginning in the early summer with solid messaging (early voting begins in the Democrat states before Republicans get their ad campaigns going. Such will inhibit Democrat appeals. 

After the disappointing midterm election there have been a number of articles in conservative publications we monitor calling for Republicans to use the turnout techniques of Democrats. Here are two examples.

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/11/12/heres-the-big-thing-that-must-change-in-2024-for-republicans-to-win-n658013

https://townhall.com/columnists/salenazito/2022/11/15/democrats-have-mastered-mail-balloting-republicans-will-pay-if-they-fail-to-step-up-n2615964

Our view

Voting more than say a week early in person at satellite sites is one thing. Encouraging people to play an inherently fraud capable and contra-good government game of vote by mail a month before the election in some states which to be competitive in the Democrat gutter requires adopting their tactics of hectoring people who do not want to or should not vote, ballot harvesting (incentivizing payola) and all the other illegalities and shenanigans they employ creates a climate of . . . “well they all cheat” among the weak-minded people supposedly targeted and you are still just competing against gross tactics the least of which is to hurry up and vote a.k.a. “the bum’s rush.”

Lengthy time frames for vote by mail also increases costs or interferes with “buys’ of all sorts of media used to promote it wasting it on such a non-message when good messaging can raise all Republican votes. I have seen valuable mailers and broadcast time devoted ridiculously, repetitively, obnoxiously to VOTE NOW ~~ before the world ends ~~ from party, candidates and issue groups .

The effort is churned by consultants and or weak-minded party apparat who think paying or getting fees or wasting volunteers time and donors money hectoring people to vote early when the only definable results are getting gold stars for scaring the low-hanging fruit of Republicans who know how to vote and who would vote anyway into voting early. The people who spend much time doing this are only running up some numbers on “early voting” to get a gold star and still losing. The so-called “banking” is really just changing accounts. The whole thing increases the political turn-off.

Do you realize that phoning, a usual avenue for such GOTV efforts (actually all unsolicited calls) has a less than 1% answer rate! It requires computerized predictive dialing 12 hours a day with people at a phone bank who may just get a hang-up if the tell-tale computer gets a live answer. Such an actual contact rate might get a few jobs if you are selling siding or new roofing after a storm but in politics what you get is a general turn-off. Then there is the feature of delivering one of those ever so effective answering machine reminders — apparently thought valuable because people are shocked to discover an election is going on??

A household might get multiple calls every day for a month or more hectoring them to vote early. Oh there is the delightful threat that if only you vote early “we can take you off our list” and you will stop getting these calls. 1) it is a lie because there might be others in the household who have the sound good-government practice of not voting early and the household will continue to get calls and 2) it is an absolutely ineffectual statement and essentially a lie because issue groups and candidates will continue to call because lists are not updated and they are intent on calling “their” own list which overlap.

Door knocking? To the extent it is permitted (many multi-family complexes essentially make it impossible) You might get one 1 in 3 to 1 in 5 to be home and open the door in a single family neighborhood in the short window you might find people home, but you may not get in a key-key-controled complex . This is not to say do not door knock and there is no problem bringing up early voting (encouraging it in person) but spending much time on the mechanism of mail voting means other doors don’t get knocked with any messaging.

Inoculate people early with messaging. Call out the scalawags and their party. Give people a convincing comparative reason to vote in flyers, billboards, social media, broadcast, etc., and for something and we will win. Vote the most secure way, in person as provided by local jurisdictions. Offer rides if need be. Maintain vote by mail for shut ins and military but for others encourage in-person.

And how about this — a message to the effect: if you are going to vote early — vote against the party of inflation, insecure borders, crime, culture rot, etc etc. Inoculate people from the bad guys with good performance and early and constant effective messaging. Leave your vote early message at that rather than wasteful spending competing with, and in essence justifying, non-in person voting mechanisms open to cheating that make it convenient for Dems to have all the time in the world to use walking around money to solicit some ballot marks. Stop Democrats presumed effectiveness by shaming, law enforcement and legislative changes. Oh, and standing up for your own policies and repudiating theirs.

0

0

• “Looser” as in susceptible to fraud

Regarding the disappointing midterm election results —  in spite of the “wave” hype we can’t expect to win everything everywhere. That said, this article from J D Rucker writing at  America First Report makes fair points about the midterms loses —  both correcting certain scapegoating myths (abortion) and addressing the need to correct possible stolen elections.

Think of the states of Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, states with continuing voter integrity issues (Georgia somewhat improved but the cheat to win ethic pervasive). Had Republicans won even 2 or 3 of the 6 or more  high profile races that received so much media attention in those states,  the conservative punditry would have perhaps been forced to be more balanced in their analysis rather than so many issuing a spate of articles when not blaming it on abortion insisting that Republicans need to adopt Democrat vote by mail tactics, harvesting etc., and abandon integrity. We will address that concept in the next post.

Related reading:  Poll reports a majority of voters believe cheating likely affected midterm elections.

We quote Ruckers commentary  in order to facilitate readers’ ease of referencing our annotations and embellishments to his. Bold emphasis ours.

Elections Were Stolen: Do NOT Let Them Gaslight You Into Thinking Otherwise

November 15, 2022

Never in modern history have the polls been wrong by FAVORING Republicans heavily. Polls favor Democrats by 3%-6%, so in any race that’s close in the polls, Republicans have a better chance of winning it than the Democrat because real results for the GOP outperforms polling. We saw a clear example of this in Florida where polls that favored Republican candidates underestimated their victories while polls that favored Democrats, such as the race between Eric Lynn and Anna Paulina Luna, were wrong. Luna defeated Lynn by 8-points despite the final two polls showing Lynn slightly favored.

That’s how things are supposed to go, but this last election was different. Very different. Inexplicably and undeniably different. Instead of close races going to Republicans, they defied every election in modern history and went to Democrats. Even candidates who were clearly winning in the final polls, such as Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake or Pennsylvania senate candidate Dr. Mehmet Oz, had their fortunes reversed.

But here’s the catch. The red tsunami that everyone and their dog predicted was only thwarted in states where voter fraud is essentially permitted through loose voter ID laws, ubiquitous mail-in balloting, ballot harvesting, and unchecked vote counting practices. States that have stricter laws such as Florida and Ohio saw the predicted red wave. States where voter fraud is de facto legalized like Arizona and Pennsylvania saw inexplicable “wins” for corrupt Democrats.

Unfortunately, we’re not hearing about this from most in conservative or alternative media. Instead, we’re hearing excuses. For example, I’ve seen many conservative pundits that I used to respect claiming that the abortion issue is what caused the failure of the red tsunami. This is unambiguously false for one important reason. Nobody woke up on election day and said, “Hmm, I know I was going to vote for Republicans and told the pollsters I was voting for Republicans just yesterday, but today I remember Lindsey Graham wants to create a nationwide abortion ban so I’m going to vote for Democrats instead.”

That didn’t happen. If abortion was the issue that stopped the red tsunami, we would have seen that reflected in the polls for weeks ahead of the election. We didn’t. In fact, many Democrat candidates had switched their ads in the final weeks to stop focusing on abortion because it simply wasn’t playing for the general population. We also would have seen it in gubernatorial races. Instead, what we saw is 100% of the governors who signed an abortion ban won reelection.

This is consistent with what we observed with a race here (SD  47)  where the Democrat had abortion as her main theme in ads for a time but changed the message to suggest the Republican was a big spender with her pro-choice message reduced to more of a tag.  Governor Reynolds was one of those pro-life governors winning by 19 points.

Others have blamed the “MAGA Republicans” for being bad candidates. This is also false. Lake, for example, ran a pitch-perfect campaign. This is why she was leading in the final polls. Without massive, widespread voter fraud, I imagine she actually won by double-digits against a very weak candidate who wouldn’t debate, was embroiled in multiple scandals, and whose only pitch to voters was that Lake was somehow dangerous. So the lady who ran the counting of the ballots after being non-existent during the campaign somehow won against a person the people have known and trusted for decades during her television career. That didn’t happen, either.

Some are pointing to the student loan forgiveness causing a blue wave among students. This may be the most ludicrous excuse of them all. Announcing that college students voted heavily Democrat this election is like saying the sun rose in the east this morning. Students have voted Democrat in every election for the last six decades. It’s not new. It wasn’t exceptional this year. It didn’t stop the red tsunami.

While agreeing that the youth vote is dependably Democratic  and turnout may not have been dramatic, it only needed to be a few points more to win those close races.

You are being gaslighting, as Wayne Allyn Root noted on one of his recent columns, which I included in a segment of today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show. Unfortunately, we’re not just being gaslighting by leftist corporate media. Conservative news outlets are blaming the election losses on everything other than massive, widespread voter fraud.

Know this. If you feel in your gut that voter fraud is the main reason the red tsunami didn’t materialize, you’re not alone. People on both sides of the political aisle are going to try to convince you otherwise. You’re going to be labeled an “election denier” and for some reason that’s scaring enough conservative pundits into silence. Don’t fall for it. You know what happened. You may not know the details, but you know there is no possible way the general population outside of Florida and a few other states voted for more of the torture this nation has been put through the last two years under Democrat control.

Could Oz really have been that bad compared to what the world saw about Uncle Fester Fetterman and the bums rush Democrats got to hurry up and vote for him?? The Democrat strategy of keeping Fetterman under wraps as long as possible, getting all the votes in they could prior to the so called debate means they can nominate and elect a ham sandwich.  Oz was not a good candidate or choice by Trump but seriously haw could he lose to Fetterman with an informed or sentient population?

“It’s the economy, stupid.” For Democrats to have allegedly been rewarded with possible gains in the Senate and far fewer losses than projected in the House is simply impossible with the economy the way it is. It wasn’t Roe v Wade. It wasn’t “MAGA Republicans.” It wasn’t student debt forgiveness. It was voter fraud. Period. Don’t let anyone, especially so-called conservative pundits, convince you otherwise.

Here we disagree as to the effect of the youth vote which is not to say that fraud was not a sufficient part of the equation. I doubt any group of Democrat leaners would be less scrupulous about how they vote than the younger voters –  and more likely to participate in activity they could rationalize however in violation of the integrity of the election. There were motivations designed to appeal to them and they included unfettered abortion but also loan forgiveness and pot referenda.

Hopefully, there will be some lawfare finally used properly by Republicans. That’s the only recourse at this point. As Leo Donofrio noted on a recent interview, there are ways we can correct the stolen election in Arizona at the very least. I’m sure there are ways in other states as well. It’s time to find some good, patriotic attorneys and plaintiffs who are willing to put in the work to save this nation. Otherwise, there may not even be a 2024 election.

0

0

Florida was not the only wave election — Iowa reelected our pro-life governor who won by <3% in 2018 but last week gave her a 19 point win like DeSantis. Iowa Republicans took all statewide offices but one (which was very close) and two of the wins were upsets. Iowa increased Republican numbers in each state legislative chamber and took the only US House seat from the Democrats making Iowa now 4 of 4. Chuck Grassley was reelected to the Senate by 12 points. So we now have a full complement at the federal level. We also passed a gun rights constitutional amendment and overwhelmingly returned the two Supreme Court justices on the ballot standing for retention who were part of the majority in a “Dobbs like” decision correcting a Roe V Wade type decision by an earlier Iowa Supreme Court. One of the four or five counties Dems traditionally rely on to pump up their numbers (about the only counties the Dems win outright out of 99) went Republican for the statewide and federal races on the ballot. In 2020 that county – Scott – went for Biden. All partisan county-wide offices on the ballot save one which was a low priority but nevertheless close race (less than half a percent)  went Republican. Iowa should probably still be considered purplish due to those counties but not this year.

0

0

• National perspective still being determined.  
• More on various races in later posts 
• Democrats relied on abortion to carry the day and underperformed 
• Key state legislature races in Scott County where Democrats hoped abortion would be the undertow only saw them go down the drain.

In regards to abortion look at State Senate District 47 where Mary Kathleen Figaro championed unfettered abortion. Attack ads were also run by others against pro-life Republican Webster for being pro-life. Even Republicans received single issue mass mailers by Figaro promoting  her pro-abortion position. The Democrat party, the party of abortion,  in that Republican leaning district would be expected to lose with 45.7 % imputed.  Figaro underperformed receiving less than 43.7 % of the vote.  “Pro-choice” — where is thy sting.  Pro-life prevails.  It is never all, but it is a net plus issue.

Even more dramatic an underperformer was the Cooper character in State Legislative district 81. Democrats by registration had an overwhelming advantage such that the RPI ignored the race.  But long time prominant right to life activist Luana Stotenberg threw her hat in the ring, not willing to concede a race to a pro-abortion party.  She appears to have won the race by about 30 votes.  Hers was a phenomenal performance and ought to have repercussions at RPI.

More on these and other local state and national races in coming posts.   Congratulations Iowa Republican voters!!

0

0

Regarding Scott County 

Regarding the Republican Party of Iowa (RPI)

In party registration this is a blue county in a red state but there are almost traditionally some county wide offices that are held by Republicans — Sheriff – Treasurer – most of the Supervisor seats. State leg — not so much. Statewide depends on the candidate/office.

For Davenport, city office is largely a Dem lock but other municipalities in the county not so much. Federal voting tends to blue (Trump lost here) except for Grassley.

The Republican wins at the state and federal level are in spite of the national and local media (Fox affiliates are just another pack journalism outlet) promulgating Democrat themes, or not honestly covering news that is counter their  liberal progressive bent, the QCTimes being the most biased. Thank God for alternate media and talk radio.

But if the induced economic situation (Democrats in charge) the vestiges of culture including law and order, national sovereignty, the goodness of life and the ignoble nature of procured abortion, the Bill of Rights under assault in so many ways. . . if those sentiments have the inherent strength we pray for, an instinctive impact, countering the culturally regressive (so-called progressive) Democrat party, this ought to be a thorough  reset election in tune with what we are hearing predicting rejection of Democrats in even more bluish enclaves.

The prayed for red wave may well happen here although the Republican fight “inspired” by the RPI has been too much one of conceding ground, taking punches without response, lackluster messaging early on that failed to inoculate – as if people make up their minds only in the final weeks.  The RPI from what I have been able to observe has failed to take it to the enemy using global messaging benefitting all Republicans.

Many hundreds of thousands of dollars (millions)  have been expended controlled by the RPI  that were narrowly and we would maintain rather blandly focused on individual races when theater neutron (leave the buildings standing) “bombs” were called for due to Democrats own bent of totally destroying the American (Iowan) way of life. Media messaging (“neutron bombs”) that destroy the enemy en mass leaving Republicans standing if for no better reason than being a Republican and not having the poor judgement of being a Democrat.

Things are so bad — the economy, the border, foreign policy, energy, culture, crime  it ought to be enough for the candidates to say I am a Republican, my opponent so and so is not and is a member of a party mainly responsible for all of the aforementioned problems.  Instead we get the equivalent of “I’m a good person”  but weakly or rarely pointing out to people how bad the Dems are.  The individual Republican races that are exceptions to this should not have been exceptions although they are helpful because their media has some overlapping effect (note our previous comments about Gov. Reynolds’ campaign).

There should have been more of a hard-hitting generic campaign on behalf of Republicans — a rising tide carrying all boats . Hopefully, and there are signs to that effect, we will still have a good night tonight nationally if honestly counted in key states.

0

0

• I have been to three Trump rallies, driven hours for two of them and believe the 2020 election was essentially stolen from us and that justice needs to be pursued. I attend the rally’s because I like Trump, would vote for him in a heartbeat if he is the Republican nominee in 2024 but especially because I like the vibe of the people, and the message THEY send along with showing support for Trump’s general policy performance.
• But Mr. President for gosh sakes learn to stifle yourself for your own good and ours
• This has never been all about you, don’t act like it, show some humility, the little appreciation you show comes off as gratuitous as you revert back to “I”, (however fulsome you are at it you are not as bad as Obama or Biden) 
• Acting presidential does not mean letting people beat up on you but it also does not mean picking fights with allies
• The dig at DeSantis in Pennsylvania was not funny or clever, certainly not necessary
• So DeSantis endorsed O’Dea in Colorado who is not a fan of yours
• It was political malpractice for you to tell Republicans not to support O’Dea in the general against a Democrat with the Senate majority so close
• Who do you think you are, Mitch McConnell subverting Republicans?
• Hell you endorsed Romney Oz and Kevin McCarthy and your hires have often been far from stellar.
• Why make it harder for people to defend you with people who could be enticed to support your policies?  
• We don’t need unnecessary drama, or enervating diversions defending your unproductive trashtalk and ill-considered quips or comparisons
• Schlichter’s List

Related reading:

https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/trump-backs-off-after-hurling-ron-desanctimonious-insult-at-florida-governor/

0

0

Not one of these Republican candidate signs (and this is just about all of them on the ballot in this area) indicate they are Republican (except the center one there for effect). Is there any good reason for this?

In a time of Republican ascendancy and Democrat vulnerability associated with party on the most salient issues as to voting importance  — inflation, crime, the border, and more —    one would think it behooves Republican candidates to at least indicate party association in their public face — signage and media. You would think.  Instead we see most Republican candidates  scrupulously avoiding their party affiliation on the weakest of presumptions about the electorate. The opportunity lost is evidenced by the appearance that Democrats are just as skittish, confirming in their case that Democrats know they are in disfavor.  With an exception or two, their signage does not indicate party affiliation either!

Makes for a much simpler time mowing

In the case of Republicans, the reason I have heard (from an active consultant) is to the effect that “we” need  no-party people to vote for our candidates. As if to say somehow being upfront about who you caucus with is a turnoff. The thought is it is necessary to ~~ get people to vote for the person and not the party and not letting party be a stumbling block.  There is also the allied perspective of so called independents “voting for the person and not the party”.  Playing that game is very inefficient of resources and is practically useless even as regards the so called no-party/independents.

Dear consultants: You do know people will find out party affiliation when they see the ballot and given the extent of early voting most will have all the time in the world to rekindle any animosity about party . . .  or jerk their knees in the voting booth on Election Day and return to form if that is what they have a mind to do.  It is not like you were asking them to put a sign up in their yard on the theory no-one will know what party the candidate is part of.  Many No-party people are weak-minded but most are not that weak-minded.

One might argue it does not make any difference, to which I would say “other than walking proud in a time of party ascendency”.

But  you can hear it from some of these weak sister candidates  . . . “I am running for all the people not a party”.  Which is to say I’m not really one of THEM or, I really don’t have a political grounding and the only reason I am on the ballot is because I made promises to Republican primary voters but that was then and this is now.   Most are not that crass but it sure seems to be part of their handwringing.

Not having party affiliation a discernible part of ones campaign short changes party building and makes less effective any generic messages in support of Republicans or those, decrying Democrats. It reduces ability to shirttail down ballot races that have very limited ad budgets  — races where people really do not know who to vote for because of lack of party identification. So yes, to perhaps torture the trope, there ought to be Republican dog catchers.

Good Example:

Now there have been a very few candidates locally proudly advertising in support of and being a Republican. Luana Stoltenberg running for the state house in a Democrat leaning district is one as she proudly indicates on several billboards. She does not have party on her yard signs but the prominence of the several billboards makes up for it. There are Republican candidates in Republican leaning and lock districts districts that do not indicate party, hardly even on campaign literature.

Luana has been rewarded according to the most recent finance disclosure report with zero support (in-kind or otherwise) from the state party but generous support from the Scott County Republican organization including contributions from local individual Republican candidates and personages.  If there are updates to that we will be happy to report them.

She is probably the hardest working candidate this cycle. It is an uphill battle against a rather pathetic lazy recruit for the Dems.  They are banking on party get out the vote as he has received little funding. They think they have it in the bag but Luana we hope will fool them and the RPI apparat.

By the way her opponent Cooper will be a mindless robot for egregious liberal policies.  He has already proved himself on that score as a member of a local library board that had no problem with promoting a drag queen story hour this past summer. Cooper does not bother to indicate party on his signage and I think it is because the Democrat apparat figures it will lose votes for him in the district.

Governor Reynold’s reelection radio ads of late (we do not pretend to be aware of all that is out there for any of the candidates) have been of a nature to help all Republicans (if only they would identify as such like she does).   Her ads mention issues (including life by the way) slamming liberal (Democrat) positions and values. Kudos to her for the effort. She currently leads by 17 points against another ultra liberal Dem — which by nature is all they have running.

If anyone wants to further explain or justify avoiding party ID even in Democrat districts this cycle please hold forth.

0

0

We wonder if the otherwise peaceful incursion by a wacko all-over-the-map-non-birthing- person in his near birthday suit into the Pelosi residence this week  — while  Nancy was busy away taking a hammer to the country and Constitution at large — wasn’t a bit of  irony. Perhaps a drug demented twist by the perp on the commie protest song by Pete Seeger “The Hammer Song” (variously recorded by Peter Paul and Mary and, I hope not a commie  but folk revival singer Trini Lopez).

The whole thing is just too goofy as our betters at RedState and Townhall relate (note as well some of the comments):

The Paul Pelosi Story Makes No Sense, and the Public Needs Answers.

There Are Some Serious Questions About the Assault on Paul Pelosi. Here’s What We Know so Far.

The Pelosi Home Invasion Just Got Weirder.

And this from Punching Bag Post:

RE PAUL PELOSI, I WANT TO CONDEMN THE VIOL- WAIT A MINUTE!

V’PAC continues — And so there is this guy who waltzes in his underwear into the compound of the third highest ranking American politician, second in succession to the presidency (in the current case  we mean residency) . . . a place that every kook resident* of San Francisco has a map to but no one got in before???   Thanks to contributor HP who forwarded a couple of pertinent memes.

0

0