THE NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY PROVED A LITTLE BIT, BUT RESOLVED LITTLE ELSE
Earlier today, two more candidates suspended their campaigns. Carly Fiorina realized the futility of continuing. Chris Christie after sabotaging the campaign momentum of Marco Rubio, slinked away back to NJ and suspended his campaign. Christie got what he deserved, since 80% of people surveyed do not favor candidates attacking each other.
Unfortunately, attacks like Christie’s do damage. Jeb Bush’s SuperPAC, Right to Rise, has spent millions on negative ads against Rubio. That’s why the only way Jeb ever gets vote from me is if the alternative is a Democratic opponent. Jeb needs to realize the damage his SuperPAC is doing to him! He bought his mediocre finish in NH by spending $36 million on that small state campaign.
The four most notable take-aways fro the NH primary yesterday are these:
1) For Democrats: Bernie Sanders energy, enthusiasm, anti-establishment message and his powerful lies: “you can have everything from the government without worrying how to pay for it, because the rich will pay” (and everyone will pay via higher taxes—which he doesn’t quite say) wins over voters who are young/naive, angry about their fate (Obama turned out NOT to be the savior as advertised—he made their plight worse) and unaware of the repeated failures of Socialism. Hillary, on the other hand has a much less appealing message, and is retooling her campaign staff to find one that resonates, lest Sanders start winning in state after state.
2) For Republicans: Donald Trump’s “everything is going to be great” message also resonates with a large group of angry Americans who are upset with the record of past Republican leaders, Congress and past presidents, going back to George W. Bush (and even earlier.) Trump’s claims of what he will do are extreme. His approach is aggressively outspoken. He never says how he would do these things—and most people don’t know how and many don’t care. How many? 35% of NH voters who chose him.
3) For everyone: The five Republicans who trailed Trump when combined, add up to 56.5%: John Kasich 15.8% (a solid, one state candidate with little money and not national organization—so far), Ted Cruz 11.6% (a first term Senator, a slick talker, appeals to evangelicals, far right conservatives but not liked or trusted by those who know him best—fellow US Senators), Jeb Bush 11.1% (the next Bush in line, competent but not compelling, proven to lack the “sizzle” and persona to win nationally, and Marco Rubio 10.5% (a fruit term Senator, who is articulate, appealing and whip smart, very well-versed in the issues, and with solid plans—but was goaded into a major debate mistake by Chris Christie’s relentless attack and damaged by millions of $$ of attack ads from Bush’s SuperPAC)…And Christie at 7.5%, is out of the race. His NJ toughness came across to many as mean-spirited.. The question is who, if anyone, he chooses to endorse.Carly Fiorina’s low 4.2% result told her to give it up. Ben Carson’s 2.3% speaks clearly enough about the futility of continuing his candidacy.)
- The GOP is still searching for the right candidate—one who can beat the Democratic candidate in Nov.,but meanwhile, Trump will continue to pile up delegates. If Christie drops out and throws his support to Trump, that will be a big deal. Ditto if Christie backs Bush. He can’t back Rubio after what he has said, and he is philosophically unlikely to back Cruz. There is fear about what the unstructured Trump means to the GOP, but his demeanor in his victory speech in NH was the closest he has come to sounding like a “mainstream candidate.” Stranger things have happened. Trump’s challenge as a candidate remains his “unfavorables”—especially the negatives of Hispanics about his earlier comments about (Mexican) illegal immigrants.
South Carolina and Nevada come next—in reverse order for the GOP and Dems.
So, for the GOP it’s on the South Carolina, where Cruz will find more sympathetic evangelicals, where Bush’s family will pitch in and the Bushes have done OK there, and where Rubio has a couple of blue-chip endorsements (Trey Gowdy, prominent House member and Tim Scott, a popular black Senator) IF they choose to campaign with or for Rubio. Nevada’s large Hispanic population might reveal how Trump is received.
Can Bernie Sanders mount a national or even large-scale regional campaign to sustain his early momentum? Doubtful. That takes time, money and people/supporters? Can Hillary reboot her message to something that re-lights her campaign? How? If Trump and Sanders continue to rack up wins, will former NYC Mayor, Michael Bloomberg, once both a Republican and a Democrat and now an Independent, jump into the race on an Independent ticket? Maybe. He is richer by 5-10x than Trump, so money will not be his problem. But Bloomerg is NOT a compelling speaker. He is smart, accomplished, and successful in business and was strong as a NYC Mayor (but so was Guiliani). He would take equal amounts of votes from both GOP and Dems, depending on which candidates the choose.
The big test comes Super Tuesday in March when 14 states, mostly across the Southern USA vote, followed by another half dozen in each of the next few weeks. Campaigning in that deluge of primaries cannot be done “ oor-to-door" like Cruz (Iowa) and Kasich (NH) did it, going to 99 counties or holding 100 town halls. It takes money for advertising, and effective campaign organizations in those states to get out the voters,and speak to the public, etc. Cruz does have a strong data-based campaign team, and the higher mix of evangelicals and the huge Texas primary, will help him too. Bush still has, by far, the most money, but Trump can spend as much as he chooses. Rubio will get squeezed, unless his appeal/message or his finishes in SC and NV are very strong. Ditto for Kasich, who will similarly get squeezed ($$), and his best primaries come in mid-March.
I still stand by a long-ago picks of Rubio and Kasich as the two best. Their skills and experience are complementary. Kasich is a long shot for the top spot, and doesn’t want a VP spot (he says now, anyway.) Rubio must rebound from the brief debate debacle and continue what he’s been doing. Bush will be formidable in SC simply due to money and family working for him. Ted Cruz will continue to do well. He represents at least as great threat to the GOP as Trump does. Cruz’s far right positions are losers in a general election.
Prediction: Look for the GOP candidate situation to clarify in March, but not until around St. Patrick’s day—Mar. 17.
IMPORTANT THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT—THAT ARE NOT ELECTION RELATED
From Reuters: The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday delivered a major blow to President Barack Obama by putting on hold federal regulations to curb carbon dioxide emissions mainly from coal-fired power plants, the centerpiece of his administration’s strategy to combat climate change.The court voted 5-4 along ideological lines to grant a request by 27 states and various companies and business groups to block the administration's Clean Power Plan, which also mandates a shift to renewable energy away from fossil fuels.The highly unusual move by the justices means the regulations will not be in effect while a court battle continues over their legality.
“BLOCKCHAIN” IS A NEW WORD YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT
It is a digital ledger system to track the trading of BITCOINS and much more. It is real time, instant, and doesn’t care what kind of currency it is tracking or for whom. it can and likely will upset the current financial trading and practices. The only questions are how soon, how much, and then what. It could force a reinvention of the entire global finance and banking systems.
ROBO-WRITING WILL GROW AND GROW
You are familiar with “form letters,” which have been around for years. Now Robots will “write” about 20% (near term) and possibly more (mid-long-term) of the documents you get, see and read. Think of it as smart form letters on steroids. They will be so well done, you won’t know they are from a robot with AI.
THE FOOD PYRAMID IS ALL WRONG
Now, after years of being told about the importance of following rules about what to eat and not eat, the “food pyramid” has been proven to be all wrong—or at least unsubstantiated by scientific fact. Now fats are not so bad for us after all…after years of choosing low or no fat foods—and dairy products like milk and butter. Carbohydrates which are supposedly good for us, actually make us fatter—unless we carefully understand and observe (eat) the right kinds in the right (lower) quantities. Eggs are actually good for us and don’t elevate our cholesterol as feared. There is much more to know. Google this and read details.
UNCERTAINTY PARALYZES BUSINESSES
One of the worst situations for business decision-making is uncertainly of what the “rules” will be. During the past few years, Barack Obama and his minions have continually “changed the rules,” and often made new anti0-business rules via executive actions, many times in blatant disregard for Constitutional legality. Unfortunately, it takes years for legal challenges to go through Courts and be decided—leaving businesses in limbo—or worse, having to deal with the new rules,(or even be attacked by the Justice Dept., IRS, EPA, NLRB, and other government agencies) until or unless the executive actions (new rules) are found to be illegal, which has happened multiple times during Obama’s. presidency. Of course a Republican President in the White House come Jan. 2017 could reverse all of these executive actions.
BERNIE SANDERS IS ATTRACTING NAIVE YOUTH AND ANGRY LOW-MIDDLE CLASS VOTERS WITH THE FAILED TOOL—SOCIALISM
SOCIALISM—LETS’ CONSULT THE DICTIONARY (Merriam-Webster)
Full Definition of socialism
- 1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
- 2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private propertyb : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
- 3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
- NOW LOOK AT BERNIE’S IDEAS, (WHICH WOULD BANKRUPT AMERICA)
Download Explaining Bernie’s ‘Socialism’ - WSJ
WHEN ATTEMPTING TO IMAGINE THE FUTURE, IT HELPS TO CONSIDER THE RECENT PAST
The largest factor in the recent past impacting the near term future is Barack Hussein Obama. Never has America elected a president with such meager credentials, about whom they knew so little detailed information. Never before has a man so eloquent promised so much and delivered something entirely different. Broken promises pLague many politicians. Rubio is right. This president didn’t just break promises—he methodically damaged America and Americans in a way that will take a decade to repair.
This is one of the best, most succinct recaps of Obama—who he is and is not—and how he has completely misled and deceived the American people. Many in his own party now see him as an aloof, condescending, deceitful man; a narcissist who cannot accept being wrong, and thus relies on obfuscation, blame placing, and outright lies, to redefine his failures into successes. This is the American leadership that must be replaced for America to become great again.
|
-===================
A DESCRIPTION OF BARACK OBAMA Written by Dr. Jack Wheeler
The O-man, Barack Hussein Obama, is an eloquently tailored empty suit. No resume, no accomplishments, no experience, no original ideas, no understanding of how the economy works, no understanding of how the world works, no balls, nothing but abstract, empty rhetoric devoid of real substance.
He has no real identity. He is half-white, which he rejects. The rest of him is mostly Arab, which he hides but is disclosed by his non-African Arabic surname and his Arabic first and middle names as a way to triply proclaim his Arabic parentage to people in Kenya . Only a small part of him is African Black from his Luo grandmother, which he pretends he is exclusively.
What he isn't, not a genetic drop of, is 'African-American,' the descendant of enslaved Africans brought to America chained in slave ships. He hasn't a single ancestor who was a slave. Instead, his Arab ancestors were slave owners. Slave-trading was the main Arab business in East Africa for centuries until the British ended it.
Let that sink in: Obama is not the descendant of slaves, he is the descendant of slave owners. Thus he makes the perfect Liberal Messiah.
It's something Hillary doesn't understand - how some complete neophyte came out of the blue and stole the Dem nomination from her. Obamamania is beyond politics and reason. It is a true religious cult, whose adherents reject Christianity yet still believe in Original Sin, transferring it from the evil of being human to the evil of being white.
Thus Obama has become the white liberals' Christ, offering absolution from the Sin of Being White. There is no reason or logic behind it, no faults or flaws of his can diminish it, no arguments Hillary could make of any kind can be effective against it. The absurdity of Hypocrisy Clothed In Human Flesh being their Savior is all the more cause for liberals to worship him: Credo quia absurdum, I believe it because it is absurd. Thank heavens that the voting majority of Americans remain Christian and are in no desperate need of a phony savior.
He is ridiculous and should not be taken seriously by any thinking American. And yet he got elected, not once but twice. Thanks to those that did not think it was important to vote for freedom and those that were willing to give up their freedoms for entitlements. Remember you don’t have to be on a southern plantation to be a slave, if you are dependent on government entitlements you just have a different slave owner.
Jack Wheeler is a brilliant man who was the author of Reagan's strategy to break the back of the Soviet Union with the star wars race and expose their inner weakness. For years he wrote a weekly intelligence update that was extremely interesting and well structured and informative. He consults(ed) with several mega corporations on global trends and the future, etc. He is in semi-retirement now. He is a true patriot with a no-nonsense approach to everything. He is also a somewhat well-known mountain climber and adventurer.
|
-===================
WHEN GOVERNMENTAL LEADERS INTERFERE IN THE EXECUTION OF JUSTICE AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAW
No way Obama will let Hillary be indicted. His legacy depends on a Dem in the White House or all his executive orders going around Congress will be wiped out—and he can’t depend on Sanders to protect them. What will happen. Hillary is clearly guilty of multiple infractions—but it is not clear if she will be indicted—and if indicted.whether she will be prosecuted. She will try to run out the clock up to the election, obfuscating and shifting blame in a uniques Clintonian way.
-===================
A RECESSION AROUND THE CORNER—OR NOT?
HERE’S A GOOD GLIMPSE OF A KEY ECONOMIC DRIVER—CONSUMER CONFIDENCE (2/3 OF US ECONOMY IS CONSUMER SPENDING.
This month, Deborah Weinswig, Executive Director, Head Global Retail & Technology, Fung Business Intelligence Centre, has provided comments on some of Prosper’s leading indicator analytics including Prosper Consumer Confidence, the Prosper Spending Forecast, the Prosper Impulsivity Score, and the Prosper Mood Index.
Prosper Consumer Confidence: At 42.5%, consumer confidence is down nearly four points month-over-month. This month’s reading represents a 15% decline from Jan-15 (50.1%) as well as a 13 month low. “With this survey fielded January 5 – January 12, concurrent with a 3.9% drop in the S&P 500, consumers no doubt were rattled by the week’s stock market performance and its negative impact on household wealth entering 2016,” according to Deborah Weinswig. “It is worth noting that the University of Michigan’s consumer confidence January 29 reading exhibited a similar trend, down 6.2% from the January 2015 high.” At 45.7%, confidence among small business owners also took a dive from last month, but continues to track above Adults 18+.
About: Consumer confidence is based on respondents who indicated that they are either confident or very confident in the chances of a strong economy during the next six months.
Prosper Consumer Spending Forecast: At 78.8, the January Consumer Spending Forecast is down a little over a point from last month (79.9) and up nearly four percent compared to last year (76.0). The consumer spending forecast is up slightly year-over-year for both discretionary items (+5%) and staples (+2%). “Despite reduced confidence, consumers indicate a willingness to spend,” Weinswig commented. “At FBIC, we think the confluence of an extended period of low gas prices along with a November and December that were unseasonably warm has left consumers with a strong appetite for apparel and accessories (especially as the weather has become more seasonal). We believe there is some pent-up demand. Retailers need to continue to meet shoppers needs with exceptional experiences, out-of-the-box loyalty programs, unique offerings, and a true hybrid retailing experience where the consumer can shop online and physical from the same retailer in a seamless moment.”
About: The Prosper Consumer Spending Forecast is an advanced predictive analytic derived from two established databases (the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Expenditure Survey and Prosper’s Monthly Consumer Survey) and represents consumers’ intended spending levels over the next 90 days in 20 retail categories. The consumer intentions data for the 20 categories is weighted by age and gender to reflect the U.S. population and then weighted to reflect the actual percentage of total retail expenditures for each of the categories.
Prosper Impulsivity Score: At 2.83, the Prosper Impulsivity Score is down slightly year-over-year (2.89). With a Consumer Spending Forecast rating of 86.4, impulsive consumers are nearly 10% more likely than the general population to be planning to spend more over the next 90 days. “A slight reduction in impulsivity is not surprising, as the internet with its transparency and accessibility continues to alter purchasing patterns and create more efficient shoppers in the aggregate,” noted Weinswig.
©Forbes.com and Prosper Group
-===================
YOU CAN ALWAYS FIND COMPLEX ANSWERS—IN MANY CASES OCCAM’S RAZOR IS RIGHT—THE SIMPLEST, MOST OBVIOUS SOLUTION IS BEST
FOR YEARS LIBERAL PROFESSORS AND MISGUIDED PARENTS HAVE BEEN CREATING A GENERATION OF ENTITLED AND SELF-INDULGENT YOUTH
====================
THIS IS ONE EXAMPLE OF HOW OUR MEASUREMENTS ARE SO DAMAGING BY MISLEADING EVERYONE
For those too young to remember Bud Abbott and Lou Costello, they were a comedy team decades ago. They made stupid things funny. This one isn’t so funny. The numbers in this are a bit dated, as the official unemployment rate is now down to 5% (U-4) and the total real unemployment is probably “only” about 11% (U-6) officially. Actually, it is still far worse than that, but NO government measure captures the reality of "underemployment.”
COSTELLO: I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America .
ABBOTT: Good Subject. Terrible Times. It’s 5%
COSTELLO: That many people are out of work?
ABBOTT: No, that's 11%.
COSTELLO: You just said 5%.
ABBOTT: 5% Unemployed.
COSTELLO: Right 5% out of work.
ABBOTT: No, that's 11%.
COSTELLO: Okay, so it’'s 11% unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, that's 5%.
COSTELLO: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 5% or 11%?
ABBOTT: 5.6% are unemployed. 23% are out of work.
COSTELLO: If you are out of work you are unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, Obama said you can't count the Out of Work as the unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.
COSTELLO: BUT THEY ARE OUT OF WORK!!!
ABBOTT: No, you miss his point.
COSTELLO: What point?
ABBOTT: Someone who doesn't look for work can't be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn't be fair.
COSTELLO: To whom?
ABBOTT: The unemployed.
COSTELLO: But ALL of them are out of work.
ABBOTT: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work. Those who are out of work gave up looking and if you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.
COSTELLO: So if you're off the unemployment roles that would count as less unemployment?
ABBOTT: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!
COSTELLO: The unemployment just goes down because you don't look for work?
ABBOTT: Absolutely it goes down. That's how it gets to 5%. Otherwise it would be 11%.
COSTELLO: Wait, I got a question for you. That means there are two ways to bring down the unemployment number?
ABBOTT: Two ways is correct.
COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?
ABBOTT: Correct.
COSTELLO: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?
ABBOTT: Bingo.
COSTELLO: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to have people stop looking for work.
ABBOTT: Now you're thinking like a Democrat.
COSTELLO: I don't even know what the hell I just said!
ABBOTT: Now you're thinking like Hillary.
YES, READERS…THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HUMOR. THE EMPLOYMENT NUMBERS HAVE BEEN ALL OVER THE MAP. WHEN METRICS ARE WRONG, OR THE WRONG ONES ARE USED, THE CONCLUSIONS REACHED, AND ACTIONS TAKEN ARE ALSO WRONG.
STANDBY FOR “NEW NEWS"…
JOHN
---------------------------
PLEASE USE NEW EMAIL ADDRESS: [email protected]
Please DO NOT use older [email protected] and [email protected] addresses—even if you get an email from one of them. They have been UNRELIABLE, and sometimes work and at other times do not!
See my commentary past ones at http://www.brennerbrief.com/author/johnmariotti/ and the LATEST ONES AT:
http://mariotti.blogs.com/my_weblog/
---------------------------
Comments