A red wave starts with a red moon
It is the early morning of Election Day. The red moon is visible in the sky. If this were ancient times, it might be construed as a sign from the gods — an omen of a red wave about to sink the Democratic Party. Though most of the people no longer see omens in such astrological events, it is quite an amazing and amusing coincidence.
Omen or not, it is not shaping up to be a good day for Democrats. History, issues, and polls all suggest a significant victory for Republicans. Most certainly they will win control of the House. I am on record suggesting a GOP takeover of the Senate – although less confident in that prediction. We have not seen a lot of polling or prognostication on the state-based races – for governor, legislature, secretary-of-state, attorney general, and school boards. I am betting Republicans will do well in those races.
In an effort to face weaker opponents – as they perceived them – Democrats spent hundreds of millions of dollars supporting Trump-backed candidates. I think many of them are going to win – as well as all those so-called election deniers.
That will leave Democrats and the folks at MSNBC to explain why the party and the candidates they have branded as the most evil and most dangerous enemies of democracy – a threat to the very existence of the Republic – have won so much support from the American people in a free and fair election.
Amid agonizing expressions of hope, many on the left still contended that abortion and threats to democracy were still viable issues driving voters. NBC even had the threat issue as the number one concern among voters – something no other poll showed.
But the reality was trumping hope. The morning shows were already filled with their excuses. Left-wing commentators and analysts fell back the failure of Democrat messaging – even in the face of the enormous amount of positive coverage the media gave the Democrat issues of abortion, democracy, and the alleged good economic news. They refused to concede that virtually every voter in America has heard the Democrat message – and it was not very convincing,
The hyper hysteria was evident in the raised voices of folks like MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough and former Republican National Chairman turned MNBC flunky Michael Steele. Ironically, the causes of Democrat weakness were inconsistent. Some alleged they spent too much time on the Capitol Hill riot and the threat to democracy and others claimed they spent too little time.
Some said the Democrats need to talk more about the economy, crime, and schools. But what could they say? Those were losing issues for Democrats – as was the border.
Democrats never understood that their hyperbolic fear mongering about the end of the American democracy was just too outlandish to even create anxiety – much less fear. They had been pushing the threat issue to the top of their campaign strategy even as polls and trends indicated it was not gaining traction outside the New York and Washington newsrooms. Despite the NBC poll, it never was the voters’ top concern.
Democrats clung to the end with a belief that abortion would tip the scales. As I opined in previous commentaries – abortion is never a decisive election issue. But Democrats continued to push the abortion issue even as the targeted suburban women were shifting to the GOP despite the overturning of Roe v. Wade.
The red wave is likely to reclaim a lot of American political territory and power. Democrats did not blow the election because of poor messaging. They blew the election because of bad policies.
Now … we shall see if that is the case when the results come in,
So, there ‘tis.
Even Nancy Pelosi might get voted out because of lying about what happened to her drunken husband. That guy wasn’t injured. He’s hiding away from the cameras because it’s a conspiracy. The red moon will bring out the truth
Larry, you said, “But the reality was trumping hope. ” I love the way you keep weaving Trump into your blogs! Simply marvelous!!! I am surprised you did not indicate that the red moon (which looks more orange to me) is a “Trump omen” LOL I agree with you, I heard the Democratic message, and as a member of the largest voting block in the USA (Independent/unaffiliated) I did not like their message. I will go even further, their message sickened me! Woke-ism, abortion, LGBTQIA+ blah blah crap, reliving Trump crap every day, are all very stupid issues with me. As for “end of the democracy” issues, it appears to most of we independents / unaffiliated that the end of democracy will come much quicker with Democrats in charge. The real problem is that extremes are running both parties and they keep the pendulum swinging wildly from end to end – never landing in the middle. We need a third party to represent moderates of both parties and independent/unaffiliated voters who by nature tend to be moderates. Larry, after you consider my “Frank and Larry Sloberknock Hour Show, please consider starting a third party for us and lead us into moderate heaven!
The hundreds of millions that Larry sees Democrats funding magarats is actually just over 50 million, mostly by one Democrat for one race.
Still a stupid idea. But why does Larry get so much, so wrong? Can’t really trust a story from a guy who does not check his facts. 30 seconds on goigke. .
Frank Stetson …..the $50 million you refer to is from a number of Dem supporting organizations, I am sure you missed the $35 million Gov Pritzker put into the ‘Bailey effort (that puts it over $85 million — and a few others. Total exceeds $100 million. You need to do better research. When it comes to facts, I can get it wrong on a rare occasion, but you make it a habit. But I am not going to waste my time being your fact-checker every time you are wrong no matter how much you crave my attention. It would waste too much of my time.
Well, already it seems we blew Florida and Florida is no longer a swing state. That’s on us.
Magarats, Big Lie Believers, 1/6 insurrection supporters, and Trumplicants blew it, that’s on you.
No matter who wins, America loses. Dems can’t get total control even if they win, they lose. Repub’s can’t get anything done for two years, even if they win. As long as no one will work in a bipartisan fashion, America loses.
But DeSantis ascends, Trump descends, but he will not go away. He needs the money, he needs the legal protection that he believes the Presidency provides. Now DeSantis will go national, people will focus, and we will see what slithers out from under the rocks that are his career. His latest actions are showy, but doubtful they will move a bipartisan audience.
Frank, as an Independent / unaffiliated capitalist, for the most part, I agree with your post but do differ on your projection that nothing will get done and America loses. We are both kindred capitalists. The grid lock that may be coming down the road has a silver lining for us. Markets like stability. Grid lock and nothing getting done does create stability. But the markets also like spending and Democratic administrations tend to spend more. Yet statistics on the S&P show that there is an average 15% bump (as reported by CBS yesterday) when GOP runs the table. Yet with GOP controlling the purse strings, this will reign in Biden so as even though there may not be as much government spending in the economy that markets like to see, there will be curbed inflation and more stable prices for goods and services (and maybe less unemployment) which the market also likes. So we will have to see how this shakes out. My guess is that there will be some cancelling effect of a 15% market bump if Dems take the Senate and grid lock occurs but markets will like the stability. This will result in a 5-10% bump, a slower market recovery but that recovery will occur, and our wallets will still get a little fatter! Rejoice and be glad friend!
Thanks for the kind comments. I agree, markets love stability, but the last regime showed us that it’s not mandatory. Trump’s policies and personality caused a lot of uncertainty.
The government being in gridlock is not the same as stability, IMO. It can get quite unstable if action is called for and none is done.
I think if you look, you will find in the past few administrations, Democratic spending has been far less than in Republican regimes. Biden may be cursed for spending but he has lowered the bridge a lot from Trump with less spending, a lower deficit and, at least, a slowdown in the debt INCREASES. Not low enough, certainly not low enough to contradict all the free money Trump and then Biden passed out. But, in general, Republicans talk big and then run up a bill bill and a lot more debt.
Since the market bumps 10% on average, not sure how the GOP statistic is generated and what it means. “The stock market has returned an average of 10% per year over the past 50 years. The past decade has been great for stocks. From 2012 through 2021, the average stock market return was 14.8% annually for the S&P 500 index.” Motly fool.
From a practical standpoint I have never understood this. First, it’s really hard to hit 10% every year if you diversify to reduce risk. Fifteen percent is a pipedream. So, if this was true, and was constant, why do people invest in anything except a total market basket? It’s timing.
I hit 30% a few years back; that took 10-hours days, day trading, and a fuck of a lot of foolhardy luck and risk. (I was really pissed that year that my pension had been capped.) It also took a lot of market volatility; I could never have pulled it off on a stable year. So, if you said Trump had one of the best economies, the 15% rule exists, everyone should be in investment hog heaven. Indeed, on inauguration, market bumped 5%. Stability voids of the trade wars, impeachments, the market rose 50% under Trump. However, like Trump, it was erratic with tech stocks soaring and energy stocks falling.
There is another rule, associated with stability, that says voting the incumbent in, regardless of party, will provide a better bump than voting him out. Makes sense if you believe in stability.
Then during the Great Pandemic, under Trump policies, in early 2020, the market crashed the at the largest collapse since The Great Depression. It lost 13% in one day and 30% in a month. Ultimately, it’s not about the President or even the economy —– it’s always about the timing :>) If you were riding a market basket, you went bankrupt under Trump.
So, I have little faith in market averages as guiding lights, don’t care about short bumps, pretty sure Republicans are the bigger spenders (although they market it well), and really think gridlock is not good for the economy just because there might be something worse out there.
And as a sidenote, I could care less about the spending amount than I do the returns. Many feel government spending has no return. Certainly, stimulus is monetary heroin, an immediate economic high of spending. Not the greatest investment but sometimes necessary in small doses. Infrastructure on the other hand, if not wasted, will provide a lifetime of returns. It can be great spending. Obama’s solar energy program — turned a profit to the government, ignited a new market, it was great spending. Cash for clunkers — a little more complicated and not as great. Clinton’s crime bill, lots of new cops on the streets, revitalized NYC for tourists. A great economic boom, until the arrests got out of hand a number of years later. Timing is always important there too. So I say it’s not the spending, it’s what you spend it on and how you manage the spending. One of the functions of government is to spend for things citizens need that the private market is not likely to provide. If done right, this type of spending will grow the economy every time. Don’t matter the party, or bipartisan, business and the economy don’t care.
fuck, even I think this is rambling and too long. hagn…. :>0
where’s ben, what has joe done to ben?
Don’t worry frank. It seems that there are plenty of others like you that want to live under the heavy boot of democrat communism. The democrat does not like freedom. It must scare them something terrible to make decisions on their own.
Rick, have you always pushed on doors marked pull? I have read Frank’s posts for some time now. He is a markets and capitalist person, not some sort of communist which you accuse him of. He does not fear making decisions and for all we know, he may have made more critical decisions in his life than you. Frank and I have a more acute sense of fairness and justice that I doubt you could ever possibly understand. Just because we want more fairness and all people to do well and be adequately taken care of, does not mean we are communists, nor does it mean we fear decision making. It is actually just the opposite. More fairness and justice leads to more market participation and wealth building potential by a greater amount of the population. This works in favor of Frank and I and our wallets while providing a higher quality of life and standard of living for a greater number of people – so why does this scare you?
Tom … I think you do yourself a disservice in making a comparison with Frank. I see you as intellectually honest — even where we may disagree — and mostly civil and unaccusatory in your approach. You make good points. I see Frank as more of an obsessed ankle biter with very narrow opinions and a sense of always being right. His snide insults and ad hominin attacks — and his tendency to declare himself always the winner of the most petty exchanges is not my idea of objective and fair-minded. I refuse to respond to most of his long insulting and inaccurate screeds even though he tries to entice me into endless exchanges. His third person characterizations of me are wrong and sophomoric — and unworthy of rebuttal. In fact, I see you and him at opposite ends of intelligent civil dialogue.
Rick, I think you are wrong. Let us know if you ever want to discuss a real issue.
I am a pretty avid capitalist, I think I have the profit n loss statement to prove it. It affords me freedoms you can only dream of.
I did this though my own decisions like the one yesterday that booted me $7K with the click of a mouse. What’s in your wallet, magarat?
FRank Stetson … you are pretty proud of your wealth. You mention it a lot. You sound like one of those guys who equates money with superiority. I call it arrogance.. I mean really … who cares how rich you are. Hmmmmm You sound like Trump.