“Waaaah…, the election was stolen from me…, waaah!” – Hillary Clinton

According to Liam Quinn, a senior editor at Fox News, “Hillary Clinton suggests the election was ‘stolen’ from her, and other Dems could ‘suffer the same fate.’”

“Hillary Clinton suggested she had the 2016 election ‘stolen’ from her during the latest stop of her slumping speaking tour.”

hillary stolen 9

“Taking the stage with her husband Bill in Los Angeles Saturday night as part of the couple’s ‘Evening with the Clintons’ tour, the former Democrat presidential nominee told the crowd she has been warning potential candidates they could suffer the same fate.”

Ha!  An evening with the Clintons!?

More like an evening with a serial sex offender and his scheming, apologist, power hungry, wanna be president, partner in crime.

hillary stoen 10

‘“I think it’s also critical to understand that, as I’ve been telling candidates who have come to see me, you can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you,’ the former secretary of state said.”

Oh really?  Which candidates exactly have been coming to see you, Hillary?  I’m calling bull caca on that claim.

hillary stolen 2

“She’s hardly the only prominent Democrat claiming to have been wrongly kept out of office. On Friday, Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams again claimed she won the state’s 2018 gubernatorial race, despite losing to now-Gov. Brian Kemp.”

‘“I’m here to tell you a secret that makes Breitbart and [Fox News host] Tucker Carlson go crazy: We won,’ Abrams said, according to The Houston Chronicle. ‘I am not delusional. I know I am not the governor of Georgia — possibly yet.’”

No, Stacey, you’re not “delusional,” you’re just a bad loser, and a typical racist, liberal, socialist…, and you don’t know how to talk.

Bam!  Ya, I just said that!

“Abrams justified her refusal to accept the result of the election by calling Kemp ‘an architect of voter suppression that spent the last eight years knitting together a system of voter suppression that is unparalleled in America.’”

Ya…, how dare Governor Kemp attempt to suppress the votes of dead people, non-citizens, and fraudulent mail-in ballots!

The nerve of that guy!

“At the Clinton event, the crowd broke out in applause after Hillary Clinton delivered the ‘stolen’ election line, before she continued with a jab at President Trump.”

‘“And that, my friends, has nothing to do with the economy,’ she said.”

No it doesn’t, Hillary…, but “It’s the economy, stupid” was coined by your hubby’s own campaign strategist, James Carville, during his successful 1992 presidential campaign…, stupid!

“So part of our challenge is to understand what it will take to put together not only the popular vote but the Electoral College.”

Wow…, that’s a good idea Hillary!  Maybe you should have thought about that before the last election…, since, you know…, the winner is decided by which candidate gets the most Electoral College votes.  Duh!

“Clinton won the popular vote in her 2016 campaign against Trump, but lost the Electoral College — and with it, the race.”

She not only lost the Electoral College election, but she got creamed, 304 – 227.

It’s pretty hard to “steal” something from someone who never had the thing to begin with!

Fox News contributor Dan Bongino asked, “How can the woman whose team colluded with Russia during the 2016 campaign claim the election was ‘stolen’ from her’ [by the Russians]?”

hillary stolen 1

“The former first lady also questioned how Trump could still hold conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin following the release of the information in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report.”

Uhhh, maybe because Mueller found no proof of collusion between President Trump and “the Russians,” whatever or whoever “the Russians” means…, or haven’t you heard?

hillary stolen 6hillary stolen 4

“Mueller’s report ‘not only decisively proves, but goes chapter and verse about how the Russians — in the words of the report — conducted a sweeping and systemic interference in our election,’ she said, according to the Seattle Times. ‘And then you wake up and your president is spending an hour on the phone with Vladimir Putin, who was the mastermind of the interference and attack on our election.’”

I’ve said this before…, but Hillary has not read the Mueller report.  All she does is make up whatever narrative she wants and then attributes it to the report, which she know the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” won’t question or dispute.

hillary stolen 5

According to Michael F. Haverluck, of OneNewsNow.com, “The first Clinton event that was held at a Canadian hockey area – which houses nearly 20,000 seats – saw a mere 3,300 tickets sold, and more seat backs than Clinton fans were visible when the lights dimmed and the couple started talking.”

“For their May 19 show at The Forum in Inglewood, California, – which seats more than 17,000 – tickets usually priced at $77 are now going for $35, with $120 tickets discounted to $50, and $175 seats down to $72,” the U.K. daily informed [And tickets were all the way down to $6.50 just prior to the event!]. ‘Despite the site telling customers that ‘tickets are selling fast!’ with ‘limited time remaining,’ it appears that less than 450 discounted tickets have actually been sold.’”

I guess Hillary is about as popular now as she was during the election!

Unlike during the election, however, you can’t pay people to come to your events…, because, in this case, what would be the point?

In conclusion…, let’s be clear…, nothing was “stolen” from you Hillary.

hillary stolen 8

In reality…, you just plain lost…, and conversely…, we know that YOU were the one who cheated during the debates.  You were the one who had your party rig the primary election against Bernie Sanders.  YOU and your partners in crime were the ones who colluded with the Russians in an attempt to dig up dirt on and/or frame Donald Trump.  And YOU were and are the one who has obstructed justice at every turn.

And you just continue to lie misinform the people whenever you open your mouth.

LOCK HER UP!

LOCK HER UP!

LOCK HER UP!

Fox News’ Adam Shaw and Andrew O’Reilly also contributed to Liam Quinn’s report.

hillary stolen 11

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

Hello Poynter Institute!  It’s your turn on my own version of the popular game show “What’s My Line!?

A self-stated goal of MrEricksonRules.com is to “challenge hypocrisy and media bias, while dragging them out into the sunlight.”

Well, Poynter Institute…, consider yourself dragged!poynter 2

I had not even been aware of The Poynter Institute before reading an article by Liam Quinn of Fox News about The Poynter Institute being forced to scrap an “unreliable news” list which targeted conservative news outlets.

Well, I’m aware of it now, and you soon will be as well.

According to the article, “A journalism watchdog has been forced to scrap a list of ‘unreliable’ news sources because, as it turns out, the list wasn’t reliable.”

Just a helpful interjection here…, in the past, when an organization was described as a “watchdog,” that was perceived as a positive and a noble thing, looking out for the good of everyday people.

The term “watchdog” has since been co-opted by liberal organizations everywhere to somehow try and give the impression of a fair and just operation…, which of course they aren’t.  The only ones these people are looking out for is themselves.

“The Poynter Institute, a journalism nonprofit organization, initially released a list of more than 500 ‘unreliable’ news outlets purportedly ‘built from pre-existing databases compiled by journalists, fact-checkers and researchers around the country.’”

“But a number of prominent conservative-leaning outlets were included in the ‘unreliable’ category, including The Washington Examiner, Washington Free Beacon, Daily Caller and other publications that employ scores of journalists covering Congress, elections, the White House and more.”

poynter 6

“The index was created with the help of an employee for the Southern Poverty Law Center.”

Ohhhh…, well why didn’t you reference the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) in the first place?!  Please refer to some of my prior blogs about the gold ole’ SPLC and its astonishing disingenuousness.

Anyway…, the article continues, “Poynter’s managing editor, Barbara Allen, posted a mea culpa [An acknowledgment of one’s fault or error, or as in this case, an elaborate excuse that disseminates the blame.] Thursday as the backlash built.”

‘“On Tuesday, April 30, Poynter posted a list of 515 “unreliable” news websites, built from pre-existing databases compiled by journalists, fact-checkers and researchers around the country. Our aim was to provide a useful tool for readers to gauge the legitimacy of the information they were consuming,’ the statement read.”

Translation: We just posted a list of conservative websites and resources that liberal media sheep everywhere already were aware of.  Our aim was to try and expand the users of our “hit list” to the public in general.

‘“Soon after we published, we received complaints from those on the list and readers who objected to the inclusion of certain sites, and the exclusion of others. We began an audit to test the accuracy and veracity of the list, and while we feel that many of the sites did have a track record of publishing unreliable information, our review found weaknesses in the methodology.’”

Translation: Soon after we did this we got busted.  Being a 501(c) (3) nonprofit organization (just like The Southern Poverty Law Center by the way), we are supposed to be nonpartisan, so we have to make sure we keep up the appearance of being nonpartisan even though we’re not.  So we pretended like we carefully reviewed our list, then came up with some lame excuses as to why the lists seemed to be partisan.

‘“We detected inconsistencies between the findings of the original databases that were the sources for the list and our own rendering of the final report.’”

Translation: We are now going to just straight up lie in an effort to make an excuse for ourselves.

poynter 7

“It continued: ‘Therefore, we are removing this “unreliable sites list” until we are able to provide our audience a more consistent and rigorous set of criteria. The list was intended to be a starting place for readers and journalists to learn more about the veracity of websites that purported to offer news; it was not intended to be definitive or all encompassing.”

Translation: We were not able to get away with putting our list out there this time, but we’ll do a better job of making it available next time, while getting away with it somehow.

‘“We regret that we failed to ensure that the data was rigorous before publication, and apologize for the confusion and agitation caused by its publication. We pledge to continue to hold ourselves to the highest standards.’”

Translation: We are very sorry and disappointed we got caught, and we pledge to make a better effort to not get caught next time.  Not getting caught is the highest of our high standards here at The Poynter Institute.

There…, was that helpful?  I hope it was.

So, now what exactly is The Poynter Institute?

Again…, let’s hear about The Poynter Institute in their own words, according to their own website, with a little interpretation by myself.

“The Poynter Institute has grown from a storefront in sunny St. Petersburg, Florida, to the world’s most influential school for journalists.”

(Ahhh, the old rags to riches story.  How inspiring!  But they didn’t do it alone.  The list of major contributors is a virtual “who’s who” of liberal foundations, funds and trusts.  Trying to control “the media” and brainwash “journalists” everywhere does not come cheap.  Oh, by the way, The Poynter Institute is designated as a 501(c) (3) nonprofit organization, but they say they own The Tampa Bay Times newspaper.  How does that work?  Just sayin’.)

poynter 3

(Pretty nice digs for a non-profit, huh?)

poynter 4

“Poynter is an instructor, innovator, convener and resource for anyone who aspires to engage and inform citizens. We serve not only 21st-century democracies, but those in corners of the globe where people who honor freedom and self-government struggle against tyrants and autocrats.”

(We want to enlist you and guide you through our liberal propaganda program.)

“By supporting the Poynter Institute, you fortify journalism’s role in a free society. Poynter champions freedom of expression, civil dialogue and compelling journalism that helps citizens participate in healthy democracies. We prepare journalists worldwide to hold powerful people accountable and promote honest information in the marketplace of ideas.”

(Poynter champions freedom of expression, except when that expression does not agree with their expression, and we prepare our fascists in training to attack conservatives at every turn and to try and dictate our socialist narrative on everyone.)

“Poynter’s Brands:”

(Poynter’s associated liberal indoctrination services:)

“News University – Poynter’s News University brings Poynter training to users around the world with the world’s largest online journalism curriculum.”

(Our way of spreading our liberal and socialist agenda to budding propagandists everywhere!)

“International Fact-checking Network – The International Fact-Checking Network brings together more than 60 fact-checkers worldwide, promoting best practices and exchanges.”

(This network makes sure no one deviates from the prescribed liberal talking points or narratives, and attempts to spin “facts” in favor of liberals, liberal politicians and liberal causes everywhere.)

“MediaWise – aims to teach 1 million teenagers how to sort fact from fiction through social media and our teen fact-checking network.”

(This particularly insidious resource targets teenagers with the “proper” indoctrination of liberal thought.)

“PolitiFact – is the largest political fact-checking news organization in the United States and winner of the Pulitzer Prize. It has published more than 16,000 fact-checks on its Truth-O-Meter.”

(PolitiFact is the lone resource they can point to as being anywhere near legitimate and somewhat fair.)

“As public trust in the media dissipates, we are increasingly expanding our mission to reach out to communities and have conversations about finding the truth. We must be relevant to journalists and non-journalists alike and hold our staff and other media accountable.”

(As public trust in the media dissipates…?  But how could this be?  How could the public trust in the media be dissipating with all of the valiant and noble efforts of the Poynter Institute?  I guess “the public” is smarter than you gives us credit for, huh?)

“Each year, Poynter trains over 100,000 journalists from more than 70 countries in person and online. Since the start of our online education initiative in 2005, we’ve taught journalists in virtually every country in the world.”

(God help us all.)

poynter 8

Their “code of ethics” is quite extensive, but obviously not worth the paper it’s printed on.

One of their highlighted taglines on their website says, “Poynter teaches journalists to tell stories the world needs to hear.”  Which in essence means that Poynter teaches its media minions to spread their approved liberal propaganda everywhere.

Well…, there you have it!

The Poynter Institute in all of its “liberal propaganda machine” glory!

Remember…, stay thirsty my friends…, but don’t drink the liberal Kool Aide!  Especially the Kool-Aide The Poynter Institute is serving up!

poynter 5

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

Muslim kids in Philadelphia were singing, “We will chop off their heads for Allah!”  Well, isn’t that special?

According to Caleb Parke of Fox News, “Disturbing footage of Muslim kids saying they would sacrifice themselves and kill for the ‘army of Allah’ surfaced from an Islamic center in Philadelphia.”

Here we have another shining example of liberal propaganda by omission.

You will not see any reporting of this on NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC or anywhere else in the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media.”

You won’t see anything about this because it doesn’t fit their narrative that Islam is just another peace loving religion.

It doesn’t fit their narrative that the only dangerous religion is “Christianity and its extremist, white, right wing, racists.”

“The Muslim American Society (MAS) Islamic Center in Philadelphia posted the video to its Facebook page celebrating ‘Ummah Day’ in which young children wearing Palestinian scarves sang and read poetry about killing for Allah and the mosque in Jerusalem.”

muslims 5

The group posted the video to their Facebook page.

OOOOOMMMMMGGGGG!!!!

Could you imagine if a bunch of rednecks posted a video on Facebook about killing another group of people because they weren’t Christian!!!!!!!!!!!!????????????

The coverage by the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” would be non-stop.

They would be losing their minds…, and blaming it all on President Trump besides.

“The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) alerted Fox News to the video.”

‘“These are not isolated incidents; they are happening in major centers of the country – including in Pennsylvania,’ MEMRI said in a statement.”

“In the video, translated by MEMRI, kids can be heard singing: ‘The land of the Prophet Muhammad’s Night Journey is calling us. Our Palestine must return to us.’”

“One girl talks about martyrs sacrificing their lives without hesitation to conquer Jerusalem.”

‘“We will defend the land of divine guidance with our bodies, and we will sacrifice our souls without hesitation,’ a second girl says. ‘We will chop off their heads, and we will liberate the sorrowful and exalted Al-Aqsa Mosque. We will lead the army of Allah fulfilling His promise, and we will subject them to eternal torture.’”

What a cute song!  Is that the one you learn in school after you learn “Twinkle, twinkle little star?”

“MAS Philly belongs to the Muslim American Society (MAS), which has 42 chapters in the United States and one in the United Kingdom.”

“MAS’ website says that its mission is to ‘move people to strive for God-consciousness, liberty and justice, and to convey Islam with utmost clarity,’ and that its vision is ‘a virtuous and just American society.’”

muslims 2

‘“Hate has no place in our society (Unless you’re talking about hate for President Trump and conservatives in general!).  In an era where we’ve seen an increase in hate crimes, including rising Islamophobia and anti-semitism, we must stand tall together in solidarity.’ Ayman Hammous, executive director of MAS, said in a statement. ‘These acts of terror in places of worship and against humanity cannot become the norm.’”

I hear your words Mr. Hammous, but actions speak louder than words, and the hateful things you are teaching these kids are disturbing.

The Muslim American Society has lost all credibility in my book, and based on what they are promoting, should be considered a “hate group,” and be treated as such.

How could any reasonable person see the situation any other way?

Only people with an agenda and/or a bias would, and will, attempt to justify this type of behavior.

But mostly the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” will just look the other way.

muslims 3

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Oh, Hillary…, lying for you is as easy as breathing, isn’t it?

When talking with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, Hillary Clinton said the most important thing she learned from the Mueller report was “the Russians were successful” in sowing “discord and divisiveness.”

First of all, “Crooked Hillary,” you, yourself, did not read one word of the Mueller report, so you actually learned nothing from it.

Then you, “Crooked Hillary,” suggest it was the Russians who were “successful in sowing discord and divisiveness” during the 2016 election, when in all actuality it was you, “Crooked Hillary” and your crooked partners in crime!  You know…, the same people you gave money to so they could give money to Christopher Steele to collude with the Russians and help to fabricate the infamous dossier.  You know…, the real colluders with the Russians…, You, “Crooked Hillary,” the DNC, the company Fusion GPS and Nellie Ohr, the wife of Justice Department official Bruce Ohr.  This is all common knowledge now, except many Americans are not aware of it thanks to the complicit “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media.”

lying hillary 1

The next thing that oozes from “Crooked Hillary’s” mouth is, “China, if you’re listening, why don’t you get Trump’s tax returns?”

“Turnabout,” she hypothetically suggests to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, “might be fair play.”

Then again it might not.

maddow

You, “Crooked Hillary,” wouldn’t be inciting operatives of the Chinese government to illegally obtain and distribute information about the current President of the United States, would you?

Because if you were, I would consider that a treasonous act and you, “Crooked Hillary,” an accessory to that crime…, another crime…, another crime in a long list of crimes.

lying hillary 12

According to Bianca Quilantan for Politico, “Hillary Clinton on Wednesday night suggested that if the Justice Department was going to let Russia get away with interfering in the 2016 presidential election, it might be OK if one of the 2020 Democratic candidates enlisted China for help.”

lying hillary 11

Speaking again to Rachel Maddow on her MSNBC show, ‘“Imagine, Rachel, that you had one of the Democratic nominees for 2020 on your show, and that person said, you know, the only other adversary of ours who is anywhere near as good as the Russians is China,’ Clinton told Maddow. ‘So why should Russia have all the fun? And since Russia is clearly backing Republicans, why don’t we ask China to back us?’”

‘“And not only that, China, if you’re listening, why don’t you get Trump’s tax returns?’ Clinton continued. ‘I’m sure our media would richly reward you.’”

lying hillary 2

I’m sure our “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” would reward them too!  Just as long as they don’t come around with dirt on you or the democrats, right!

I’m also sure that China would be more than happy to back the democrats and go back to the Obama days when they were getting away with economic murder all of those one-sided trade deals.

“Clinton said the No. 1 thing she learned from reading special counsel Robert Mueller’s partially redacted report (which she didn’t read) was that Russia conducted a “sweeping and systemic interference” in the 2016 election and has not been held accountable. And that she worries there is reason to believe Russia will do it again.”

Extra!  Extra!  Read all about it!  Russia has been trying to interfere, and interfering, in our elections for like the last 70 years!  This is nothing new and I’m sure they won’t quit trying now.

Mrs. Clinton, “Crooked Hillary,” is just one giant and continuous misinformation machine.  In other words, lies roll off of her tongue like water flows over a waterfall.

lying hillary 5

“When asked about Attorney General William Barr’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier Wednesday, Clinton said that ‘calling for his resignation makes perfect sense.’”

‘“I think that the Democrats on the committee did a good job today in exposing that he is the president’s defense lawyer,’ Clinton said. ‘He is not the attorney general of the United States in the way that he has conducted himself.’ Clinton added that House Democrats ‘have every reason to’ find Barr in contempt.”

lying hillary 13

Standing up for the truth, the law and common sense does not make you “the President’s defense lawyer,” Hillary.

You, “Crooked Hillary,” feel that “calling for his [Attorney General Barr’s] resignation makes perfect sense.”  Oh, you mean like when Obama’s Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, met privately with your husband, on a plane, sitting on the tarmac, in the middle of their investigation of you?  Is that what you mean?

lying hillary 3

lying hillary 7

‘“But this is part of their [“their” meaning the whole right-wing conspiracy thing I guess] whole technique to divert attention from what the real story is,’ Clinton continued. ‘The real story is the Russians interfered in our election. And Trump committed obstruction of justice. That’s the real story.’”

Wrong again “liar, liar, pants on fire!”  “The real story” is that you and your partners in crime fabricated the fairy tale dossier and used it as a basis for attempting to frame President Trump, and his people, with colluding with the Russians…, which is exactly what you and your friends did.

That’s “the real story.”

LOCK HER UP!  LOCK HER UP!

lying hillary 6

Lies, lies and more lies.

lying hillary 8

lying hillary 10

lying hillary 9

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

The “biased, liberal propaganda, fakes news media” strikes again!

“We should be outraged by FOX and its apologists,” according to The Washington Post.

Another liberal “rag” magazine, The Nation, recently pronounced that, “Fox News has always been propaganda.”

Sounds like just another coordinated, fake news narrative being spun on multiple fronts.

The sheer and utter hypocrisy of the “biased, liberal propaganda, fakes news media” just never ceases to amaze me…, and they just have NO shame.

fake news

The “biased, liberal propaganda, fakes news media” turned its collective head and looked the other way on countless occasions during the Obama years, or when it had to, they “reasoned away” many concerns or dreamed up excuses as they deemed necessary.

Their behavior during Obama’s reign was the definition of being an “apologist.”

Any fair minded people know that the “biased, liberal propaganda, fakes news media” does not even make an attempt anymore to appear fair or balanced with their coverage of President Trump, the republicans, or conservatives in general.

So I’ll tell you what Washington Post…, you and your friends go on and be outraged at whoever you want and the rest of us will be outraged at whoever we want…, ok?

We all know what causes your “outage.”  It’s the fact that FOX and FOX News does not walk in lock step with your liberal agenda.

fakenews 0724 resized

What causes our “outrage” is the fact that the mainstream media has become a propaganda arm of the democrat party and along with liberals and socialists everywhere.

The trust and the reputation of the mainstream media is gone and I don’t think it’s ever coming back.

Congratulations.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the very bottom of this page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

 

The disingenuous “biased, liberal, fake news media” tries to paint President Trump as a liar…, again, regarding Mexico and the border wall. 

According to Ying Ma of Fox News, “Trump-haters are again foaming at the mouth over comments made by The President regarding the border wall he has promised to build.  Once again, they are wrong about their criticism of the president.”

“President Trump noted last week that his campaign promise to build a wall and have Mexico pay for it ‘obviously’ did not mean getting a check from the Mexican government directly.  Rather, he said, Mexico will be paying for the wall indirectly, ‘many, many times over’ via the trade agreement his administration recently renegotiated with Canada and Mexico to replace NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement).”

“The anti-Trump media wasted no time accusing the president of lying. CNN, featuring all-out indignation from its anchors, promptly replayed video footage from Trump campaign rallies showing Trump and his raucous crowds chanting that Mexico will pay for the wall.”

“The Washington Post has chimed in as well and declared in a headline: ‘Trump falsely asserts he never promised Mexico would directly pay for the border wall.’”

“Meanwhile, Politifact screamed out its own verdict: ‘Trump says he didn’t say Mexico would write US a check for border wall.  But he did.’”

Before our friends in the “biased, liberal. Fake news media” go getting too excited, let’s remember that it was only a couple weeks ago that the congress finally authorized any wall spending, and only $1.375 billion at that, so there hasn’t even been an opportunity for Mexico to kick in for anything until just recently.

Nevertheless, it is extremely disingenuous for his critics to huff and puff over what they perceive as a lie.

Do you recall such an uproar after former President Obama declared, “If you like your doctor you can keep doctor.  If you like your plan you can keep your plan.”  Or how about, “Every family will save $2,500 on this plan on average.”  Or how about, “The Affordable Care Act” (ObamaCare) won’t add one dime to the federal deficit.”

I sure don’t, and these were actual premeditated lies…, just to name a few!

It’s just another example to the “biased, liberal, fake news media” and their propaganda by omission.

“One could disagree with the substance [of President Trump’s claims], but those pretending to be honest and objective observers of President Trump should at least try to understand why ‘build the wall’ … became a rallying cry during the last presidential campaign.”

“The chant reflected voters’ frustration that Mexico was engaging in unfair practices, whether in trade or immigration, while politicians in Washington on both the left and the right did nothing about it”

“Candidate Trump promised to change this.  If Trump-haters paid attention to this core idea, they might understand why Trump supporters care far more about whether the president builds the wall and strengthen border security than they care about whether Mexico pays for the wall directly or indirectly.”

BUILD THAT WALL!  BUILD THAT WALL!  BUILD THAT WALL!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the very bottom of this page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

build the wall

So the “biased, liberal, fake news media” now feels it is OK to belittle the education level of selected groups of voters? 

The answer to this question is undeniably “yes,” at least as far as Eugene Scott of The Washington Post is concerned.

Mr. Scott chooses to point out that, “Americans are pursuing higher education at growing rates, but those without a college education are increasingly finding a home in the GOP.”

So are you implying that voters without college educations are somehow less informed, Mr. Scott?

Are you implying that voters without college educations are somehow less deserving of the right to vote, Mr. Scott?

During the latest midterm elections in 2018, if I heard it once I heard it a thousand times from the democrats, “Every vote counts!”  “Every vote deserves to be counted!”

I guess that’s only true when you’re “harvesting” what you believe are votes for democrats.  Right Mr. Scott?

Voter demographics should not have a bearing on anything.  Each voter is as important as any other voter.  The important things are that each legal voter have the opportunity to vote, and that they vote only once.

According to new data released by the Pew Research Center, higher educational attainment is increasingly associated with Democratic Party affiliation and leaning:

“In 1994, 39% of those with a four-year college degree identified with or leaned toward the Democratic Party and 54% associated with the Republican Party.  In 2017, those figures were exactly reversed.”

More than half of registered voters who identify as Democrat have a bachelor’s degree, while fewer than 4 in 10 registered voters who identify as Republican have a bachelor’s degree.

Those with graduate degrees are even more likely to find their political home in the Democratic Party, according to the survey.

Meanwhile, the GOP has increasingly become more of a political destination to Americans who lack a college degree, according to Pew, “Among those with no more than a high school education, 47% affiliate with the GOP or lean Republican, while 45% identify as Democrats or lean Democratic.”

In Mr. Scott’s estimation, “This may not bode well for the GOP long-term as the American public becomes increasingly educated.”

I think he means, “… as the American public becomes increasingly brain washed by our liberal education systems!”

According to Census Bureau data, “More than a third of American adults have a four-year college degree or higher, the highest level ever measured by the Census Bureau.”

Why Mr. Scott…, I do believe you are “fake news!”

You say, “This may not bode well for the GOP long-term as the American public becomes increasingly educated,” but if “more than a third of American adults have a four-year college degree or higher,” that would mean close to two thirds do not.  How does that “not bode well for the GOP?”

Mr. Scott goes on to say, “As the Republican Party increasingly becomes the party of those without degrees, their leaders may feel pressure to champion policies that benefit working class voters…”

Well, we can’t have that!  Right Mr. Scott?

That damn “working class,” right Mr. Scott?

Those pathetically ignorant “working class” voters who don’t deserve to vote, but pay for all of your liberal “give-away” programs, right Mr. Scott?

Pew data shows that the educational makeup of the two major parties’ electorates also has changed substantially over the past two decades, particularly when factoring in race:

“When race and education are taken into account, white voters who do to not have a college degree make up a diminished share of Democratic registered voters.  White voters who do not have a four-year degree now constitute just a third of Democratic voters, down from 56% two decades ago.  By contrast, non-college white voters continue to make up a majority of Republican and Republican-leaning registered voters at 59%.”

Ha!  I knew it wouldn’t take long before race got involved in the issue!

Apparently “non-educated” white voters are less desirable that “non-educated” Black or Latino voters.

Mr. Scott finishes by saying, “Some top GOP officials have attracted attention for their desire to win women and people of color to their party.  Perhaps moving forward we’ll see more emphasis on what can be done to win the highly educated.”

It seems to me, Mr. Scott, that your “highly educated” people are more often than not the people that are more “highly confused.”

Also, why is it that liberals seem to only value education as a result of a college education?

How about educations and training acquired by our “trade” professionals, like electricians, plumbers, welders, carpenters, HVAC technicians, mechanics, licensed practical nurses, construction professionals, et al?  Do these educations, most of which are quite extensive, not count just because they are practical?

How about the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines who serve in our military, most of whom do not have college educations?  Do these educations not count because they are practical in nature?

No, these educations don’t “count” in the minds of liberals because these are educations that do not indoctrinate the students into the liberal political ideology.

Nicholas Carnes and Noam Lupu, also of The Washington Post, have their own take on voter demographics, specifically as they pertain to Donald Trump’s election and support.

Carnes and Lupu say that, “Media coverage of the 2016 election often emphasized Donald Trump’s appeal to ‘the working class.’ The Atlantic said that ‘the billionaire developer is building a blue-collar foundation.’ The Associated Press wondered what ‘Trump’s success in attracting white, working-class voters’ would mean for his general election strategy.  On Nov. 9, the New York Times front-page article about Trump’s victory characterized it as ‘a decisive demonstration of power by a largely overlooked coalition of mostly blue-collar white and working-class voters.’”

“But what about education?” They continued.  “Many pundits noticed early on that Trump’s supporters were mostly people without college degrees.  There were two problems with this line of reasoning, however.”

“First, not having a college degree isn’t a guarantee that someone belongs in the working class, nor should it somehow indicate that these people are not successful (think Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs, Richard Branson, Aretha Franklin, Quentin Tarantino, Ellen DeGeneres, Simon Cowell, Ted Turner, Rachel Ray, Kim Kardasian, Mark Wahlberg, Al Pacino, Seth Rogan, Marshall “Eminem” Mathers, and Robert ‘F-you’ DeNiro, just to name a few).”

“And, second, although more than 70 percent of Trump supporters didn’t have college degrees, when we looked at the NBC polling data, we noticed something the pundits left out: during the primaries, about 70 percent of all Republicans didn’t have college degrees, close to the national average (71 percent according to the 2013 Census).  Far from being a magnet for the less educated, Trump seemed to have about as many people without college degrees in his camp as we would expect any successful Republican candidate to have.”

So Mr. Scott, you have been debunked!

“Observers have often used the education gap to conjure images of poor people flocking to Trump, but the truth is, many of the people without college degrees who voted for Trump were from middle- and high-income households.”

Many, if not most, of these “observers” are quite confused and quite biased as well.  “Poor people” flocking to candidates is, again, only desirable when they are “flocking” to the appropriate liberal candidate.

“In short, the narrative that attributes Trump’s victory to a “coalition of mostly blue-collar white and working-class voters” just doesn’t square with the 2016 election data.  According to the election study, white non-Hispanic voters without college degrees making below the median household income made up only 25 percent of Trump voters.”

In a word, there are “uneducated voters” and then there are “uneducated voters.”

It would appear that it is the democrats who are a party of extremes.  They seem to be comprised mostly of college eggheads, highly paid entertainers, extreme social and environmental interest groups, high school drop-outs, high school graduates who haven’t furthered their education, and all of those who live off of the government and have no intent to better themselves.

In a recent National Review article (The National Review is recognized as a leading conservative magazine, but was exposed during the election as just another “swampy,” establishment, media outlet) about Trump’s alleged support among the working class bordered on a call to arms against the less fortunate, saying that, “The white American underclass is in thrall to a vicious, selfish culture whose main products are misery and used heroin needles.  Donald Trump’s speeches make them feel good. So does OxyContin,” and that “the truth about these dysfunctional downscale communities is that they deserve to die.”

According to Carnes and Lupu, “This kind of stereotyping and scapegoating is a dismaying consequence of the narrative that working-class Americans swept Trump into the White House.  What deserves to die isn’t America’s working-class communities.  It’s the myth that they’re the reason Trump was elected.”

Shame on you National Review, and shame on you Eugene Scott.

And thank you to Nicholas Carnes and Noam Lupu for reporting the facts and not twisting the facts to fit the liberal narrative.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of the page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

remember-when-you-said-trump-would-never-be-president-but-36286487

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑