Monday, May 23, 2016

Trump-Hillary polling graph, July 2015-May 2016-Real Clear Politics

5/23/16, "General Election: Trump vs. Clinton," Real Clear Politics. July 2015-May 19, 2016

Above, July 2015-May 2016


RCP average of five polls in May 2016, Trump +.2

ABC News/Washington Post-Trump +2

NBC News/Wall St. Journal-Clinton +3

Rasmussen Reports-Trump +5

Fox News-Trump +3

CBS News/NY Times-Clinton +6


Jack Nicklaus says of Donald Trump, “He is awakening the country. We need a lot of that”-Washington Post

May 22, 2016, "Jack Nicklaus says Donald Trump is ‘turning America upside down’--in a good way," Washington Post, Cindy Boren

"Jack Nicklaus is the latest member of the sports world to endorse Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for president of these here United States and someone for whom Nicklaus has designed golf courses. 

“I like what Donald has done. I like that he’s turning America upside down,” Nicklaus told Jim Axelrod in a “CBS Sunday Morning” interview. “He’s awakening the country. We need a lot of that.

Nicklaus said his business experiences with Trump, who attended the ceremony when Nicklaus was honored with a Congressional Gold Medal a year ago, had been positive and that he “didn’t want to get political about this.” Reluctantly, he said he knows how he is likely to vote in November even though he says Trump probably isn’t “as smooth or as politically correct as he should be.”

I like the guy. He’s a good man,” Nicklaus said. “And certainly — if he’s the one that’s on the ticket, I’ll be voting for him.”"


Sunday, May 22, 2016

Architect of US switch to European welfare state was George W. Bush, a supposed conservative Republican. 'We are all socialists now,' Newsweek cover story, Feb. 16, 2009

Feb. 16, 2009 Newsweek cover

2/16/2009 cover

"The U.S. government has already—under a conservative Republican administration (George W. Bush)—effectively nationalized the banking and mortgage industries....
It was, again, under a conservative GOP administration (George W. Bush) that we enacted the largest expansion of the welfare state in 30 years: prescription drugs for the elderly....Bush brought the Age of Reagan to a close; now Obama has gone further, reversing Bill Clinton's end of big government....The catch is that more government intrusion in the economy will almost surely limit growth (as it has in Europe, where a big welfare state has caused chronic high unemployment). Growth has always been America's birthright and saving grace."...

"Whether we want to admit it or not the America of 2009 is moving toward a modern European state," Newsweek Editor Jon Meacham and Editor-at-Large Evan Thomas write in an essay opening the February 16 Newsweek cover package, "We Are All Socialists Now" (on newsstands Monday, February 9). Meacham and Thomas write that the America of 2009 was moving toward a European social democracy, even before President Obama proposed the largest fiscal bill in American history. "If we fail to acknowledge the reality of the growing role of government in the economy, insisting instead on fighting 21st-century wars with 20th-century terms and tactics, then we are doomed to a fractious and unedifying debate. The sooner we understand where we truly stand, the sooner we can think more clearly about how to use government in today's world," they write.

Meacham and Thomas observe that this shift towards more government intervention in the economy began not under a Democrat but a Republican. "The architect of this new era of big government?...The man who laid the foundations for the world Obama now rules is George W. Bush, who moved to bail out the financial sector last autumn with $700 billion." The Obama administration is now caught in a paradox, having to borrow and spend to fix a crisis created by borrowing and spending. "Obama talks of the need for smart government. To get the balance between America and France right, the new president will need all the smarts he can summon," Meacham and Thomas write.

Also in the cover package, Europe Editor Michael Freedman reports on the extent to which the United States is turning European. When Obama said that it was time to get past stale arguments over whether government is big or small, he was echoing the eclectic philosophy of French president Nicolas Sarkozy...."But with an urgency not seen since Ronald Reagan declared that government was in fact the problem, policymakers are now reconsidering the relationship between government and the private sector."

While it's impossible to know just what the day after the crisis will look like, the broad contours of the new economic world are becoming visible...."Can America adopt a more European model, only with a faster rate of growth?" 

Freedman believes that if Obama can somehow forge a middle path that builds upon the best of the European safety net while also encouraging the dynamism and innovation that has helped the U.S. prosper, it will provide evidence that government can actually be a part of the solution."



Middle class shrinks in 9 of 10 US cities as incomes fall, Pew Study, May 11, 2016. "America is losing jobs because of the free trade stuff," Nolen argued. "They're selling America out." AP

"April 8, 2016, image made from a video shows Wendell Nolen, who said he has experienced the slide from middle-class status first-hand, in Hamtramck, Mich. A widening wealth gap is moving more households into either higher or lower-income groups in major metro areas, with fewer remaining in the middle, according to a report released Wednesday, May 11, 2016, by the Pew Research Center. (APTN via AP)"

""America is losing jobs because of the free trade stuff," Nolen argued. "They're selling America out.""

May 15, 2016, "Middle class shrinks in 9 of 10 US cities as incomes fall," AP, Christopher S. Rugaber, AP Economics Writer  

"In cities across America, the middle class is hollowing out. A widening wealth gap is moving more households into either higher- or lower-income groups in major metro areas, with fewer remaining in the middle, according to a report released Wednesday by the Pew Research Center.

In nearly one-quarter of metro areas, middle-class adults no longer make up a majority, the Pew analysis found. That's up from fewer than 10 percent of metro areas in 2000.

That sharp shift reflects a broader erosion that occurred from 2000 through 2014. Over that time, the middle class shrank in nine of every 10 metro areas, Pew found.

The squeezing of the middle class has animated this year's presidential campaign, lifting the insurgent candidacies of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. Many experts warn that widening income inequality may slow economic growth and make social mobility more difficult. Research has found that compared with children in more economically mixed communities, children raised in predominantly lower-income neighborhoods are less likely to reach the middle class.

Pew defines the middle class as households with incomes between two-thirds of the median and twice the median, adjusted for household size and the local cost of living. The median is midway between richest and poorest. It can better capture broad trends than an average, which can be distorted by heavy concentrations at the top or bottom of the income scale.

By Pew's definition, a three-person household was middle class in 2014 if its annual income fell between $42,000 and $125,000.
Middle class adults now make up less than half the population in such cities as New York, Los Angeles, Boston and Houston.

"The shrinking of the American middle class is a pervasive phenomenon," said Rakesh Kochhar, associate research director for Pew and the lead author of the report. "It has increased the polarization in incomes."

The report documents several other key trends:

Income for the typical household fell in 190 of the 229 metro areas studied, further evidence of the decline in U.S. living standards since 1999. Median incomes fell even in wealthier cities such as San Francisco, Seattle and Denver.

— Income inequality is lifting some Americans closer to the top even as people in the middle fall further. Median incomes fell 8 percent nationwide from 1999 to 2014. Yet the share of adults in upper-income homes rose to 20 percent from 17 percent. Middle-income households declined to 51 percent from 55 percent.

The hollowing out of the middle class has occurred even as the income needed to meet Pew's definition of the middle has declined. A three-person household had to earn $45,115 in 1999 to qualify as middle-class. Now, that figure is just $41,641.

Wendell Nolen, 52, has experienced the slide from middle-class status firsthand. Eight years ago, he was earning $28 an hour as a factory worker for Detroit's American Axle and Manufacturing Holdings, assembling axles for pickup trucks and SUVs.

But early in 2008, things unraveled. After a three-month strike, Nolen took a buyout rather than a pay cut. Less than a year later, the plant was closed and American Axle shipped much of its work to Mexico.

Now Nolen makes $17 an hour in the shipping department of a Detroit steel fabricator, about 40 percent less than he made at the axle plant.

"America is losing jobs because of the free trade stuff," Nolen argued. "They're selling America out."

Many of the income changes in the past 15 years have been much more dramatic at the local level than nationally. There are now 79 metro areas in which the proportion of adults in upper-income households equals or exceeds the national average of 20 percent. That's more than double the 37 cities in which that was true in 2000.

And the proportion of adults in lower-income households meets or exceeds the national average of 29 percent in 103 areas, up from 92 in 2000.

The report studied 229 of the largest U.S. metro areas, which constituted 76 percent of the U.S. population.

Overall, cities with the largest middle classes are more likely to be in the Midwest. Those with the biggest low-income populations are more often in the Southwest, particularly near the Mexico border. Metro areas with the highest proportions of upper-income households are more likely to be found in the Northeast or along the West Coast.

Even many of the cities with substantial middle-class populations are still under stress, according to Pew's research. For example, Wausau, Wisconsin, and Youngstown-Warren, Ohio, are among the cities with the largest proportions of adults in middle-class homes, at 67.2 percent and 60.2 percent, respectively.

Yet median incomes have fallen sharply in both cities. They fell 8.5 percent in Wausau and 12.9 percent in Youngstown, Pew found.

In addition, both cities now have larger proportions of lower-income residents and smaller proportions of upper-income households. That suggests that their middle classes have been bolstered by downward mobility: Some richer households fell into the middle, and middle-income earners fell into lower brackets.
In some cases, many former middle-class residents have moved up. In others, they've fallen lower.

Middle-class adults now constitute less than half of Boston's adult population, down from 56 percent in 2000. Nearly the entire change reflects an increase in upper-income earners. The lower-income proportion was little changed.

In Atlanta, the reverse is true: Middle-income adults have fallen to just over half the total from 56 percent. High-earners dropped about 1 percentage point to 22.6 percent. Yet lower-income adults, jumped 7 points to 27 percent."


May 11, 2016, "America’s Shrinking Middle Class: A Close Look at Changes Within Metropolitan Areas," Pew Research

"The 10 metropolitan areas with the biggest lower-income tiers are toward the Southwest, several on the southern border. Two metropolitan areas in Texas, Laredo and Brownsville-Harlingen, lead the country in this respect—in both areas 47% of the adult population lived in lower-income households in 2014. Farming communities in central California, namely Visalia-Porterville, Fresno and Merced, are also in this group of lower-income areas. With the exception of Lake Havasu City-Kingman, AZ, Hispanics accounted for more than half of the population in each of these lower-income metropolitan areas in 2014, compared with 17% nationally."


US accepting refugees for decades has rewarded tyrants and incompetent governments the world over, protects them from natural consequences of bad governance. Rulers know globalist US political class is on their side, will always force starving US taxpayers to take more refugees-Feb. 2005, Johnson

Below, Feb. 2005 article during Vicente Fox administration: 

Feb. 8, 2005, "Vicente Fox, Labor Pimp," Human Events, Mac Johnson

"At play is...a little commented-upon effect that America has had on the world for decades. America’s acceptance of refugees by the millions has made it, effectively, the safety valve for tyrannical and incompetent governments the world over.

Normally, bad government is unstable government. When a government makes a substantial part of its population destitute or unhappy, it can expect them to work against that government, first as individuals and over time as political parties, gangs — or even armies. But with America close-by to absorb the most unhappy, bad governments have found a release for those segments of their populations they most fear: the poor, the ambitious, the disgruntled....

The rulers of other countries recognize the service America unwittingly provides. The most flagrant proof of this was the Mariel boatlift in 1980, in which Fidel Castro organized a mass exodus of 125,000 Cubans from the port of Mariel, Cuba, to Florida. These refugees included common criminals and the mentally ill released from Cuban jails and asylums (Cuba’s “universal healthcare” apparently has it limits), but the overwhelming majority of the migrants were simply the proverbial poor yearning to be free –exactly the sort of people Castro could not depend upon to help maintain his oppressive rule. Castro may claim to detest the fact that Florida is just 90 miles away from the shores of his communist paradise, but if it weren’t, his regime might have ended long ago. Florida is full of the Cubans who would most like to change Cuba. They do Castro little harm in Miami. 

Most nations are not so obvious in their use of the safety valve, but America is filled with diverse immigrants who do little to agitate the status quo in their homelands, and the ruling classes in these lands were not sad to see them go.

Mexico is a far cry from Cuba and Vicente Fox is certainly no Castro. But he understands the many ways in which shunting his discontented poor out of the country benefit him and his political allies. 

There is no shame in poverty and no sin in seeking work, but there is something unseemly in a leader who sees people as a product for export. In all the discussion of the immigration issue, the one aspect I have not seen bluntly assessed is what a failed and myopic leader Vicente Fox is. In America, men are made rich and families are well fed by the energetic labor of Mexicans. An admirable Mexican government would set about reforming the country so that that same energetic Mexican labor could create riches and feed families inside Mexico. Fox’s government simply wants to avoid the issue, preserve the established power structure, and make sure it gets a cut when Mexico’s workforce auctions itself off to more efficient economies. Seeing his people forced to sell their labors abroad, Fox simply wants to act as pimp on the sale....

Vicente Fox has made increasing the flow of his people out of Mexico and into America his highest priority in his relationship with the US. His expressed desire is that the border should pretty much cease to exist — at least for Northbound traffic. He would prefer that America voluntarily acquiesce to his desire to depopulate his nation’s poorest neighborhoods, but he is also prepared to achieve this depopulation unilaterally."... 


As of Jan. 2005, Mexico only had to pay general workers $4.12 per day. That was Vicente Fox's minimum wage:

"Beginning January 1, 2005, Mexico's average minimum wage is 45.40 pesos ($4.12) a day [$4.12 for an entire 8 hour day];" April 2005, "Mexico: Migrants, Mexicans in US, Economy," UC Davis 

(Ed. note: Please excuse tiny text above. Google dislikes free speech.]


As of Jan. 2016, Mexico only has to pay general workers $3.98 per day:

"Minimum Wages in Mexico with effect from 01-01-2016,"

"The minimum wage rates in the table are in MXN (MX Peso)"

"Job Types-General Workers" "Minimum wage per day-General Workers [$3.98 US per day]"



Saturday, May 21, 2016

Minimum wage in Mexico is $3.98 per day as of 1/1/16, per Wage Indicator. Mechanic for automobiles minimum wage is $5.77 for an entire 8 hour day

"Minimum Wages in Mexico with effect from 01-01-2016,"

"The minimum wage rates in the table are in MXN (MX Peso)"

"Job Types-General Workers" "Minimum wage per day-General Workers [$3.98 US per day]"

"Professional Workers Minimum Wages January 2016"

"Job type-Minimum wage per day"

"Bulldozer and/or digger operator 112.17 [$6.11 US per day]

Car and truck painter 102.58 [$5.59 US per day]

Mechanic for automobiles and trucks 105.95 [$5.77 US per day]"...


"1....Legal minimum wages in Mexico are declared on daily basis. (refer to Media Bulletin Dt. 18 Dec 2010) 

2. Article 61 defines the maximum duration of the day is: eight hours the day, seven the night and seven thirty when mixed. Also as per article 85 of the Labour Law, salary paid to a worker (not less than minimum wage) should be based on a normal work day of 8 hrs or 7.5 night hrs."... 

Above conversion from Bing


Friday, May 20, 2016

Hey Manafort, if Trump is going to change into a different person like you say, do we get to run all the primaries again and vote for someone else in case we don't like the changed person you say Trump is going to be, as reported in Politico, 5/19/16?

"When asked about Trump’s high negatives, Manafort said it was the result of the Republican primary and that Trump's "behavior can be changed.”"  

5/19/16, "Manafort to GOP aides: Trump's 'behavior can be changed'," Politico, Burgess Everett, Seung Min Kim, Eli Stokols

"The newly empowered chief strategist says Trump can win over Hispanics and be a Reaganesque figure."

"Donald Trump's newly empowered chief strategist sought to convince top GOP congressional officials on Capitol Hill that Trump can compete for the Latino vote, exploit Hillary Clinton's weaknesses and become a Reagan-esque figure in the party, according to attendees and sources familiar with the meeting.

After Trump himself attempted to sooth House and Senate Republican leaders over how the presumptive nominee will conduct his campaign and work to keep Congress in GOP control, it was Paul Manafort's turn on Thursday to try and win over some of the top GOP operatives in the party. Facing a room full of seasoned campaign veterans and longtime congressional aides at D.C. law firm Jones Day on Capitol Hill, Manafort struck a confident tone.

He told attendees that Ronald Reagan used to be criticized just like Trump is now for his polarizing reputation within the Republican Party, the sources said. And the senior Trump adviser said the campaign will work hard to court Latinos, despite Trump's poor approval ratings among Hispanics and Trump's controversial comments about Mexican immigrants, said one attendee....

Manfort saw his title officially changed Thursday to "campaign chairman and chief strategist." It's the clearest indication yet that the longtime operative, hired just two months ago, is now in charge of Trump's campaign as it shifts into general election mode....

When Manafort was asked Thursday about the vice presidential vetting process, he pointedly shot down a report that campaign manager Corey Lewandowski was leading the effort: “I’m not in charge. Corey’s not in charge. [Ben] Carson’s not in charge. Donald Trump is in charge,” Manafort said, according to an attendee.

But Manafort also reinforced a message that Trump delivered to GOP senators last week: That Trump realizes that Republicans are concerned with the tone and tenor of his campaign. When asked about Trump’s high negatives, Manafort said it was the result of the Republican primary and that Trump's "behavior can be changed.

Perceptions of Clinton are more ingrained, he argued. Her “high negatives are driven by her character. It’s something we can’t wait to exploit," Manafort said, according to the same attendee....

After the lunchtime meeting, Manafort was seen strolling through the Senate after the meeting with an aide. He declined to speak with reporters."


Comment: I don't care about Reagan. I didn't vote for him. I'm sick to death of hearing about him. Trump doesn't need to be compared to Reagan or anyone else. We don't even have a country at this moment, how about that for a topic? When was it decided that Trump was going to be an open borders, amnesty "Reaganesque" candidate? The border is the only reason Trump is where he is today. Reagan was the opposite of Trump on the border.


Movement conservatives on RNC at lowest ebb since 1960s because nominees McCain and Romney weren't sympathetic to them. In 2016, candidacies of Trump and Cruz have brought conservatives to the RNC-Morton Blackwell to Politico

5/19/16, "Republicans' new reality: Forever Trump," Politico, Kyle Cheney

"Even if Trump never sets foot in the White House, his stamp on the Republican Party will linger long past 2016....

(Longtime Virginia activist Morton) Blackwell told POLITICO he’s hopeful that the anti-establishment fervor driving today’s political climate helps him reshape those battles. 

Since I first started paying attention to these things back in the 1960s, there are probably fewer movement conservatives on the RNC than at any time. That is because we’ve had the nominations of McCain and Romney, neither of whom is sympathetic to movement conservatives, he said. “I think it would be reasonable to assume that since a big majority of the delegates elected to the Republican National Convention in Cleveland supported either Cruz or Trump, that there would be more anti-establishment people elected.”

Blackwell hopes that will translate to what he says would be a new approach: “Under the new committee, there will be greater opportunities for power to rise from the bottom up rather than the top down.”

Trump hasn’t shown any direct interest in reshaping the RNC to fit his anti-establishment mold, but his supporters — as well as those who backed Cruz — stuffed convention halls and helped tip the balance of those meetings anyway. 

He didn’t directly have any role in Dave Bossie’s campaign, but obviously, we saw a different element come into central committees and different party offices,” said Louis Pope, who was bested by Bossie at the Maryland convention. 

Pope, who was vying for a fourth four-year term as an RNC member, said he saw the seeds of change planted in 2012 when libertarians attempted to take over aspects of the convention that nominated Mitt Romney for president. Those changes have been reinforced and accelerated this year, he said. 

You’re going to have a more conservative party. You’re going to have a little bit more libertarian party,” he said. “Less, for lack of a better word, establishment.” 

Shane Goettle, who won an election to fill the seat of retiring North Dakota committeeman Curly Haugland, said he supported multiple candidates before he came around to supporting Trump. But he said he now views the lesson of Trump’s candidacy for the GOP as shaking up the status quo. 

“I don’t buy the idea that Trump is the end of the Republican Party. Trump is an opportunity for this party,” Goettle said. “I think shaking things up can be good.

That doesn’t mean, however, that these insurgents will have full power over the party. Establishment-backed Republicans continue to hold top posts at the RNC, and committee veterans cautioned that the ranks of these RNC newcomers are unlikely to rewrite the calculus on the RNC’s core functions.

Indeed, some of the newcomers fit the mold of more traditional RNC members, such as Keiko Orrall, an ally of moderate Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker and supporter of Marco Rubio’s presidential bid; California’s Harmeet Dillon the first Indian American elected to the RNC; and Tennessee’s two new members: Oscar Brock, the son of former Sen. Bill Brock, and Beth Campbell, a veteran party insider. 

“I don’t see a whole lot of maverick in either one of them,” said Peggy Lambert, one of the outgoing Tennessee RNC members.
But the impact of the anti-establishment wave won’t just be felt among the RNC newcomers. It’s also influencing members who are already on the committee. 

You can’t ask for voters to give their input, and then they give it to you, and you just ignore it. That’s what some in the party want us to do, they want us to act like it didn’t happen,” said one veteran RNC member who spoke on condition of anonymity. “Donald Trump won. That’s the fact. That has consequences.”"