Tag Archives: political parties

A Latino Migration?

Posted on by
Reply

It’s a distinct possibility, and it would be IMNSHO a good thing. William McGurn had some thoughts on this, citing a recent mayoral election in McAllen, TX, in which a Republican was elected for the first time ever. McGurn also noted that, in the 2020 Presidential election, nearby Zapata County voted Republican for the first time in 100 years when the county picked Warren G Harding. McGurn suggested that these might be the harbinger of a Latino migration from the (Progressive-)Democratic Party to the Republican Party.

Then McGurn offered some statistics from a National Republican Senatorial Committee survey of Latino likely voters in battleground states. Even accounting for the obvious potential of bias in the survey, the numbers are suggestive.

Asked to choose between two possibilities—Some people say free-market capitalism is the best form of government because it gives people the freedom to work and achieve and Other people say that socialism is the best form of government because it is more fair and equitable to working class people, 63% of respondents opted for the former, and only 17% went for the latter.

Other outcomes of the survey:

  • 67% are “very concerned” their kids “won’t have the same opportunities me and my family came here to find”
  • 58% said too many people in America are happy not to work and “just live off government assistance”
  • 80% percent agree that “public schools are failing”
  • 67% agree that too many Americans “are losing our traditional values centered on faith, family and freedom”
  • 57% “oppose Democrat efforts to pack the Supreme Court with liberal judges”
  • 72% agree “we should do what is necessary to control our southern border”
  • 65% oppose the Democrats’ “bill that would make voter ID illegal”
  • 50% agree that “many of the policies that Democrats say help all minorities actually end up hurting Hispanic families”

Even given the strong potential for bias in the survey, one aspect of its importance, McGurn noted, is that it was conducted during campaign season when then-candidate Biden was overtly pretending to be politically moderate.

The Biden Oil Price Spike

Posted on by
2

President Joe Biden (D) has killed the Keystone XL Pipeline, is blocking oil production from Federal lands, killed oil production in northern Alaska, is working to kill fracking altogether, is working to kill American oil (and natural gas) production, and has given the go ahead to Russia’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline. In sum, he’s actively working to kill American energy independence.

All of that is driving up American citizens’ energy costs, and that is reflected in the market’s anticipation of spiking oil costs. Here are a couple of graphs illustrating that. They illustrate the expectation that oil will soon cost $100/barrel, after several years of $50-$65/barrel. The first presents the spike since the start of the year in the number of West Texas Intermediate $100/barrel futures contracts against a current $70 price.

This graph reflects the price of a $100/barrel call option on WTI for delivery in December this year and next.

The expectation of actual market pricing of $100 is rising, also, sharply enough to drive up the price of the option.

This is what expert traders (some of whom are trading on the trends themselves and not on underlying oil prices, to be sure) are seeing as the future price of oil for our citizens. Even if oil settles out at its current price of $70 or just a little higher (and the anticipations turn out to be overstated), this current price represents a sharp increase over the last several years, when Government wasn’t moving so zealously to restrict our nation’s oil supply.

This is what Biden has wrought for our nation’s energy supply and cost of energy.

Unpleasant Signals

Posted on by
Reply

Recall Russian President Vladimir Putin’s promise to send “unpleasant” signals to the US because President Joe Biden hasn’t yet kowtowed sufficiently to him—Washington was not showing a readiness to discuss all issues at a bilateral summit next month [now this month] is how The Jerusalem Post dryly put it at the end of May.

The comments by Sergei Ryabkov, Russia’s deputy foreign minister, came a day after US President Joe Biden said that he would press Russian President Vladimir Putin to respect human rights when the two leaders meet in June.

Having embarrassed Biden—and our nation—quietly with the Colonial Pipeline/Nord Stream 2 fiasco, Putin now is bent on embarrassing Biden—and us—more publicly.

JBS Meats was the recent target of a “ransomware” attack that caused JBS to shut down some servers and interrupt meat production in Australia and the US.

Now, a couple of Cox Media Group television stations, one in Florida, the other in Pennsylvania, have been hit by a cyber attack, forcing them both off the air. Cox expects to have them back on the air “soon.”

I expect more signaling in the coming days. And I worry, given what Biden gave away in the aftermath of Colonial, what he’ll give away in response to these signals behind closed doors in Geneva when he meets with Putin in a week.

Not Such an Obstacle

Posted on by
Reply

The Senate Parliamentarian has ruled that President Joe Biden’s (D) and his fellow Progressive-Democrats’ “infrastructure” bill can, indeed, be effected through reconciliation, if certain steps are taken in the process. The idea is that the bill can be passed as a modification of the existing reconciliation-passed Wuhan Virus “relief” bill passed earlier this year.

One of those steps is the Parliamentarian’s requirement that the infrastructure modification to that prior bill begin anew at the Budget Committee level. This would give the Republicans a chance to block the bill altogether by boycotting the committee, thereby denying Progressive-Democrats a quorum and a vote, thus preventing the bill from being passed out of Committee to the Senate as a whole.

R Street Institute Resident Senior Fellow for Governance James Wallner, though, says that there are workarounds (unidentified by Wallner or the Fox News cite at the link) to the Committee-level blockage.

The other step is forcing the Senate into a vote-a-rama on the bill, during which lots and lots of amendments can be proposed by any Senator and each amendment must be given a roll-call up-or-down vote. Chad Pergram has written—and he’s serious—that

A “vote-a-rama” is a lengthy, arduous process which sometimes consumes an entire calendar day or more.

Wow. A whole day. Worse (here, Pergram isn’t the only one claiming this is an impediment), the vote-a-rama votes would put Progressive-Democrats on the record as supporting this spendiforous bill. Never mind that they do support it, and they’re proud of their support.

What’s missed altogether in this hand-wringing about a vote-a-rama for this bill is the shenanigan the Progressive-Democrats pulled with the vote-a-rama run on that prior Wuhan Virus relief bill. The Senate Majority Leader gets to go last on the amendment proposing and voting-on process.

It didn’t matter how many of the Republicans’ amendments to that relief bill actually got voted up. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D, NY) amendment, the last of them all, was to withdraw all of those approved Republican amendments and restore the relief bill to its original, un-Republican-amended form. Of course, that amendment was voted up strictly unilaterally, along party lines—all those supposedly vulnerable Progressive-Democrat Senators proudly voting on the record with Schumer—with Vice President Kamala Harris casting the tie breaking vote.

Schumer and Harris will do that with this so-called infrastructure bill. The Parliamentarian’s ruling is no obstacle at all.

Modern Bread and Circuses

Posted on by
Reply

The Biden administration is using today’s spending in an effort to buy votes for the election seasons of 2022 and 2024.

The White House predicts a two-year growth boom of 5.2% in 2021 and 4.3% in 2022, as the country returns to normal after the pandemic and record amounts of government spending flood the economy to goose consumer demand.

Then,

the White House says growth will sink to 2.2% in 2023, and then average below 1.9% for the next eight years.

As the Wall Street Journal editors put it,

One is that the White House is essentially conceding that all of its unprecedented monetary and fiscal stimulus really is living for today with little regard for the future. It implicitly concedes that the growth it spurs now will have to be paid back later in the form of higher taxes or tighter monetary policy, which might reduce growth. This is the definition of a “sugar high.”

Bread and circuses. And a clear illustration of the utter contempt President Joe Biden (D) and his fellow Progressive-Democrats have for us average Americans: he and his confreres think we’re just too grindingly stupid to understand this, or to remember it in those election years.