Year: 2018

The Future Party 4

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, The Future Party, Uncategorized

Chicken or egg, where does a new party start?  Worldwide many parties have started around charismatic leaders but given Trump already has the Republican Party do we really need another cult masquerading as a political party?  Yet without a viable candidate can a party get off the ground?  In 2016 the Libertarian Party on paper had a viable ticket with two successful former governors.  The reality of the top of the ticket’s  unfamiliarity with Aleppo, a Syrian city then under bloody siege exposed a lack of knowledge or staff work or both.  Libertarian disinterest in foreign involvement was exposed in the most unsettling manner.  Even against maybe the two most disliked Presidential candidates, the Libertarians made hardly a ripple.  While on the ballot in all states, no mean feat, they just didn’t  have the organization and financing to be competitive. Without it they couldn’t attract winning candidates.

The young Republican Party didn’t come into existence just to elect its first presidential candidate, John C. Fremont. Rather, it was founded over opposition of slavery’s extension into new territories by disgruntled Whigs and free soil Democrats not being heard by the two dominate parties at the time.  First they organized at the state level starting in 1854 and then held their national conventions in 1856 nominating Fremont as their first  Presidential candidate. This gave a home for those politicians uncomfortable or overlooked in their old parties to have a path forward in the new party.  This  empowered  legions of voters not aligned with the agrarian slave holding interests.  The last truly successful party was built from the ground up. It found its leaders along the way.

Continue reading →

Of Pizzas & Cakes

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, Uncategorized

The Supreme Court decision in favor of the owner of the Masterpiece Bakery who refused to bake a custom designed wedding cake for a gay couple.  He had explained his refusal on religious and free speech grounds. His victory wasn’t based on any rights but turned on the animus of the commissioners. As such it settled nothing. This got us to thinking about our 4/2/15 post We’re Confused about Indiana.   Re-reading this post  relating to  a persecuted pizza shop, we still think we were on the right track but realized we had missed the major point.  Simply, the vast majority of these types of cases should-be been immediately tossed out of court.  Hear us out.  In April, New York attorney Steven Molo turned down a request to represent President Trump.  A top-notch attorney was needed to replace the then lead attorney John Dowd and the well credentialed Molo fit the bill, but he said no. He didn’t have explain.  Even the President couldn’t demand his personal service  No was sufficient. Now imagine if President Trump had approached clothing designer Calvin Klein to design his inauguration wardrobe and Calvin said no.  Could the President sue to compel  Klein’s performance in his service?  Obviously not!  There never was a “meeting of the minds” so no contract.  Further the 13th amendment precludes involuntary servitude and even if the President really pushed, coercion doesn’t work under our law. Simply in either case, you can’t demand personal performance.  They could just say no and that’s the end of it.  Did Molo and Klein have to give any reason for their refusal?  No, unless they wanted to but it would be immaterial. Even the President isn’t legally owed an explanation. No is no and that’s the end of it.  But what if either or both said they refused on religious grounds? Say, they’re Catholics and Trump  is unrepentant Presbyterian. Could the President then take his case to the local civil right commission?  Of course not.  This would mean people could be stripped of their right to say no simply because they mentioned 1st amendment rights.  This would lead to the absurdity of losing a right simply by bringing up another constitutional right.  This would be turning the law on its head. Yet, this is exactly where we are. Now, the President has every right to go to Amazon and purchase any book on the law or anything else Molo wrote or go into Macy’s and purchase Calvin Klein branded clothes.  These are offered to all for sale and cash payment completes the contract.  This is general commerce and Molo and Klein can do nothing legally to prevent these sales.  However,  general commerce is different from personal unique services and products and we have always recognized the difference.  One apples and the other oranges.

There are excellent reasons for this distinction. It protects both parties. It protects people from unwarranted demands for their personal skills.  Also, it protects people from foolishly forcing the produce of people who have less than their best interests at heart.  Imagine a President Trump on inauguration day realizing he’s being mocked for an ill-fitting ugly suit.  Worse being perp-walked out of the white house after impeachment and realizing Nolo just might not have given his best advice and efforts.  Further, it prevents the inevitable litigation that would arise and that certainly is in the courts interest.

Continue reading →

Baby out with the Bath Water

Dave Davis Commentary, Uncategorized

“Roseanne” a highly rated TV Show especially in middle America was tossed off the air shortly after its namesake star Roseanne Barr tweeted a weird and bizarrely racist tweet.  We agree it was out-of-bounds and she should suffer consequences, but was pulling the hit show the right way to go?   What struck us with all the elitist hand wringing by numerous panels across the airwaves from all sides of the political spectrum was how few of these talking heads ever saw the show. For instance, Rich Lowery the editor of the National Review on a CNN panel illustrated this best when after a long comment on the controversy admitted he had never watched the show.  Judging from the reactions from the rest of the panelists, actual knowledge of the show was limited if not non-existent.  Print commentators are no better.  Washington post Columnist Kathleen Parker put it to Roseanne this way, “she’s what happens when a struggling network (ABC) sells out in a bid to capture President Trump’s base.”  She obviously never took the time to watch the show or god forbid maybe she did but just didn’t understand it.  For all these elites who never saw the show, we would like to point out this is exactly the kind of show we need on TV.  A middle American family living pay check to pay check trying to survive in a sea of change.  A family with health problems, daughters stuck in dead-end jobs, a mixed race grandchild with ex and current military parents and a grandchild with possible gender identity problems.  One sister is conservative and the other liberal.  The patriarch is coping with a changing construction labor market.  Talk about diverse people dealing with real problems.  More importantly, the show did it with great humor. This is anything but the Trumpist propaganda as some people have portrayed it.  Like shows before it such as “All in the Family” and “Will and Grace” they presented  problems and situations not by hitting people over the head but by showing real people in ways the audience could relate to and begin to understand.  Humor can bring an understanding in ways other venues just can’t. While the program had big audience, apparently the elites demanding the cancellation of the show weren’t part of it.  If they watched the show, they might have seen its great value.

Continue reading →

The Future Party 3

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, The Future Party, Uncategorized

How realistic is it a new successful major party could actually come into existence?  With any new product, the first question, is there a market for it?  While on the surface overwhelmingly Republicans appear to be Trump supporters.  The Wall Street Journal /NBC polling put Trump’s approval rating among Republicans is 80% to 15% disapproval.  Looks as if Republicans and Trump are synonymous. However, the poll dug deeper to show only 54% favor Trump over party while 40% favor party over Trump.  While Trunpists are clearly a majority of in the party, a sizable put party above Trump.  Conversely, The Liberal dominated Democrats are near unanimous is their opposition to Trump 91%  to 7%. Yet while those Democrats considering themselves liberals has grown to 51%, 47% consider themselves moderate/conservative.  Serious minorities in both parties are less than enthusiastic Trumpists or liberals even though they’re not dominant in either party.  This means the candidates put forth by the dominant wings of their respective parties may not reflect their views and desires.  Given the extreme wings control of primaries they aren’t likely to get such candidates reflecting them  any time in the future.

So what, you might say.  They’re just minorities and minorities don’t win.  Remember we’ve just mentioned Democrats and Republicans, but according to the latest Gallup Poll, Republicans make up only 24% of the population while the Democrats are marginally better at 29%.  Fully 45% are independents. These are people refusing to identify with either party let alone with their extreme wings. Taken together with the party minorities it appears there is major part of the voting public not fully served by the candidates of the two major parties.  This is a market worth pursuing.

Continue reading →

The “Future Party” Continued

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, The Future Party, Uncategorized

Given our two major parties either are in alignment on major policies or in silent agreement to keep certain hot button issues at the boiling point, a little competition might be expected to come in to take advantage of an under served market. There actually are people who have noticed continuing down our present fiscal path can only end in disaster.  The only question is when.  Maybe they’ve noticed our rapidly aging population and realize it is also on the verge of declining.  Just to keep our social programs going we need more not fewer people.  Free markets have raised millions and millions of people out of grinding poverty and some recognize this and fear the effects of a reversal.   We live in a shrinking world and it’s unreasonable to think we can be a walled off “Big Switzerland.” Most don’t want to be asked if they’re pro-life or pro-choice when they’re actually somewhere in the middle.  Instead of endless fruitless fighting  about guns many are asking if all these people knew the perpetrators of these mass murders were disturbed or had mental problems why was d nothing was done?  All these people just might be asking “where do I go to find somebody to represent my views?”

Progressives may feel they have won the culture wars, but the backlash has contributed mightily to the fact Democrats control very little that matters.  Further it has greatly contributed to the nations ugly divide.  An update of William Graham Sumner’s “Forgotten Man” might be illuminating.  In his 1876 essay he put it in algebraic terms,

As soon as A observes something which seems to him wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then propose to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine what C shall do for X, or, in better case, what A, B, and C shall do for X… What I want to do is to look up C. I want to show you what manner of man he is. I call him the Forgotten Man. perhaps the appellation is not strictly correct. he is the man who never is thought of…. I call him the forgotten man… He works, he votes, generally he prays—but he always  pays…”

Continue reading →