Why The Republicans Lose

The present administration’s report card signals incompetence. A catastrophic Afgan pullout and a stalemated war in Ukraine highlight the lack of ability in foreign affairs. These failures join the highest inflation and interest rates in decades—the border needs fixing. The homefront isn’t any better. Add a judge’s finding the government has joined with media platforms to suppress free speech. Several house committees are just one Joe Biden bank account showing receipt and dis[persement of funds from his son’s “business” from impeaching Joe. 

Given the administration’s sorry state, the Republicans should be reserving moving vans for their executive branch ’25 takeover. Yet Joe Biden is the betting favorite to win. The reason is Donald Trump is the favorite to be the opposition. The former president has a loyal following but has always been upside down in the national surveys. So long as they can run against a candidate with such a low ceiling, Democrats are in fine shape. 

As I pointed out, the whole Democratic coalition, including its media allies, has worked hard to encourage Republicans to rally around Trump with an unprecedented number of lawsuits. It puts the former president constantly in the limelight, sucking all the oxygen away from other candidates. The last thing Democrats want is for Trump to be convicted and unable to run, but with our slow-motion judicial system complete with appeals, jail will never happen before the election.

So far, the Democratic plan is working fine. Trump is well in front to be the Republican nominee. Anyone running for office would love to run against an opponent with a 45% ceiling.

The only problem with the Democrats is their ticket of Joe and Kamala have their problems. Joe is old and looks and acts feeble while the net is closing in on his criminal conduct. The blowup of his son’s sweetheart’s deal on taxes and gun leaves poor Joe naked before the world. The smoking gun is out there, and it’s only a matter of time before it surfaces. It will be sooner rather than later. 

The disliked Kamala has shown a unique lack of ability for someone in her position. Getting rid of Joe now leaves you with someone viewed even less favorably. There may have been a different plan all along.

Continue reading

What do They Really Stand For?

While worrying about the next election’s outcome, I see an enormous opportunity for our nation. Other nations have worsening trends. As I’ve pointed out, China, by moving to state control of the economy, and the results of a horrendous population control program, is on a downward journey. Europe is more market-oriented, but declining populations are robbing the continent of dynamism.

By contrast, we can extend and maybe even accelerate progress by turning away from the industrial policy of “Bidenomices” and returning to policies favoring growth. We know what works, so why become pale imitations of others when we have a better formula? A Free-literate growing population working in free markets engaging with others in free trade will outperform “elites” running top-down economies.

I grew up in an era where the press told us the USSR would overtake us with its larger population and well-thought 5-year plans. Ronald Reagan saw it differently. He expanded our present and future arms capabilities, and the Soviets found they couldn’t keep up. Reagan knew we had the more productive system. Instead of burying the US, economic woes led to the dissolution of the USSR.

If we stay true to our principles, we will continue to lead the world to a better future. We can continue an upward march by reducing government interference in the economy, expanding free trade with other nations obeying the rules, and taking steps to maintain needed population growth. Of course, without a skilled populace, we will come up short. 

Continue reading

Who Is The Opposite of Biden?

The liberalization occurring in recent centuries has lifted humanity to levels never imagined before the 15th century, even though the world’s population has exploded. Massively expanded trade and connected literate minds, bringing innovations to solve problems and improve our lives.

Yet the president of the United States is talking up “Bidenomics,” which is another way to say “industrial policy.” The nations taking the path of government directing their economies have not only failed to produce but have diminished the lives of their citizens. The USSR, Mao’s China, Cuba, and Venezuela attest to this policy’s utter failure. As it retreats from liberalizing, Xi’s China will join them shortly. 

The ancient Elite combination of government, church, and military, having the rest working for their benefit, is reflected in the modern Democratic Party. Government employees, with the clergy, morphed into academics and the priests of the Green Religion—the military run by political generals. Joining them are the crony capitalists currying government favors. 

One might hope Republicans have the desire for a government serving all citizens. A nation that maintains the legal framework safely, allowing innovation and trade. Policies that favor free markets and free trade, with a bureaucracy dedicated to getting things done rather than expanding their power. Cost-benefit analysis keeping expenditures in line. A foreign policy that curbs those still believing they can gain by taking things from others.

Continue reading

 Turning Their Backs On Progress

In the past few posts, I sought to draw attention to drift, even on the right to a state-directed economy. This tendency is more pronounced on the left, but this idea is gaining currency. In their genius, government elites will provide better outcomes than market-based solutions. Rather than greedy profiteers who only think about their bottom line making decisions, we accommodate all stakeholders. 

On the surface, this sounds plausible. The best and the brightest of our society are more intelligent than we are, so these “expers” are bound to make better decisions. 

As I pointed out in my series, “The Long Journey to More,” elites’ rule was how we organized settled societies worldwide for thousands of years. A usually hereditary group, generally less than ten percent, controlled the rest of the population. The government, clergy, and military resided here. The masses mostly toiled at subsistence, any surpluses extracted for the benefit of the ruling class. The rest of the people will get their reward in the next world.

As bad as this sounds to us today, this organization made sense. Knowledge of when and what to plant, how to build and maintain irrigation systems, and a host of other things needed exchangeable knowledge, but the costs of literacy severely limited its availability. Putting marks on clay tablets and preserving them is time-consuming. Writing with ink on parchment consumed the lives of many monks—the scarcity of things available to read limited literacy to a few.

Further, the educated class had little incentive to change a system benefitting them with the best things available. Change might upset their position. For this reason, innovation of any kind was suspect and often opposed.

Continue reading