Category: Trump

What We Need is a Baby Boom

photog Current Events, Reclaiming the Family, Trump

There are fifty million Americans between the ages of twenty and thirty (ball park).  That’s twenty-five million couples to provide the next generation of Americans.  The problem is they won’t get married and have kids.  Why?  Well, several reasons.  Feminism, internet porn and the cost of living.  The first two are more in the way of being negative drags on the process of marriage.  But the last is more like a road block.  The cost of housing is too high and the mortgage rates are too high.  Okay, that is the current situation.  But this has to be fixed and right away.  The clock is ticking and all those twenty-five million female biological clocks are winding down.  And this is the last chance to fix this before America just sort of fades away.  What’s needed is a baby boom.

How do you make that happen?  Well, it’s quite simple.  We need a moonshot for a baby boom.  The government has to do a bunch of things:

  • Bring back good paying jobs for men (Trump is actually working on this one already).
  • Make houses affordable (this involves two separate things; lower interest rates for young couples buying their first house and incentivize home building)
  • Government incentives to married women staying home and raising kids.
  • Federal tuition vouchers to allow parents to take their kids out of the public schools.
  • A propaganda program to convince young women that working in an office is slavery and that raising kids is the most important job in the world (because it is).
  • Get rid of no-fault divorce.
  • Tax incentives to corporations to hire married men.

I call this a moonshot because it will cost trillions.  Between the mortgages and the tax incentives it will be as expensive as the GI Bill of Rights after WWII and the Great Society rolled into one.  But it’s a matter of necessity.  This country is bleeding out.  We’re already shrinking from the point of view of children and that’s even considering all the immigrant kids walking around today.  Another generation and immigrants will be all that’s left and that won’t really be America anymore.  It’ll be post-America.

So that’s the direction our leaders have to be going if they want to keep this experiment going.  Some of this stuff is being put in place by Orban in Hungary.  Trump is working his way in the right direction but it will take more than a few years to institute.  But first it has to be on the radar of the people in charge.  I know there are people aware of the critical problem of population loss.  But unfortunately, the millennial generation is the biggest part of the problem.  They’ve been brainwashed into thinking there are already too many humans.  So, it’s not clear which side will win this fight.

Personally, I hope to see as many great-grandchildren as possible in my family.  Maybe I’ll have to start an incentive program of my own.  Maybe I’ll sell the Compound and buy a multi-family that I can turn into condos for the grandkids.  You’ve got to start somewhere.

When Will the Supreme Court Overturn Obergefell v. Hodges?

photog Current Events, Trump , , , , ,

Hillary Clinton thinks the Supreme Court will overturn Obergefell v. Hodges (the decision that discovered the right to gay marriage in the US Constitution) before the 2026 election.

I think she is drawing an analogy from the fact that the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade in June of 2022 in advance of the November 2022 mid-term elections.  Of course, there could be blowback from this decision that affects the midterms.  It might even cause the loss of the House of Representatives.  But you know, I kind of doubt it.  I think it’s a mistake to wait to make these decisions.  The future is uncertain and the opportunity that exists may be temporary.  What’s the expression?  “Strike while the iron is hot.”

Throwing abortion and gay marriage back under the jurisdiction of the states sort of takes the monolithic nature of the decisions away.  After all, the blue states will continue on without change and the red states will probably put it on the ballot and let their own people decide (well, except for very, very red states where it will be banned by their legislatures and governors).  I wonder if there might even be some states that allow gay marriage but forbid the adoption of children by these “families.”

Now I guess it’s possible that the Supreme Court might wait until after the midterms.  And it’s even possible that the court might uphold Obergefell v. Hodges.  I wouldn’t be surprised to see John Roberts vote to uphold it.  But I think the votes are there to overturn it.  And this brings up another case; Lawrence v. Texas.  This was the decision that made homosexuality a protected constitutional practice.  Is it probable that this decision would also be reconsidered?  Maybe it’s too much to hope for but since we’re seeing fifty-year precedents overturned why not this relatively recent ruling too?

You know, it’s not every day that I find myself in agreement with something Hillary Clinton says.  But in this particular case I think she’s correct.  I think the court will rule on Obergefell v. Hodges in 2026 and let the voters sort out how they want their states to stand on gay marriage.  And in the long run that is the healthiest way for these things to be handled.  We’re supposed to be living under a federal Constitution that allows most of the power to remain with the sovereign states.  Thinking that California and Mississippi would have the same opinions on abortion and gay marriage is ludicrous. But in the same way as many ludicrous actions have been taken by the federal government over the last half century and are now being adjusted it only makes sense that the Supreme Court is also going through a reevaluation of unjustified decisions that strayed well beyond the bounds of Constitutional authority and created laws that had no right being written.

My hope is that this trend continues and that President Trump has the chance to appoint several more justices to ensure that the conservative majority is protected and even increased over the next three and a half years.  And in fact, I hope he has the opportunity to replace many Democratic federal judges with conservatives, especially in the blue districts like Washington DC, the Northeast and the west coast.  But my thanks to Hillary for bringing this opinion to my attention.  It brought a smile to my face.  Now how often has she done that?  As far as I can remember not since 2016.

Well, Maybe It Wasn’t Such a Small Part of the Funding

photog Current Events, Trump , ,

Despite assurances that federal funds were a miniscule part of the budget for PBS and NPR, those media groups have already begun to feel the effects of the rescission:

PBS To Cut Budget By 21% Following Public Media’s Loss of Federal Funding

“PBS plans to cut its budget by 21% as public media faces the loss of $1.1 billion in federal funding over the next two fiscal years.

Paula Kerger, president and CEO of PBS, informed station general managers Wednesday of the planned cuts. The overall pool of station dues will be reduced by $35 million, she said. Local outlets are grappling with their own budget holes given the loss of federal support.”

Very sad.

David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart are two “journalists” that appear on Fridays on the PBS NewsHour and I think that part of that $35 million could be offset by firing one of them.  Now how to do that is a question.  What occurs to me is a scene from the classic tv series Star Trek:

David and Jonathan could be dressed as Thralls and forced to battle in the arena while PBS viewers place wagers in quatloos that will pay the salary of whichever of them walks out of the arena alive.

Also, I read that NPR is forced to reduce its budget by $8 million for next year.  Also, very sad.

The article stressed that replacement funds from private corporations have not been forthcoming because the other Congressional budget cuts have impacted how corporations are allocating their charitable donations.  Apparently, everyone is scrambling after alternative funding sources and there just isn’t enough money to go around.  Also very, very sad.

So, what’s the takeaway here?  Well, I think it’s important to remember that when the Left tells you that government funding for something they like is miniscule and unimportant, that means it’s a lot of money and it’s critical to their operation.  And I think it goes without saying that the money is being used to make very comfortable existences for the people at the top.  There are homes in Northern Virginia and Ivy League tuitions and expensive wines at lunch that are being funded with that money.  Now that doesn’t mean that those things will go away because of these cuts.  No, that’s not how it works.  It probably means several lower echelon people will lose their jobs and several shows won’t get made.  Maybe the next Ken Burns series will be cut or Masterpiece will have to use American actors instead of British.  Or as I said Books and Capon; I mean Brooks and Capehart will have to get whittled down to Brooks or Capehart.

Now you might wonder if the heads of PBS and NPR might have an epiphany and try to sell Congress on the idea that they could truly produce non-partisan and unbiased content that appeals to both the Left and Right.  They could bring aboard conservatives on their boards and in management and put together a lineup of shows that even Donald Trump, Speaker Johnson and Senator Mike Lee would be willing to fund.  Now that would be something.  Of course, the chances of that happening are of the same order of magnitude as Nancy Pelosi going to heaven.

So, congratulations again to Donald Trump and his friends in Congress.  Their unprecedented action to defund PBS and NPR is already bearing fruit in ways we cannot yet appreciate.  Some show advocating for pediatric trans-surgery is probably not going to be funded because no corporate sponsor will want to touch it.  Very, very, very sad.

Bravo.

Swapping Territory

photog Current Events, Humor, Trump , , , ,

Girl Boss Anchor – I’m here in Anchorage Alaska with my former colleague David Books.  Hello David.

David Books – Hello Girl Boss Anchor.

Girl Boss Anchor – David how were you able to get time off from Red Lobster for this remote assignment?

David Books – I’m supposed to be taste testing a large batch of King Crab legs that’s being shipped to us.

Girl Boss Anchor – How plebian.

David Books – Up yours, lady.

Girl Boss Anchor – Moving right along.  We’re here to provide commentary on the historic meeting between President Donald Trump and President Vladimir Putin as they make a vain attempt to broker a peace in Ukraine.

David Books – Well, shouldn’t you at least pretend that you want this to succeed?

Girl Boss Anchor – If you insist David.  And look Trump and Putin are walking out of the conference room smiling and laughing.  Something must be up.  Let’s listen to their statement.

Donald Trump – As President of the United States; a very great country, I am happy to announce that we have negotiated a fair and equitable solution to the Ukraine war.  And just as I said it required some territory swapping.  Right Vladimir?

Vladimir Putin – You said it, Droog!

Donald Trump – I will be in contact with President Zelensky of Ukraine and let him know that Ukraine will not have to cede any land for peace.  But it will be necessary to allow any Russian or even Ukrainian citizens who want to leave Ukraine to report to a relocation center for processing.

Girl Boss Anchor – Mr. President, are you saying that Russian speaking Ukrainians will be migrated to Russia for resettlement?

Donald Trump – Well, technically yes.  But only because these new territories will become part of Russia.

Girl Boss Anchor – What does that mean?

Donald Trump – The Ukrainian thing has been folded into a larger land deal.  You know how I enjoy real estate deals.  Well, sometimes if you combine several deals together the combination is greater than the sum of its parts.

Girl Boss Anchor – But what other deals are there?

Donald Trump – Well, you’ve probably heard that Western Canada is getting ready to vote on seceding from Canada.  That’s British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba.  And you know how I’m interested in picking up Greenland.  And you know how miserable the West Coast; California, Oregon and Washington are.  And the Northeast is just as miserable living under my presidency.  So, I’ve brokered a tentative deal.  Russia gets Alaska, the West Coast and British Columbia.  We get Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Greenland and Canada get the Northeast.  As far as I can see it’s win/win/win.

Vladimir Putin – Da!  Santa Barbara much nicer than Crimea, bah!

Donald Trump – See everybody’s happy.

David Books – What are you talking about?  That’s insane.  That would require a constitutional amendment to allow the ceding of US territory.  The Canadians will never agree to it and the Russians are our existential foes that threaten us with nuclear annihilation at the drop of a hat.  And the West Coast will never stand for Russian autocracy.

Donald Trump – Yeah, well, I made a few calls and everybody’s on board.  We can dot the i’s and cross the t’s later but shouldn’t you be down on the dock tasting crab legs Booksie?

David Books – You’ll never get away with this.  Putin is a war criminal and no one will do business with him if he tries something like this.

Donald Trump – Well I wouldn’t get him mad at you if I were you.  After all you’ll be buying Russian King Crabs from him very soon.

Vladimir Putin – Da, Booksie.  Try to keep it friendly comrade.  You wouldn’t want to see a price hike, now, would you?

David Books – I really have to take up drinking.

Girl Boss Anchor – And there you have it viewers.  Donald Trump has used insane Solomonic horse trading to recast the world we live in and apparently my choice is move to flyover country or become a Canadian, bleh.

David Books – Hey shut up!  I’m Canadian!

Girl Boss Anchor – Well viewers, good night and have an anti-depressed tomorrow.

Thinking Outside the Box

photog Current Events, Trump ,

Girl Boss Anchor – And finally as we conclude the news of the week, I’d like to go out to our former colleague Jonathan Capon and find out how the President’s new DC policy of federalizing the police and adding National Guard troops is working out there on the mean streets.

Jonathan Capon – Oh, so now you want to talk to me.  Where were you last week when my PBS credit card stopped working and the ATM ate it?  Well anyway, this week the National Guard glued a poster to the outside of our refrigerator box that said, “This illegal domicile will be removed from the public space Thursday at 5am.”  Now, whoever heard of a government job that gets going before the sun comes up?

Girl Boss Anchor – That sounds very challenging Jonathan.  How have you coped with this threat of homelessness?

Jonathan Capon – Well I started crying uncontrollably and Big Bob comforted me by slapping me six or seven times in the face.  It was like that scene in the “Asphalt Jungle” when the crooked cop starts slapping the weak hoodlum to get him to rat on his friends.  By the way, it was quite effective.

Girl Boss Anchor – That sounds awful.

Jonathan Capon – Well everything is relative.

Girl Boss Anchor – But what do you intend to do tomorrow?

Jonathan Capon – I guess start looking for a new refrigerator box and a new corner to live on.

Girl Boss Anchor – But what if Trump does this everywhere in DC?

Jonathan Capon – Well then, guess what, he better have a plan for where to put us.  Because there are thousands and thousands of us.

Girl Boss Anchor – There has been talk about reopening mental hospitals and putting the homeless and the drug addicts there.  It sounds like Nazi Germany.

Jonathan Capon – You know, maybe that doesn’t sound so bad at this point.  I’d prefer to be back at PBS or even the Red Lobster but if someone has at least realized that people living on the streets is a symptom of a bigger problem then maybe Donald Trump isn’t as evil as I made him out to be for all these years.

Girl Boss Anchor – I’ll have to say Jonathan that this may just be some kind of Stockholm syndrome you’re experiencing.

Jonathan Capon – Yeah, well, listen “pantsuit,” living out here for the last few months has given me a fresh perspective on life.  And the nuances of intersectional ideology don’t provide guidance when a naked three-hundred-pound man starts getting overly friendly with you inside a refrigerator box in the dark.  Or when someone puts a knife to your throat because you fished a half-eaten pizza out of a dumpster and he wants it.

Girl Boss Anchor – Well Jonathan, that pantsuit comment was uncalled for and it seems that being laid off by PBS has turned you into a radical MAGA ideologue so I think I’ll cut this interview short.

Jonathan Capon – Yeah, fine.  I’ve got to get going too.  Wednesday is free baths at the carwash across town and I can’t afford to miss this week.  I want to make a good impression on the National Guard.  I hear they’re taking resumes for the new ICE jobs.

Girl Boss Anchor – Fascist!

The Trump Trajectory

photog Current Events, Trump ,

People talked about the “Reagan Revolution.”  I guess it was a conscious effort to leave the malaise of the 1970s behind.  It rejected the pessimism that grew out of the Vietnam War, Watergate, the Oil Crisis and the general chaos that was spawned during the 1960s counterculture.  Reagan said that pessimism was unfounded and that America was ready to become “that shining city on a hill” that it was meant to be.

And to some extent, the booming 1980s sort of proved him right.  The hippies became yuppies and made a killing on Wall Street.  And away we went.  Of course that wasn’t all of it.  Reagan was followed by Bush senior and Clinton and Bush junior and all of them pushed agendas that didn’t include the long-range prosperity of the bulk of the American people.  They were intent on a “new world order” and getting their slice of the pie under the table.  So, the Reagan revolution didn’t end up with all of us living on that shining city on the hill.  Most of us ended up on the other side of the tracks and broke.

And that brings us to MAGA.  It’s sort of the Reagan Revolution 2.0 without the PG rating that 1940s Hollywood lent to Reagan.  We’ve got Donald Trump running this train and he’s got more of an R rating vibe to him.  But then again, in the age we’re in that doesn’t seem shocking or even surprising.  But what it does leave us to wonder about is where do we end up?  There were, are and probably always will be very powerful interest groups that are constantly lobbying for the federal government to do their bidding.  Arms dealers and hedge funds and pharmaceutical companies are constantly jockeying for Congress and the President to buy their weapons or approve their drug or pass a law to lock in their profits.  And all of these decisions could be detrimental to the future of you and yours.  Currently Donald Trump is calling the shots and he’s sticking it to the globalists and the Deep State and doing everything he can to make the job environment better for the middle and working classes of this country.  And I think this will re-ignite some of the optimism, opportunity and affluence that we saw and felt in the 1980s and 1990s.  And that’s wonderful.  So many of the young are hanging on by a thread and need some good times to help them catch up and live middle-class lives again.

But what comes after Trump?  Let’s be optimistic and say that by 2028 Trump has managed to hang onto his control and sparks a boom economy.  And because of that JD Vance gets catapulted into the White House.  Will he have the vision it takes to prevent the same kind of shenanigans that Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, Obama and Biden allowed to happen?  I don’t know if he has the same kind of smarts that Trump has.  I’m not saying he’s dumb.  He seems eloquent and sharp.  But is he enough of a hustler to know when someone is trying to hustle him?  Because I think that’s what it comes down to.  Now the good thing is that Vance used to be a working class (at best) guy.  He may have a loyalty to the shlubs.  But can he out hustle all those crooks in DC?

And I think that is what it all comes down to.  Will JD Vance and Peter Thiel and Elon Musk throw in with us instead of Raytheon, Blackrock and Pfizer?  That’s the bottom line.  And can the majority of voters in this country throw in with them or will they instead vote for the next Mamdani or whatever communist flim-flam man comes down the pike next.  In other words, are Americans smart enough to vote for their own long-term interests.

That’s what I wonder.

What Have We Got to Lose?

photog Camera Reviews, Country Music Reviews, Current Events, Music Reviews, Photography Reviews, Trump , ,

This week Donald Trump has a meeting in Alaska with Vladimir Putin.  I find this intriguing.  And not because I believe they are on the cusp of agreeing to the end of the Ukraine war.  Far from it.  Ukraine and Russia are killing each other there at an industrial scale and there does not seem to be an end in sight.  So that doesn’t seem to be on the agenda.

And maybe that’s the point.  I think both men are getting together despite knowing that no peace deal is currently possible.  So why are they getting together?  I’m not really sure of the answer but maybe it’s because they both know they are in a sort of unique position.  I think that maybe both of them want to find a way out of this nightmare and maybe they figure if they meet up without those in their orbits who want to keep the war going forever, that maybe they can figure something out that would satisfy both sides.

I know that Trump doesn’t want any part of this war but the neo-cons are very powerful in the Congress and even to some extent in his administration.  As for Putin, he’s in a million dead Russians so he can’t just walk away.  And even if he could there are a lot of Russians in Ukraine and he’s carving out a homeland for them.

But all and still, there may be a way to move this thing forward so that the killing stops.  And maybe that’s why both of them are there.  Trump’s whole persona is “the art of the deal.”  He probably figures it couldn’t hurt to talk to the other head honcho.  It’s not as if he’s afraid the other guy will talk him into a bad deal.  So how could it hurt?

Of course, if the two of them walk away accomplishing absolutely nothing and can’t even come up with some story about how these are the “first steps toward peace” then it will look like a loss for Trump.  And Trump must know this.  So, he must think there is something to be gained that outweighs that risk.  And that’s what intrigues me.  Could both of them be there for entirely the right reasons?  Could these two supremely egotistical and cynical men be getting together because they want to change the trajectory of the world?  Because if you think about it, they’re the only two men on this planet who have the authority and clout to actually do it.  Between the two of them, they control about 90% of the nuclear weapons on the planet and between the two of them they control some enormous amount of the resources (both natural and financial) of the planet.  Now certainly, both of them are constrained by the political systems they exist in.  Believe it or not Putin is considered a moderate in his regime structure and Trump has to deal with the military-industrial complex that is still insanely powerful.

But they still are the chief executive officers of two very, very powerful entities.  And imagine if the reason they are going to meet is to try and untangle the conflagration that Biden and the neo-cons has allowed to engulf us.  Maybe they can find a path.  Or maybe it’s hopeless.  But I give them both credit for trying.  What have we got to lose?

Guest Contributor – Tregonsee – 09AUG2025 – Constitution on Census

photog Current Events, Guest Contributors, Tregonsee, Trump

I actually looked at the constitution with respect to the census in a comment in another blog ( https://thenewneo.com/2025/08/07/trump-calls-for-new-census-that-doesnt-count-illegal-aliens/ ) Looking at the text of Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the US Constitution (partial) we have

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.

So first issue is that the 3/5 clause is made moot by the 13th amendment as slavery is now forbidden, as are terms of service for a period of years . The “Indians Not Taxed” Portion has been nullified by legislative action in 1924 by the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 so native Americans DO count towards the census. This effectively leaves us with

“according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons”.

Sadly the most direct reading of that is NOT citizens but humans (actually counted/enumerated). It might be possible for the legislature to clarify the meaning to citizens (making legislative changes similar to what it did to include Native Americans). More sure would be a change in the constitutional language in the form of a constitutional amendment. A purely legislative change is likely to see judicial challenge given large blue states would get hammered by it. At present I doubt an amendment could be gotten through Congress let alone the 38 states needed for ratification. Probably worth a shot via the legislature as the Supreme Court might view that change as a clarification of the definition of Persons, analogous to the change created by the Indian Citizenship act.

With respect to the inaccuracy of the count alleged by the Trump administration the language uses the words count and enumerate. This does NOT seem to leave slop for the various estimates used in the blue cities with respect to transient and homeless populations as well as to count illegal aliens who do not directly reply to the census. The language implies that you have to actually count the people. Only people so counted, to be repetitive, count. This would be challenged but is on far stronger ground with the current Supreme Court’s tendency to being more constrained by the text.

Finally the language concerning whether you can do another census sooner than 2030 says “The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.” That implies no more than 10 years between enumerations but Congress may legislate when within that period. So it would seem they could require an enumeration sooner, but it may take legislative action depending on the law as it exists.

Of course, I am NOT a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, so this and $2.50 will get you a cup of coffee (maybe). This particular idea of restricting the redistricting to be based on citizens (or similar) seems like a win. It also seems like what the founders intended as the purpose of redistricting is to avoid rotten boroughs, as seen in 17th-century England and trying to keep representation in line with citizens/population.
If Congress WERE to write an amendment to restrict the enumeration to citizens I would think that they should also go with something like the Wyoming rule (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming_Rule), adding seats so that there is less of the discrepancy on representation/seat where some small states votes are disproportionate to districts in larger districts. Last I looked the Wyoming rule would require ~570 seats instead of the current 435 in the House. It is something the Left complains about A LOT and I do not think the Wyoming rule would have much effect on overall balance as the red areas get a fair addition of seats too.

Guest Contributor – Glenn W – 08AUG2025 – What Counts

photog Current Events, Glenn W, Guest Contributors, Trump , ,

I’m very interested to see how this plays out. I worked for the Census Bureau for six years and who got counted in the decennial census was always very contentious. After every census the Bureau would be sued by several states who believed their population were undercounted (states always want to maximize their population to get the maximum number of congressional seats). The Census’ position always was that the Constitution states that they are to count the number of “persons” in each state without any other qualifiers. There is a historical basis for this since slaves were not citizens and they were to be counted (the 3/5 rule would be mute otherwise). Of course slaves were here legally. I suspect the legal folks at the Census Bureau are scrambling right now and I don’t know how they are going to officially react. We live in interesting times for sure.

Re-Counting the Census

photog Current Events, Trump , ,

Wow.  Can he do that?  I guess he can.  This may turn out to be a really big deal.  How much might California’s population decrease if illegal aliens are discounted.  A million?  Three million?  Maybe more?  What if all of a sudden there are more people in Texas and Florida than New York and California?  Not to mention all the illegals in Illinois, Virginia and New Jersey.

So, this is Trump swinging for the fences.  I can’t imagine that the same federal judges that have challenged him on every executive order and every action he takes won’t write injunctions against this.  They may slow him down but I think the Supreme Court may back him on this if he can make the case that illegal aliens are being counted in defiance of the intent of the census to count how many Americans need representation in each state.

I listened to a little bit of a podcast where James Carville was freaking out over this and he said that if the Democrats can get the White House and both houses of Congress in 2028, they should immediately declare DC and Puerto Rico states and add six seats to the Supreme Court in order to claw back control of the federal government.  I took that to mean that he’s in a panic.  Trump is fighting gerrymandered fire with fire.  Massachusetts has been 100% Democrat for ages.  The Supreme Court has said that gerrymandering is not within their purview.  Since racial gerrymandering is no longer allowed, it’s only natural for the red states to copy states like Massachusetts and maximize the number of Republican house seats they can manufacture.

Trump is playing hardball and he’s doing it while he has the maximum clout he’ll ever have.  Could it backfire?  Not really.  It could fail to get all he’s looking to get but it’s not like the Democrats could ever get any angrier than the already are.  And this is the moment when the Democrats are as unpopular as they’ve ever been or maybe ever could be.  So, this is the time to strike.

We are living in very turbulent times.  We have elected Trump because the other Republicans were useless and dishonest.  We’ve hired a pragmatist who doesn’t like losing.  It certainly behooves us to back his play.  Any Republican wringing his hands or whining about alienating the Democrats is not to be listened to.  In fact, these are the people we must replace.  Trump has a vision of how to defeat the leftist political movement.  It entails restoring prosperity to the American middle-class and eliminating as much of the bureaucracy and the NGO’s that leech money and power from the federal government at the expense of the tax payers.  He is dead right.  Defunding USAID and other slush funds that feed the Left is brilliant.  Recounting the census is also brilliant.  He is doing everything he can to allow the real majority to get the government they want.  If he keeps up like this, it won’t be enough to add him to Mt Rushmore.  We’ll have to put him on the million-dollar bill (which will have to be added to circulation to allow for buying Starbucks coffee in a few years).