Democrats are trying to tell us that there isn’t a crime problem in DC. Or that if there is a crime problem, its normal. You know: it ain’t that bad! But the homicide rate in DC is about 23 per 100,000 people. So, we can expect in 2025 about 160 murders. Meanwhile, over in Austin, TX it is about 3 per 100,000 people. If DC dropped to Austin’s level, 21 murders. Still bad, but its 139 people alive on December 31st who otherwise would be dead.
And, of course, the murder rate is just the jagged edge of crime – in order to have a city where there are 3 or so murders per week, you have to have a lot of other crime going on. You know, like 5,200 violent crimes per year in DC. A hundred per week. Fourteen a day. A level of crime that is starting to overwhelm the city. And keep in mind that DC was just caught faking its violent crime stats – that is, massively under reporting the true number to make it look like crime is getting under control. No matter how you slice it, this isn’t normal.
To be sure, the Democrats have crafted a Narrative which makes out that this is normal – that living in a big city simply means you must put up with crime. But it isn’t so: murder should be in the neighborhood of 2 to 3 per 100,000. Other violent crime in proportion. Our streets should be quiet, clean and safe – sure, there are always going to be rougher neighborhoods, but even the roughest shouldn’t be havens of murder and other violent crime. Human beings are Fallen – we know this: but controlling crime is not some impossible task. It just takes treating crime the right way – that it is wrong. That you don’t have an excuse. That you must pay the appropriate price for it. We did that for a very long time and, once upon a time, America’s cities were quiet, clean and safe. They can be that way again.
Trump is also trying to tackle homelessness – not by subsidizing it, but by stopping it. Good to remember that homelessness became a “crisis” in the 1980’s – when the Democrats started to blame Reagan for it. Of course, it was actually caused by Democrats. When they demanded that lunatics be left to wander the streets and they made the conscious decision to not deter street crime. But, they blamed Reagan…and because of the way the GOP used to be, we went along with it and the spigot was turned on. Untold billions (probably trillions by now) have been poured into it…with absolutely no effect because the last thing the homeless “advocates” want is an end to homelessness…they’d be out of a job if we did that. And, of course, stopping it doesn’t require zillions of dollars…it just requires enforcing the standard laws against vagrancy, petty street crime and public intoxication. We have a huge population of homeless people…camped out on the sidewalks and making cities unlivable…but only in those cities where they tolerate it. Pay for it. Make it happen. Trump’s plan is to stop the cities from allowing it – they’ll have to round up the insane, the addicted and the shiftless and place them into some facility where they can get help…and jail, ultimately, if they don’t respond.
How is Trump doing? His approval rating right now is higher than both Obama and Bush’s during their second terms. Oh, and this is with the averages cluttered with obviously fake polls designed to keep Trump’s overall approval rating down. My guess is that a solid majority is still behind Trump…with an even money chance it is growing as people get a look at what he’s actually doing. First President since Reagan to actually try to carry out the campaign promises…and doing that even better than Reagan did. Meanwhile, Democrats can’t raise money – officially this is because the big money donors are holding back to see how the Democrats craft their 2026 message. Actually its because Trump cut off the NGO money…Liberals are never actually generous. Even Soros tends to use government money laundered through his NGO’s to fund Leftwing causes. The GOP – and Trump – already have buckets of money saved up for 2026.
The Democrats in California are saying they are going to redistrict the GOP out of existence in CA – which they technically can do but they’ll have to violate the California constitution to do it. Of course, the law never deters a Democrat. But even if they whack all 9 GOP House seats in CA, it still won’t make up for what the GOP is going to do in the Red States. And even though Democrats ignore any law that gets in their way, the people of California aren’t too enthusiastic about this. Democrats have a massive voter registration edge but the combination of GOPers and Independents is a larger bloc than the Democrats. This move might backfire – especially as to get those 9 GOP seats to be D+ seats, they’ll have to dilute Democrat voters in other districts…and this at a time when Latinos and other minorities are starting to shift to the GOP. Oh, and voter registration trends continue to favor the GOP – even in California.
Schiff is in deep trouble – and his Biden “pardon” only covers his J6 Committee work…not the stuff he did with Russia Russia Russia. Of all the malevolent toads that went after Trump, him going down would be the most satisfying.
Blogs For Victory 
If “…the combination of GOPers and Independents is a larger bloc than the Democrats…” is true, then we need to find a way to move a lot of those Independents over to the Right. I think the best way to do that is to stop focusing on ISSUES—and stop letting the Dems make ISSUES the primary focus of their campaigns, along of course with Identity Politics which seems to be mostly just Hate Trump.
I believe the way to do this is to stop making people think that they have to abandon their pet ISSUES to vote for Republicans. We should be telling them “Bring those issues across the aisle with you because you’re entitled to think they are valuable and important. What we are talking about is just the decision about where they should be decided—-at the state level, by the people, or in the massively powerful Central Authority the Democrats want to establish in D.C. where they will be decided by a few elites.”
Because THAT is what the national election is all about. It’s not about PEOPLE. It’s not about who you like or dislike, or why. It’s about deciding the framework for how to govern the country. ISSUES are, or at least should be, decided at the state or local level and don’t belong in a national discussion.
That could be a good line to take – because all the Dems are trying to accomplish in CA is to empower a tiny elite in DC…Newsom is only doing this as a means of launching is 2028 Presidential bid. He knows that the Dem primary voters are going to choose whoever Resisted Trump the most…but for an actual campaign in CA, Resisting Trump might not play that well. What advantage will a working class Californian gain if the Democrats get 9 more House seats in DC? They already totally control the State…and even if they get all 9 remaining GOP House seats in CA, it almost certainly won’t be enough to give the Democrats a House majority. Hitting them on the simple absurdity might be the best route.
I think it, or a version of this, is the ONLY line to take. Way back in the Olden Days of what was probably the Obama years I started talking about how the only real choice we have as voters in national elections is between two versions of government—-a federal government restricted in its size, scope and power with most authority left to the states or a massively powerful Central Authority of consolidated power run by a few, with little authority left to the people. And oh, my goodness! the howls of outrage and screeches of how stupid I am for not understanding that every election is about ISSUES (in bold italics to try to convey the curled-lip sneer which accompanies nearly every one of my uses of the word) because that is WHAT PEOPLE CARE ABOUT.
No amount of explanation could budge these self-appointed political pundits from their assumed stance of intellectual superiority as they lectured, interminably, on the need to understand the vital role played by ISSUES in elections.
All this ever did was convince me, more than ever, that on the national stage ISSUES is just another word for “bait”. Dangle an ISSUE and start to reel in the votes, regardless of the actual political system doing the fishing.
We’ve all seen it. “Why did you vote for Obama?” “Because I believe in gay marriage.” That kind of silliness. But no, gay marriage was the bait used to get you to bite on a vote for a Democrat, which is another way of saying a vote for consolidation of power, collectivism and government control. Every “ISSUE” is bait, on the national level, because very few issues are resolved in a national campaign.
Even important issues like national security and border security are just the trappings of a specific political philosophy, one of national sovereignty and the rule of law. We are still voting on which political system will be making the decisions, not on the decisions or actions themselves.
I remember my first references to the old Big Tent philosophy of the GOP and how, if we want to win, we need to get back to that. My example at the time was that if a woman was a high priestess of Wicca who wanted to marry her girlfriend and open a chain of abortion clinics she was still a conservative if she agreed that all of these personal ISSUES had to be resolved at the state level, as per the 10th Amendment. And I remember someone who used to post here (Spook probably remembers his name, a Viet Nam vet in the HVAC business in Florida) being outraged and declaring in no uncertain terms that he would refuse to associate with a party that included “people like that”.
It was exchanges like that clarified my developing theory about the biggest weaknesses of the Right, this one being the seduction of abandoning actual political thought for the emotional gratification of seeing “politics” as some popularity contest where we pick and choose who we will associate with depending on personality or “charisma” or personal belief systems instead of an analytical approach to deciding on the best blueprint for governing the nation.
(The other big and nearly fatal weakness has been the pathetic failure to communicate. That is being resolved, to some extent, with better messaging, but sadly even those successes are focused on appeals of Identity Politics much more than on the nuts and bolts of actual governance. We’re still falling short as we continue to use shorthand—labels—-instead of definitions and examples, so we just toss out words like “socialist” and “communist” and let the Left define those words and sanitize them.)
Its an interesting way to look at it – totally in practical terms. If you want Communism but don’t propose to impose it on my from above, what the heck do I care? Honestly, if your town or county wants to go that route…knock yourself out. See how it goes! As long as its a free and fair vote and, of course, people are able to vote themselves back out of it…live how you want to live! The Left is control, the Right is freedom – even the freedom to be a fool.
As long as its a free and fair vote and, of course, people are able to vote themselves back out of it—and as long as we don’t have to bail you out when you fail. Vote for communism: fine. But don’t come to us with your hand out when you go broke, when you can’t pay your bills, when your whole system implodes. Don’t beg for money to feed your “homeless” or fix your streets or pay your first responders.
That’s always the thing, isn’t it? I mean, Communism has been tried in the USA – in various mid-19th century and 1960’s/70’s communes…but as there was no force and no taxpayer subsidy, they all fell apart…and for the same reason: anyone wanting a Communist system is a mark and the con artists latch on to them. Lots of people will be willing to spout Commie nonsense if they can live off the labor of others. In the end, nobody ends up doing any work and the things go away. The only Communist economic organization that ever worked was the Monastery – and to be in there you had to obey strict rules and while all was shared alike, it was private property and often worked to produce for the market.
It’s not an insurmountable job, and success will be incremental—-but to succeed we have to START. We have to have some talented people on our side who can do effective graphics, for example, to illustrate that when we vote for Democrat Suzy, that charming and charismatic candidate with the winning smile and talent as a speaker, we are not really voting for SUZY but for the entire edifice of the party behind her. We are not just flaunting our virtue and tolerance and support for diversity by voting for someone from another race or culture, we are actually voting for the entire record of governance of her party–and we need to understand that no matter what Suzy thinks or believes, personally, if she is elected she will vote the party line no matter what it is.
Much more relevant to current politics, when we vote AGAINST Trump, we are not just satisfying a personal wish to express our negative feelings about him as a person, we are voting FOR a specific political system.
Again—-the ISSUE, whether it is for someone or against Trump, is just bait to get votes on the hook,, and we need to find a way to diminish the emotional tendency to be guided/controlled by ISSUES and start evaluating the pros and cons, successes and failures, of the core systems they represent. We have ample evidence that most of the country isn’t really capable of that, but a lot are, and those are the people we need to reach. I think it likely that most “Independents” are more likely to be swayed by that approach, if they have already at least rejected party allegiance.
And here is an example of good writing and graphics to address the nuts and bolts of the Democrat Party
Possible topic for discussion: Why is the attractive young brunette in the White House wiping her mouth? Asking for a friend
There’s a weekend coming up—plenty of time to read this very long and very important essay. And buried deep in it is this: Emphasis mine, because it ties in with my prior post on Identity Politics.
If you get this far—-and there’s a lot to process in this, none of it cheerful—at the very least pay a lot of attention to the segment titled “The Synthesis of Control” All of this ties in with Dr. Malone’s articles on psy-ops.
Excellent piece.
My computer flickered off and when it came back I had lost the link to the original piece I posted from. If you have it, will you please link it? All I have is the link to the part I quoted.
https://brownstone.org/articles/the-cowards-bargain/
Thanks. That is the long and rather complex article I meant to link.
The author made so many good and important points it would require just copying the entire article to cite them all. One that jumped out at me is something that I have come to think about the “vaxx” mandates—that the true agenda (other than enriching Biden and Fauci) was to train Americans to submit to what they see as authority.
“This was a stress test of how quickly a free society could be transformed into something unrecognizable, and we failed spectacularly”
Interesting—there now seems to be a competition to illustrate How Dumb Are Dems Anyway? It’s almost as if they think there is a prize.
If you watch this (and it’s simultaneously painful and funny) note the smugness of this awful woman and her complacency in believing, with absolute certainty, that she is illustrating both virtue and intellectual superiority. Her screeching pleas for help as she pursues this guy are hysterically funny, particularly as the video she is taking would show that she is the aggressor following him.
And BTW she works for the government. Of course she is in Portland, which explains what kind of government would have her. (I think she is cross-referenced under “Batshit Crazy” and “Karens Gone Wild”.)
She’s either ON some really powerful drugs, OR, she needs some really powerful drugs.
For a while I thought she was just a garden variety screeching harpy, but when she started screaming at the man to get away from her while stalking toward him, yelling for help, I knew it was a deeper crazy than that. But it was her making a video of herself advancing on him while he was clearly backing away, yelling all the time to stop attacking her, that it went all the way to zero grasp of reality to any degree.
Keep in mind that she is a government worker, and also drives, so she has a lot of ways to be dangerous.
And, as I pointed out all through this she had the Leftist smirk of smug conviction of moral and intellectual superiority.
Confident Idiocy is the main mark of the Left. In Thomas Massie’s Nicholas and Alexandra, he relates the scene where Lenin and the Politburo are informed that the Czar, his wife and his children had all been murdered…Lenin listened to the report and then said, “and now we’ll go on to the second reading of the proposed health law”. You think about it – here’s a man who just heard of murders he ordered and now he’s going to play the role of the Ice Cold Bolshevik and go on with getting a health law…as if he had the vaguest notion of what was needed for the health and safety of the Russian people. Very confident man, indeed…and an idiot through and through. Being homicidal just made his idiocy worse…and rely on it, if that lady could have that dog owner shot, she would.
if that lady could have that dog owner shot, she would. She actually provided a good gun control ad as if she had a gun on her I think she would have shot him. Because he deserved it, of course.
And this is, when you come down to it, the scariest thing about those who have been suckered in by the bait of Shortcut to the Higher Moral Ground—their absolute, unshakable conviction that this gives them so much Moral Authority that they can impose their delusions on everyone and that there are no limits.
I was skimming through some videos the other day and one of them, about people pushing back against protesters, showed a bunch of those No Oil lunatics not just “protesting” but on the verge of actual violence, as they physically imposed themselves on people in cars stuck in the traffic mess they had created. They were grabbing onto car doors, reaching through open windows, verbally assaulting people within inches of their faces, etc. Why? Because THEY WERE RIGHT so that gave them the right to physically touch, intimidate, threaten and harass people because in their tiny narcissistic universes they had not just a Moral Right but a Moral Imperative that overrode every other rule of social interaction and even law. The stunned outrage and sense of violation they exhibited when drivers just drove off, with them on the hood or hanging onto the doors, only to be dragged or tossed aside, was hysterical. They actually felt victimized, and in seconds morphed from furious attackers to weeping innocent survivors of some totally unexpected violent event.
The “just stop oil” people definitely give off a Himmler vibe…he, too, thought he was saving the world, after all. Of course he was evil and deep in his heart he knew it (towards the end he was plagued by a sick stomach)…but he shoved all that down and proceeded with the master plan…because he was sure it was right. That the world would be cleansed and beautiful if only he could kill all the Jews. So, too, the “just stop oil” people…no thought, no reflection…they just want us to stop, right now, and if we don’t they will wreck as much as they can.
This op-ed headline in the New York Times of all places, tells you everything you need to know about the Left.