In many polls for quite a few months, favorability for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar, but particularly for AOC, has not really been there, despite how often they are both talked about.
 
Despite the Democrats’ incessant defense of the many horrendous remarks these two make, a notably few amount of people seem to like these two at all (can’t imagine why). And during the weekend, Axios received a Democrat Party internal poll that shows these things to be true.
 
Axios reported: “Ocasio-Cortez was recognized by 74% of (swing) voters in the poll; 22% had a favorable view. Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota – another member of The Squad – was recognized by 53% of the voters; 9% (not a typo) had a favorable view.”
 
So while plenty of people know and can recognize the name of these two Leftist darlings, VERY few people actually like them. Nearly three-quarters of voters could recognize who Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is, but less than 25% of them actually held a favorable view. Perhaps more embarrassing is Omar’s numbers, who despite being recognized by more than half of voters, less than 10% view her favorably.
 
And these kinds of numbers are not a one-off thing, or from some random poll. These numbers are consistent with other polls and come from the Democrats themselves!
 
A poll back in June asked voters inside AOC’s district what they thought of her and here is what they found: “They don’t like her. She has a more than 2:1 ratio of unfavorable (50.88%) to favorable (21.37%) in public opinion. They don’t trust her. Only 10.75% thought she had their best interests in mind in quashing the Amazon deal – 32.60% said she didn’t. They don’t want her. 33.44% are ready to vote against her, and only 13.30% would vote for her.”
 
A Quinnipiac poll from March found that “23% of Americans had a favorable view of the member of Congress (AOC), while 36% had an unfavorable view – a -13 overall approval rating,” according to Vox.
 
A top Democrat running for Congress in 2020 told Axios: “If all voters hear about is AOC, it could put the [House] majority at risk. [S]he’s getting all the news and defining everyone else’s races. Socialism is toxic to these voters.”
 
Those words are not to be taken lightly from this anonymous Democrat running for congressional office (it’s unclear if he or she is an incumbent or challenger). He or she is right about AOC defining everyone else’s races, but that largely is because the vast majority of the Democrat Party is falling in line with people like her. They are beginning to embrace socialism far more openly, seeing the results it’s gotten people like Bernie Sanders and AOC herself (as well as others). There isn’t a single Democrat running for the presidency that hasn’t disavowed socialism or socialistic policies. I keep going back to when every single Democrat raised their hand when asked which one of them would give illegal immigrants free healthcare.
 
Just about whatever position AOC takes, the Democrat Party also takes, for the most part. And while there are those within the Party who disagree sometimes, namely Nancy Pelosi mocking the Green New Deal as “the Green Dream or whatever”, there are plenty of people who see her as the future (for some reason), including former DNC chair Keith Ellison, who outright said that she was the future of the Democrat Party.
 
However, as with AOC’s and Omar’s numbers, socialism isn’t viewed all that favorably. According to Axios: “Socialism was viewed favorably by 18% of the voters and unfavorably by 69%... capitalism was 56% favorable; 32% unfavorable.”
 
It’s precisely because of these reasons that I don’t believe any Democrat running for POTUS has any real chance against Trump. Say what you will about the President (calling him racist certainly doesn’t work anymore and I seriously doubt his tweets regarding Omar’s ingratitude towards America, whether one thinks are racist or not (they aren’t), are going to do anything to hurt him come election time), but he at least can run on results.
 
All Democrats can run on is hating Trump and lying about him. And while that may work with their mindless base (seriously, I had a Twitter debate with someone who legitimately thinks the Mueller report showed collusion, when it adamantly stated there wasn’t and she called me a liar as a result, so some of these people are wacky themselves), that’s not going to work for the vast majority of the American voting bloc.
 
That low favorability for socialism isn’t anything new. Back in March, an NBC News/WSJ poll said that only 25% of Americans would approve of a socialist candidate for President, and in that same poll, only 18% approved of socialism in general, the same number as today (though I would personally hope it gets even lower still as time goes on). In that poll, 50% disapproved of socialism, so that’s a massive, 19-point jump from that poll back in March to this internal Democrat poll.
 
50% viewed capitalism favorably and only 19% unfavorably in that poll, so there’s a bit of a shift in the new poll, with capitalism’s favorability gaining 6 points but its unfavourability also rising significantly, but that might be due to some sampling size differences and other variables.
 
If these trends continue, and if Democrat candidates continue to out-Leftist each other, more and more people will think negatively of them (and these polls are why I don’t buy into the idea that any of these Democrats could beat Trump. I mean, I even saw a poll that said US Women’s Soccer star Megan Rapinoe could beat Trump! Now you know they are definitely crazy) and it will ultimately come bite them in the behind once the 2020 presidential election is here.
 
Not only that, but the House is, in all likelihood, also to go to Republicans if this keeps up. Like the anonymous Democrat candidate said, people like AOC are defining other Democrats’ campaigns. Even if a candidate runs on not being out of his or her mind, AOC’s shadow is going to be a threat to their campaign. Any agreement to anything AOC does will likely be seen as a sort of endorsement of the actions. Any defense of her anti-Semitic, racist or outright insulting and belittling comments regarding illegal immigrant detention centers being in any way, shape or form akin to concentration camps will be seen as a total endorsement of that brand of lunacy.
 
That’s not to say the entire election is in the bag. We don’t want to get complacent here. That’s what Hillary did, believing the election was over before it started, and look at where she is now: doing book tours and signings that barely get covered and hardly anyone shows up. Victory should never be an assumption, but neither should defeat. With everything that I am seeing currently: an America being made great again, Leftists going out of their way to bash it for being America and for being founded in the first place (going so far as to even say this country was founded on slavery, when it was literally founded on liberty, but the Founding Fathers thought slavery was on its way out the door, so they didn’t think they would need to do much apart from keeping ships from importing slaves into the country), and Leftists embracing full-blown socialism and government-takeover of virtually everything they can get their hands on, I really can’t see the Left winning against Trump.
 
These numbers show devastating results to Democrats. And again, this is their own internal polling, so you know there is bound to be some oversampling of Democrats. But despite that possible oversampling (I won’t go so far as to actually accuse them of that without any actual evidence, but that is a common practice for these people, so I doubt they were perfectly objective in their sampling), these numbers show AOC is heavily disliked, as well as Ilhan Omar (quite possibly, the rest of “The Squad”, Rashida Tlaib and Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) show at least somewhat similar numbers, but they don’t tend to be quite as frequently talked about) and that socialism is overall viewed as “toxic” to voters, in the words of the anonymous Democrat candidate.
 
I can only hope and pray that these numbers will continue to show up like this, or get even lower, as time goes on.
 
Deuteronomy 28:7
“’The Lord will cause your enemies who rise against you to be defeated before you. They shall come out against you one way and flee before you seven ways.’”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
 

Within the last few days, I (and likely others as well) have heard of two stories from two different campaigns: Beto O’Rourke campaigning IN MEXICO, despite the obvious fact that not one Mexican citizen is bound (or allowed) to vote either in the Democrat primaries or the 2020 election, and the other story of the Trump campaign trying their hardest to reach the evangelical vote.
 
While Beto O’Rourke is campaigning in Mexico (in what is obviously an attempt at securing illegal immigrant votes States-side), the President is trying to reach those of us who follow the Lord.
 
According to Axios, a Trump campaign advisor told them: “There is a significant evangelical outreach effort. It’s going to be state specific. It’s going to exist in important battleground states and focus on churches and areas where we can have an impact. African American outreach will be a component of that… It’s robust, and it will be well-funded.”
 
Another campaign official told Axios that “this is about finding voters,” and Axios reported that in 2016, Trump got 81% of the evangelical vote. As it stands right now, the Pew Research Center says that 69% of evangelicals think the President is doing a good job.
 
Governing.com also reported that evangelicals have moved closer to Trump since his 2016 victory:
 
“Exit polls showed that 75 percent cast their ballots for Republican candidates. That number includes evangelicals of all ages, but surveys taken shortly before the election showed that 78 percent of white evangelicals ages 18 to 29 identified as Republican. ‘Did we see white evangelicals moving toward the middle of the political spectrum in 2018? Clearly no,’ says Ryan Burge, a political scientist at Eastern Illinois University (and a Baptist minister). ‘White evangelicals are more Republican now than they were two years ago.’”
 
Burge also noted that the percentage of evangelicals rose in 45 states from 2000 to 2010, coming largely from a rise in Latino evangelicals in states like Arizona, Florida, Maryland and Ohio.
 
And back in May, White House spokesman Hogan Gidley said that evangelicals and Trump are so close because “there’s a mutual respect. I think they have a good relationship because of the fact that he has delivered on the promises he made during the campaign.”
 
And there’s certainly a lot to that. As far as other Republicans go, the ones that do not keep their promises, like that snake Paul Ryan, seriously tick us off because he was essentially doing the Left’s bidding, which is far from good for the country. We respect Trump because he actually keeps his promises and is legitimately making America great again, despite all the hurdles in his way.
 
Now, I know what rather hypocritical Leftists will say about this: “how can evangelicals support Trump? He likes to grab women by their privates! He has had affairs on his wives and has been married three times! He is far from a man after God’s own heart!” To which I say: while the Access Hollywood tape of him saying what he said was definitely not a nice thing to say, it was locker room talk and he has never actually sexually assaulted or harassed any woman. While he has had affairs with his wives (his second wife was his mistress while he was married to Ivana), while there’s the whole Stormy Daniels thing (which I don’t fully believe anyway), and while those things are certainly sinful and not right, what is important to understand is whether or not Donald Trump has asked for forgiveness for his sins.
 
Which brings me to the last one, about him not being a man after God’s own heart. The biblically-illiterate Left will be quick to judge, but slow to understand, but David, while anointed as a man after God’s own heart by the Lord Himself, eventually sinned greatly by sleeping with one of his most loyal soldier’s wife, Bathsheba, and then plotted to send said soldier off to die in battle to keep his sins buried.
 
The story of King David would be seen as a massive fall from grace if it weren’t for the fact that much of the book of Psalms is about David’s recognition and repentance of his sins, begging for God’s forgiveness and eventually receiving it.
 
And that’s what is important: to be forgiven by the Lord. What Trump did decades ago, or even a few years ago, is irrelevant if he has asked for forgiveness from Jesus Christ.
 
What’s more, what he did in the past is greatly overshadowed by the atrocities the Left advocates for TODAY.
 
I’ll take a former adulterer who cares for this country and loves the Lord over a current advocate for death, lust, obscenity and evil who hates this country and wishes for nothing more than to see it turn into the antithesis of what the founders intended.
 
President Trump has flaws, yes, but that comes naturally as HE IS HUMAN TOO! And while there may be evangelical NeverTrumpers like David French who honestly can’t see past Trump’s former mistakes and judges him on those things as a result (not exactly a very Christian thing to do either), most recognize that if we were to wait for the perfect candidate to show up to run for President, we would literally have to wait for rapture to occur because no one is perfect apart from the Lord.
 
And believe me, Jesus Christ wouldn’t run for President of the United States, as He already is the King of all the Earth and Heaven.
 
The fact that President Trump is trying this hard to get the evangelical vote (which will almost certainly go to him over anyone on the Left who currently advocate for literally demonic things) shows us who he wants to be part of his base.
 
Evangelicals love the Lord, love this country and love Trump in that order. And the reason they (we, really, as I’m also a Christian) love Trump is because he ALSO loves the Lord and this country. Whatever mistake he may have done in the past is forgiven provided he has asked for said forgiveness (and I have no reason to believe he hasn’t).
 
The entire story of the Bible, both the Old and New Testament, is a story of redemption. From the moment Adam and Eve sinned against the Lord, God has provided salvation after salvation for His people – all of them with a similar theme: have faith in the Lord.
 
It was Noah’s faith that saved him from God’s wrath during the flood. It was Abraham’s faith that saved him. It was Lot’s faith that saved his family (minus his wife, who disobeyed God) from the judgment over Sodom. It was Moses’ and the Israelites faith that saved them from Pharaoh. And it is all of our faith in Jesus Christ, who died on the cross for our sins, that saves us from God’s judgment. Sola Gratia and Sola Fide. By grace alone, we are saved through faith alone.
 
Even the most spiteful of humans to ever exist can be saved if he or she were to place their faith in the Lord Jesus. Even every single person on the Democrat ticket who currently advocates for Satan’s wish list could be saved if they were to place their faith in Jesus Christ. Granted, that is not likely to happen as it stands, and it is up to the Lord to choose whom He shows mercy, so it is possible none of them will be saved (and no, Buttigieg is not a Christian, he is not saved, no matter how much he tries to say he is a Christian. Outward proclamation of faith does not always equal actual faith).
 
So it really doesn’t matter what Donald Trump did in his past. As long as he has repented of his sins, he has been forgiven by the Lord. As a result, I see no reason not to forgive him myself for those things. So as far as his reelection campaign goes, I, along with many other Christians, will be voting for President Trump.
 
1 John 1:9
“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Last week, I talked about the first night of the Democrat debates, in which each candidate tried to outdo themselves in how much pandering they could do, starting with Robert Francis O’Rourke avoiding answering a question in both English and Spanish, followed by former Obama HUD Secretary Julian Castro including transgender people in the topic of abortion (he since clarified he meant transmen, meaning women who transition into men, which still makes no sense) and with every single candidate trying to out-socialist the other with radical ideas that are poorly thought out and even less explained.
 
The second debate was no different, all things considered, which leads me to believe in the point I make in the title: none of these guys will beat Donald Trump.
 
None of these people offer anything new to the table, just slight alterations and versions of ideas they all talk about but most people don’t want. Things like unrestricted abortion, Medicare-for-All which would take away people’s private health insurance, raising taxes on the middle class, providing free health insurance to illegals (and opening our borders entirely), etc. are all things that should rightly destroy each of their campaigns.
 
Alas, one of these Marxists has to win the nomination, so one of them will be getting rewarded for the insanity they bring to the table.
 
Even President Trump, in his only tweet on the night of the second debate, wrote: “All Democrats just raised their hands for giving millions of illegal aliens unlimited healthcare. How about taking care of American Citizens first!? That’s the end of that race!”
 
Not only that, but the Trump campaign actually issued a statement following the debates:
 
“The cast of characters may have changed, but the second night’s script was eerily like the first: a two-hour long infomercial for President Donald J. Trump’s re-election campaign. All of the Democrats tripped over each other in a race to see who could stand out as the most leftist candidate, threatening government control of every aspect of people’s lives. We are many months away from seeing who the Democratic nominee will be, but one thing is clear – President Trump will be the hands-down victor after each and every Democrat debate.”
 
Usually, statements like that make me say: “hold up, there is still a year and a half until the election and a lot can happen in that time.” And while that still is technically true, from what we saw in those two nights, even from the current frontrunner Joe Biden, not a single one of these people is ready to beat Donald Trump and don’t seem to have much of a path to do so.
 
What they’re doing will certainly fire up their radical base, but there are plenty of people who used to vote Democrat (and even voted Hillary in 2016) who will likely vote for Trump in 2020 because the Democrat Party has gone so far to the Left and there doesn’t appear to be a single one of them that seems in any way moderate, or at the very least somewhat reasonable.
 
Each of them wants to prioritize illegal immigrants over Americans, as we know from the fact that they raised their hands if their healthcare plans would cover illegals, and as we know from the fact many of them advocate for open borders (even if they don’t necessarily use those exact words). Each of them wants abortion to be completely unrestricted, even when a sizeable majority of DEMOCRATS, let alone everyone else, want some fairly heavy restrictions on abortions. Each of them wants to raise taxes, not only on the upper class, but also on the middle class. Each of them wants to prioritize a boogey man of a threat in man-made climate change.
 
Each of them wishes to turn the United States into the Soviet Union but with open borders.
 
Let’s briefly go over a brief analysis of a few of the candidates:
 

• Joe Biden, the frontrunner, tries to pin the situation at the border, specifically children in “cages”, as a Trump-only problem, despite having been part of the administration that was most notorious for doing that very thing. He also can hardly go a day without speaking some nonsense. He literally said his first act as President would be to “defeat Donald Trump”. The guy’s a moron.

 

• Bernie Sanders appeared seriously ticked off, probably because he’s getting overtaken in some polls by a woman who literally pretended to be Native American for most of her career and even claimed she was Native American after releasing DNA test results that SHOWED SHE WASN’T, and beyond that, he brings nothing new to the table, just repeating many things he said in 2015. The problem here is that the economy was terrible before Trump came along, so his promises seemed good and doable. The economy is far better today for everyone, and they know it.

 

• Elizabeth Warren, again a fake Native American, spews the exact same thing as just about everyone else.

 
Basically, you can copy and paste these descriptions about everyone, with some alterations. Each of them is adamant about using heavily socialistic policies to get their way, be it government take-over of healthcare, confiscating people’s guns and effectively getting rid of the 2nd Amendment, establishing a permanent underclass with open borders and forever changing the American culture from what it once was, etc.
 
The only candidate that was remotely interesting was Buttigieg and that’s because he’s the only one on that stage that at least pretends to be a Christian (he most definitely is not a Christian). He’s the only one that bothers to bring God into the conversation (for some of the worst and most evil reasons) because everyone else on the Democrat field is a Godless heathen who views God as the enemy and government as a suitable replacement.
 
Every single one of the candidates we saw last week is basically a carbon copy of the one next to them, all attempting to pander to target audiences, all promising “free” everything (except when they have to admit that they will raise taxes on the middle class to pay for their “free” healthcare) and all seeking to rule this country more akin to a tyrant than a servant to the people. Not one of them has any sort of appeal for the sane person, and for whatever problems people might see with Donald Trump, he’s at least not crazy like these people.
 
He puts America first, tries his best to uphold the rule of law (something he can’t do on his own), has in two years helped the American economy to rise to new heights, something that is not likely to change any time soon, has obliterated ISIS, is competitive with China (none of the candidates even think China is much of a threat either) and overall is keeping his promise to Make America Great Again wherever he can.
 
Trump will run on his accomplishments. Whoever the Democrat nominee is will run on hating Trump and turning America into a socialist hellhole. That might work for the radical Leftist base, but the overall Democrat base is bound to shrink. Plenty of registered Democrats voted for Trump in 2016 and I suspect plenty more will look at these candidates, or the eventual nominee, and think “yeah, this is too much.”
 
And like I said last week, if it weren’t for the tech giants helping out the Democrats, it’s entirely likely Trump would absolutely obliterate his opponent.
 
Proverbs 28:26
“Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Have you ever found yourself in a situation in which you were hit on the head and felt like you might have lost brain cells as a result? Regardless of the way in which you hit your head, chances are, you still have more brain cells than the entire Democrat field and those who watched the Democrat debates after they were over.
 
That’s how embarrassingly stupid the first Democrat debate was, which is what we will mostly be focusing on. Although, I don’t know why I was expecting anything else from them.
 
Let’s begin with Señor Robert Francis O’Rourke when he somehow managed to avoid answering a question relating to taxes in two different languages.
 
Early on in the debate, moderator Savannah Guthrie asked O’Rourke: “Some Democrats want marginal, individual tax rate of 70% of the very highest earners, those making more than $10 million a year. Would you support that, and if not, what would be your top individual rate?”
 
To which Robert responded: “This economy has got to work for everyone, and right now, we know that it isn’t. And it’s gonna take all of us coming together to make sure that it does.” That was what he said in English, which 1) entirely avoided the question and 2) was a complete lie, considering we are in an economic boom and minorities are experiencing record-low unemployment rates that have been steady during Trump’s administration thus far.
 
Then, despite being limited on time, Robert said this in Spanish (and Spanish that wasn’t even entirely grammatically correct): “We need to include every person in the success of this economy. But if we want to do that, we have to include every person in our democracy. Every vote needs representation and every voice needs to be heard.”
 
Again, entirely avoiding the question, but in a uniquely dumb manner that even liberal late night hosts made fun of.
 
Let me remind you that the question asked had to do with taxing the rich extreme rates. What reason does Robert have to reply (without even answering the question at all) in both English and Spanish? It’s quite clear to anyone even half-way paying attention that the guy was simply pandering to the Hispanic vote by basically saying: “Hey, look, I can speak Spanish too!” The only thing that would’ve completed that hysterical moment was if he was holding Uno cards while he was saying that.
 
And while there may be others who disagree with me on this, I find this not only embarrassing for the guy but also kind of insulting. As a Hispanic person, I’m not going to be wooed by someone who happens to know some Spanish (again, he didn’t even speak it perfectly well either). I’m especially not going to be wooed by someone who manages to avoid answering a question in two different languages.
 
Granted, I never had any plans to vote for O’Rourke at any capacity and fully plan on voting for President Trump come the 2020 election, but this was outright asinine.
 
But perhaps not quite as asinine as Julian Castro saying that biological men who transition to (looking) female ought to have the right to an abortion.
 
For some context, NBC News’ Lester Holt had asked the actual Hispanic (and actual lunatic): “Secretary Castro, this one is for you. All of you on stage support a woman’s right to an abortion. You all support some version of a government health care option. Would your plan cover abortion Mr. Secretary?”
 
Castro replied: “Yes, it would. I don’t believe only in reproductive freedom, I believe in reproductive justice. And, you know, what that means is that just because a woman – or let’s not also forget someone in the trans community, a trans female, is poor, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have the right to exercise that right to choose. And so I absolutely would cover the right to have an abortion.”
 
Another kind of pandering, particularly because he stopped to also include transgender people. And like O’Rourke’s pandering, this one also doesn’t make any sense (although it does make sense in the mind of a lunatic Leftist who is this out of touch with reality).
 
In case Secretary Castro has forgotten his 3rd grade science class, MEN CAN’T GET PREGNANT! It doesn’t matter if a man with gender dysphoria goes through the process of mutilating his body to look like a woman’s, he still cannot biologically get pregnant because he lacks the reproductive equipment to do so. A man may say he is a woman and may even transition into having the body of a woman, but that does not include the transfer of a womb into the new body and the removal of the previous reproductive system.
 
Men can’t get pregnant, and as a result, can also not get an abortion. It literally makes zero sense for Castro to even say this, or for anyone to say this for that matter. And these people think Trump isn’t fit to serve? This guy literally thinks men can get pregnant! Either that or he’s simply trying to pander to out-of-their-minds politically-correct morons in the audience who will say: “Yaaaas! Slay, queen!” entirely unironically. I honestly hope it’s the latter because I would hate for someone that mentally deranged to be within 10 feet of any position of power as grand as the Presidency.
 
Overall, the Democrat debates have proven that the entire field of Democrat candidates is filled with shameless panderers at best and outright deranged people at worst. None of them have proven to mainstream America that they are in any way sane, and that goes beyond the ridiculous (and dangerous) desire to confiscate every gun in America and allow for literally unrestricted abortions. While those two issues demonstrate how out of touch they are with America, it’s the shameless pandering and the open lunacy that tells us what they are all about.
 
Even if I had been a registered Democrat, voted for Hillary in 2016 and despised Trump, I would seriously doubt I would be willing to support any of these people. And I think there are plenty of people out there who think similarly. I mean, O’Rourke is polling at roughly 3%, Castro at less than 1 and everyone else is equally as stupid or deranged.
 
Sure, neither of the two will likely be the Democrat nominee to challenge Trump, but if this is what the Left has to offer, they really do need the tech giants to come in and rig the elections for them because otherwise, Trump would likely win all but one state ala Ronald Reagan.
 
Proverbs 18:2
“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

A few of months ago, Democrat candidates began their own races to the Democrat nomination in an effort to unseat President Trump come November of 2020. Part of the big headlines that were made apart from the actual announcements by the various candidates was just how much money they all raised in the span of a single day and even a single quarter.
 
For example, former Vice President Joe Biden made headlines for having raised $6.3 million on the first day of his candidacy. Failed Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke raised almost as much, at $6.1 million in his first day. Lunatic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-USSR) raised $5.9 million in his first day.
 
And in the first quarter, Joe Biden bragged about having raised almost $20 million in that time span, in a fundraiser full of Wall Street donors, saying: “With your help, you’re going to allow me to be able to compete in a way that I’ve never been able to do before. We’ve raised a great deal of money.”
 
Well, if we are to consider money raised as a sign of excitement and enthusiasm for a candidate (and we will), then I suppose raising $24.8 MILLION in the span of 24 hours is a pretty great sign of enthusiasm.
 
GOP Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel tweeted: “[Trump] has raised a record breaking $24.8M in less than 24 hours for his re-election. The enthusiasm across the country for this President is unmatched and unlike anything we’ve ever seen!”
 
Tim Murtaugh, the Director of Communications for the President’s 2020 campaign also tweeted: “Jaw-dropping numbers from the 24 hours of the day [Trump] announced his re-election campaign: $24.8 million raised. Do the math: that’s more than a million dollars an hour for an entire day. On top of an electric rally in Orlando, this shows huge Trump enthusiasm.”
 
And that last part also brings up a very good point: Trump has been filling up whole stadiums ever since 2016 and that doesn’t seem to have changed at all.
 
The President announced his bid for re-election in Orlando, Florida, in the Amway Center. That’s the same Amway Center where the Orlando Magic, an NBA team, play. And let’s not forget that back in October of last year, while holding rallies for Republican candidates for the midterm elections in Houston, Texas, Trump also filled up the Toyota Center, where the Houston Rockets, another NBA team, play.
 
The President fills up entire stadiums where sports teams play, while Democrat candidates struggle to fill out their own areas for speaking.
 
Now, I know what you’re thinking. “Well, Trump is the incumbent in this race. Of course he’s going to raise more money and fill up more seats. He’s the only Republican running!” And you would be correct in your thinking if it weren’t for the fact that this has basically been a trend ever since 2015, when Trump first announced his candidacy. He was still drawing huge crowds and raising plenty of money, despite the fact there were another 16 or so candidates also running.
 
There’s no doubt that Trump holds an advantage as the incumbent and being the only Republican running, but if Trump were in as much trouble as multiple polls claim he is, the amount of enthusiasm shown in Orlando alone wouldn’t have been quite as much.
 
The people of Orlando, as well as just about everyone who voted for Trump in 2016, still know for sure that CNN sucks, that Hillary Clinton should be locked up (and honestly, so should Barack Obama) and that we need to build the wall (which Trump is working very hard to do but there’s only so much he can do without Congressional help, something that falls on both parties). So the people who supported Trump in 2016 are still here, and more are likely to show out to vote, considering who he is running against and what he has had to face in the last couple of years.
 
Even The Daily Wire’s Erick Erickson tweeted that he’d rather vote for Trump (don’t know if he did in 2016, but I doubt it as he has always been a NeverTrumper to some extent) than for any of the “baby-killing socialists”, as he put it, currently running on the Democrat ticket.
 
Given that I have already stated that I believe this race will, in large part, be about the very soul of this nation, I think there will be some people who look at what the Democrats are running on – higher taxes, “free” everything which only leads to higher taxes, restricted free speech for political opponents of the Left, restricted religious freedom for bakery shop owners, legalizing actual infanticide, forcing female students to compete with males, etc. – and recognize the actual threat these people possess and come to the realization that they ought to be as far from political office as one can get. Because for all of people’s personal gripes with Trump (which are entirely petty, but to each their own), he is Ronald Reagan, Abraham Lincoln, Dwight Eisenhower and George Washington put together on steroids in comparison to Karl Marx’s All-Star team of Democrat candidates.
 
All of this is yet another reason not to trust the fake MSM polls that show what the Left hopes is reality. Never mind that these polls showed even worse numbers for Trump all throughout the 2016 campaign and were all incredulously wrong, never mind that the polls always tend to over-sample Democrats, an already well-known tactic used by Democrat pollsters, never mind that these are the same people who claimed for two and a half years that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 Presidential election away from Hillary without any actual evidence, salivating at the idea that they might one day actually get something solid so they could impeach Trump. The fact that Donald Trump has raised a record-breaking amount of money for a single day as a candidate, far beating out their original $7 million goal and far beating out Joe Biden’s numbers from an entire quarter, AND he is still filling out entire stadiums used for sporting events shows the amount of enthusiasm for Trump hasn’t wavered in the least.
 
Of course, as I’ve been saying for some time now, it’s still too early to determine anything happening right now as being a big factor in 2020. An awful lot of things can change from here and Trump will eventually be facing one candidate, not making generalizations about what the Democrats are proposing (which he still can do if Biden is A) the nominee as most people expect him to be and B) runs on the same socialist crap all the others are running on because he’s a serial plagiarizer and does not have the mental capacity to formulate a single original thought).
 
But as things stand currently, Trump is off to a pretty great start for his re-election bid. I just hope and pray things stay like this and even get better as we go forward.
 
1 Timothy 2:1-4
“First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

I hold the belief that the 2020 election cycle will be about the following things: immigration, the economy, and the very soul of this country. Granted, the first two things are usual in elections, especially in this day and age, but that last one ought to make people realize just what it is we are facing.
 
Much like 2016, we are at a crossroads: we either elect a conservative like Trump, who loves America, or we elect a socialist like (insert literally any of the Democrats currently running), who hates America as it was founded and wishes to turn it into a nation where the government controls just about everything aka a socialist country.
 
And if you’ve been keeping up with multiple polls, you see the terrifying rise of people who consider socialism to be better than capitalism. While those people are still the minority (roughly 40%), the trends are seemingly terrifying. But there is good reason I say “seemingly” in that sentence.
 
You see, according to Rasmussen, 84% of people have a favorable opinion of free markets and 41% say the same about socialism.
 
It is at this point that your brain might be trying to do some seriously challenging mental gymnastics to understand the logic behind that. The vast majority of people like free markets, but about 41% also like socialism? That doesn’t make any sense! And if we were strictly talking about economic ideologies, then yes, you would be correct. But that is not what we are talking about.
 
Before I get to that, however, let’s look at all the numbers.
 
Within the poll that talked about free markets, 87% of Republicans favored it, 85% of Independents said the same as did 81% of Democrats.
 
“Voters strongly believe that Free Markets are better than Socialism when it comes to promoting economic growth (55% to 12%), creating quality jobs (52% to 13%), and giving everyone a chance to succeed (44% to 19%),” according to Rasmussen. “Voters give Free Markets a more modest advantage on helping people in poverty reach the middle class (37% to 22%), creating a fair society (35% to 25%), and reducing poverty (33% to 24%). Voters are close to evenly divided on which system will be better at reducing health care costs: 30% say free markets and 26% socialism. However, it’s worth noting that there is very little support for requiring all Americans to get health insurance through a government program.”
 
So what is it that we are looking at here? We’re looking at people who, economically, agree with capitalistic, free market ideologies, but don’t think socialism is the opposite of those things. They don’t view socialism through the lenses of economic ideology, like you and I do, but through the lenses of the government being an avenue capable of helping people who are in need. They like the idea of government-issued health insurance like Obamacare, but largely do not like the idea of that being the only option.
 
So what we have here are a bunch of people who are largely misguided as to what socialism actually is. The definition of socialism/communism is the government being the one who owns the means of production. Meaning there is no such thing as private property because the government controls and/or regulates everything, from your home, to your car, to your job, to your phone. Absolutely everything is controlled and regulated by the government. You cannot get something that is outside of the government’s control. It’s part of the reason China is so adamant about getting Google to censor things in that region for their citizens.
 
But as we can plainly see, that is not the definition self-proclaimed socialist voters tend to follow. Matter of fact, when it comes to the economy, the less government involvement, the better. This is something even those “socialists” believe in, as we can see from how many people, INCLUDING DEMOCRATS, prefer free markets over socialism.
 
For the record, these self-proclaimed socialists do not include people like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. They know perfectly well what socialism is, that’s why they’re in the government. They get to expand their own power if they back socialism and in turn, deceive others as to what socialism is to make it more appealing. Why else do you think they adamantly avoid talking about Venezuela and even California? Apart from being precise examples as to what socialism does to a country or even a state, they will often claim that that’s not “real” socialism, and that “real socialism” has never actually been tried.
 
Of course, that’s a load of garbage, but people will believe it. That’s why there are people who call themselves socialists but will often times support capitalistic economic policies. They don’t truly know what socialism is.
 
Not that I blame them for their ignorance. Socialism was not really a topic that was covered when I was in school (likely because the term itself was still fairly taboo at the time) and I wouldn’t have learned about socialism had I not done my own research or talked with family about politics. Granted, I also have the advantage of having lived in a fairly socialistic country before (I’ll take “words that have never been spoken before in the history of the world” for 1000, Alex), so I know what socialism is like in a sort of first-hand manner, but still. Schools don’t tend to teach about socialism, and if they do, they don’t actually teach what it really is and what it has led to.
 
I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: if people knew what socialism truly was, most people would completely drop it. We know this because Scott Rasmussen himself, in a recent interview with The Daily Signal, said that “only 1 out of 3 people who say they like socialism think it leads to higher taxes and a more powerful government.”
 
Meaning only 1 out of 3 people who say they like socialism actually know what socialism is. Still a scarily high number, but taking that in relation with just about everyone in the country, and the percentage of people who both like socialism and know what it is shows to be far lower than what polls show. That’s 33% out of the 41% of people who support socialism - that's only 13.5% people. One can easily see how truly few people there are out there who want to see this country be turned into the Soviet Union.
 
But for the most part, the vast majority of Americans far prefer the current economic system we have of free market economics, regardless of political party affiliation or political ideology. Most people are free-market capitalists and simply see government as an option, not as a deterrent, to that system. Really, that’s where the problem lies, as the more government there is, the less individual freedoms there are, including economic freedoms, and the task is really to educate people as to what socialism truly is (and most people are shocked when they find out what it really is, so that tells you something).
 
Of course, another problem comes in the fact that these people, despite their own personal opinions, will vote for those who actually are socialists and will implement actual socialist policies that intrude on people’s economic freedoms (and other types of freedoms) and that can cause severe harm to the country. The task then becomes properly defining socialism and exposing the fact that the people running for office are not the same kind of socialist the people voting for them claim to be. Bernie Sanders wants Medicare for All in the form of only the government being the option for health insurance. A lot of people like the term “Medicare for All” because it suggests an option for people to take, but recoil when they learn that it would actually take away people’s options for health insurance.
 
Actual socialism is not popular in this country, but what needs to be done is to properly define socialism. Most people who claim to be socialists aren’t actually socialists. They are just as capitalistic as you and me, just view the government as a force for good and not as a force for evil that can destroy economic and other kinds of freedom.
 
I just hope we can properly define socialism for the vast majority of Americans before we turn into Venezuela.
 
Colossians 2:8
“See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

This is far from the first time I have written about Hispanics supporting Donald Trump at any capacity. Given that I, myself, am Hispanic, I can at least fairly decently relate with credibility why it is that Hispanics are so willing to support the President. But to entitled Leftist elitists who view minorities as voting mules, Trump being supported by as many Hispanics as previous Republican candidates/presidents makes absolutely zero sense.
 
Take David Drucker from the Washington Examiner for example. While I wouldn’t necessarily call him a Leftist per se (what I have seen from him doesn’t paint him with the same brush as pretty much everyone else on the MSM), he does appear surprised at the fact that Trump is rather popular with Hispanics. In fact, the title of his article I will be quoting from is: “Hispanics stick with Trump despite tough border stance”.
 
Now, to me, I find that rather hilarious. “Despite” tough border stance? Try BECAUSE of tough border stance.
 
Keep in mind that exit polls back in 2016 showed that Trump garnered 28% of the Hispanic vote, which is admittedly lower than it is today. 28% is around the support other Republicans have received from the Hispanic population. Mitt Romney back in 2012 got 27% of the Hispanic vote.
 
So while you can attribute a strong economy causing his support to grow (something I do as well), there was still a decent portion of the Hispanic population that voted for Trump despite the fact he hadn’t done anything for the economy just yet (naturally, having not been POTUS at the time). Also keep in mind that his entire campaign centered around illegal immigration and building a wall at the southern border.
 
So you would think people would be able to figure out that a tough border stance is not detrimental for Trump when it comes to Hispanics. WE ARE TOUGH ON THE BORDER TOO!
 
But here’s what Drucker said specifically in his rather short article. He starts by noting that Trump’s initial remarks upon launching his campaign “mortified” Republicans, establishment and otherwise, fearing that nominating Trump, let alone electing him, would doom the GOP with the Hispanics. He also notes that it hasn’t quite worked out that way, given he has support around 30%, give or take depending on the poll.
 
Even Daniel Garza, a Koch brothers minion and former Bush official said: “[Trump] starts in a much better place for reelection than when he launched his 2016 campaign. One would think immigration would be a major anchor for him, but he’s turned it into at least a push.” Even Drucker notes that Garza’s comments are quite the turnaround from what he said back in 2015, shortly after Trump launched his campaign: “His positions are indefensible. I would actually rise up against him.”
 
In any case, Drucker then continues by citing a YouGov poll that shows Trump’s job approval rating among Hispanics sits around 29% and on immigration, which is, in Drucker’s mind “presumably a tougher issue for the president with this demographic”, is at 30%. Drucker then notes that 30% is rather usual for Republicans, as around 30% of Hispanics tend to be “die-hard Republicans”, as Joe Heck, a former Nevada congressman who usually was popular with Hispanics noted.
 
And then Drucker supposedly warns Trump and conservatives that roughly 30% is “dangerously low for competitive contests”, saying that “it can leave Republicans too reliant on the white vote, the largest segment of the voting population nationally but one that is declining.”
 
But wait, didn’t Trump get 28% in 2016? And wasn’t Hillary supposed to absolutely cream Trump? Virtually every poll out there said that Hillary was going to win, so if Trump ended up winning anyway, doesn’t that mean that 30% is at least decent enough for someone like Trump?
 
What’s more, we are seeing a strong economy today with the lowest unemployment rates for Hispanics (and other demographics, but the focus is on Hispanics) that we’ve ever recorded, so Trump has that going for himself, particularly with Hispanics.
 
But then, Drucker quotes Albert Morales, a senior political director for Latino Decisions (admittedly a group I have never heard of), that typically studies Hispanic vote patterns and other things. Morales said that, according to recent internal polling, 80% of Hispanics intend to vote in 2020, as though that is a massive warning for Trump.
 
“That figure ‘is usually around 50%,’ Morales said. Republicans hope a booming economy will supersede Hispanics’ lingering reservations about Trump over his crackdown on illegal immigration and aggressive tactics to secure the border…”
 
Ok, what? This article, up to this point, was talking about how despite Trump’s tough border stance, Hispanics still support him. And now, it’s likely going to be a problem for him that he’s hoping will be superseded by a strong economy? Did Drucker start writing an entirely different article in the middle of talking about how Hispanics don’t actually distance themselves from Trump because of his strong border stance?
 
I honestly don’t understand the logic here. Back in 2016, Trump garnered a fair bit of the Hispanic vote, a typical number for Republicans to garner. Despite the fact Trump centered his entire campaign around the idea of Making America Great Again (which is somehow supposed to turn off Hispanics because apparently we can’t be happy for America and hope it does well) and securing the southern border with a great and beautiful wall, these same ideas are likely going to sink him in his reelection bid with Hispanics?
 
What’s more, Drucker went on to say: “Morales was doubtful (about Trump superseding supposed Hispanic reservation about Trump’s tough border stance, which we just established is not really there), explaining that Hispanic anger at the president’s policies evident in the midterm elections has not dissipated. ‘I think that question needs to be posed to the 40 Republicans who lost their [House] seats,’ Morales said concerning whether the economy would be enough. ‘That’s what they were relying on last cycle, but it just wasn’t enough,’ Morales said.”
 
Are these people seriously forgetting that almost all of the seats the Republicans lost in the midterms was because the incumbents conveniently retired and incumbents tend to get reelected? Had fewer, or even none of the Republicans who retired last year not decided to retire and run again, it’s entirely certain Republicans would’ve lost far less seats and maybe would’ve even retained a majority in the House, even if it was a slimmer one.
 
And let’s not forget the rather suspicious manner in which some Democrats wound up winning their races, conveniently “finding” a whole bunch of extra ballots in the trunks of people’s cars that conveniently went to the Democrat candidate and counting those ballots WELL after the polls closed and some elections should’ve been decided. (Seriously, I highly doubt the elections in Orange County, CA, which originally went to the Republicans but after some of this crap went to Democrats, were in any way legitimate).
 
The only part about that “80% of Hispanics” that intend to vote in 2020 that scares me is the high chance some of them are illegal immigrants who intend to illegally vote for the Democrats that will allow them to stay where they are and will even go as far as to allow them sanctuary even if they commit heinous crimes against Americans.
 
But as far as Trump’s reelection efforts go, there really is no good reason for him to lose, both the election and Hispanic support. There are Hispanics such as myself who HATE the fact the Left is allowing illegal immigrants to cross the border without any sort of punishment or care for the rule of law. Legal immigrants like my family hate the fact Democrats give ILLEGALS special treatment despite whatever they may do.
 
Seriously, do you remember when the trial for Kate Steinle wrapped up? Where Kate Steinle’s murderer was acquitted of all charges except for the illegal possession of a firearm? And do you remember the trial for George Zimmerman?
 
When a delinquent African American kid is tragically killed because a half-Hispanic and half-white man defended himself, people were basically up in arms when Zimmerman was found not guilty. But when a poor white girl gets shot and killed by an illegal immigrant who had been deported FIVE TIMES in a case that should’ve at the very least found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter is acquitted of almost all charges, no one bats an eyelash.
 
Illegals essentially get this message from the Democrat Party: do whatever the hell you want, even kill people, because we are going to do everything in our power to keep you here in the States and protected from law enforcement.
 
No worse form of injustice or corruption could be found than in this. Kate Steinle’s murderer gets off scot free because he’s a precious little illegal immigrant who did nothing wrong and Kate was simply dumb enough to be walking on a walkway like a weirdo.
 
Legal immigrants such as myself go through the process the right way, waiting our time, paying our dues, etc. and illegals just get to walk past the border with zero documentation and can get away with anything and the Democrats allow this? Gee, I wonder why so many Hispanics support Trump.
 
Not that I’m asking that legal immigrants get any special treatment either. Far be it from me, a conservative, to wish to receive something from the government. What I am asking for, however, is that we observe and respect the rule of law.
 
If there is one thing I disagree with Trump about is when he said something along the lines that most illegal immigrants are criminals, coming here and raping or dealing drugs or killing, etc. Most of them are not criminals. ALL OF THEM ARE! It’s in the name ILLEGAL immigrant. Even if you want to use the stupid PC version of it, “undocumented immigrant”, that still poses a legality problem. You can’t be here WITHOUT PROPER DOCUMENTATION!
 
So for those who are here illegally, I want them out. They have no RIGHT to be here. If they wish to come back in, they have to go through the proper, LEGAL process, in which case, they absolutely would have the right to be here. But until that happens, they need to get the hell out of this country.
 
And if Trump can manage to do that (of course, he’ll need the help of typically spineless Republicans, so it’s a tough road for him), then he’d garner even more Hispanic support. Because we don’t support him “despite” his tough immigration stance. We support him PRECISELY BECAUSE of his tough immigration stance. Those that fail to understand that are nothing but arrogant Leftist snobby elitists who have a seriously annoying superiority complex and an ironic “holier than thou” mindset who think they are better than the people they claim to “support”.
 
Exodus 12:49
“There shall be one law for the native and for the stranger who sojourns among you.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

As we draw closer and closer to the 2020 election cycle, with all 200 Democrats getting ready for their first debates later on this month, pollsters are running their numbers again and pitting Trump against potential 2020 Democrat matchups and, surprise surprise, he’s “trailing” all of them by a significant deficit.
 
Quinnipiac University released their first 2020 matchup poll on Tuesday which has current Democrat frontrunner former VP Joe Biden leading the President by 13 points. Biden also leads Trump 60-34 among women and 47-46 among men. White voters are also split among them, but Trump leads Biden 47-46 here.
 
Biden also leads Trump among African-American and Hispanic voters, with Biden leading Trump 85-12 among African-Americans and 58-33 among Hispanics.
 
When it comes to the other Democrats, Trump supposedly doesn’t do much better. Crazy Bernie leads Trump 51-42, Kamala Harris leads Trump 49-41, Fauxcahontas leads Trump 49-42 and the Pence-obsessed South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Cory “Not So Smarticus” Booker lead Trump 47-42.
 
Non-college educated white voters are the only demographic where Trump seems to have a very solid lead against every Democrat candidate.
 
But looking at this poll as a whole, one might think that it’s over for Trump, right? That he’s going to get trounced. He’s finished. Done. Caput.
 
Well, there is a very good reason as to why I am so skeptical about polls that show these kinds of numbers, especially from Quinnipiac University. Well, reasons, not just one, but one major one.
 
Despite the fact it seems like Trump’s campaign will be swiftly defeated come November of 2020, there is one big factor at play here: this very same poll had Hillary Clinton winning by EVEN BIGGER MARGINS THAN THEY SHOW FOR BIDEN!
 
In this recent poll, Quinnipiac shows Biden leading Trump by 13 points. A good lead for Biden if that were to be the truth whatsoever. But the problem here comes in the fact that back in May of 2015, so basically the same time four years ago, Quinnipiac had Clinton leading Trump by 18 points (50-32).
 
What’s more, even among demographics like African-Americans and Hispanics, Hillary held more of the support than Biden does. Again, Biden supposedly has 85% of the African-American support. But Hillary had 88%. And when it comes to Hispanics, Trump’s numbers today (33%) are higher than they were in 2016 (28%).
 
So considering how astronomically wrong Quinnipiac wound up being in 2016, this current poll shouldn’t really elicit confidence for Trump haters. I imagine there will at least be some fairly rational Democrat voters who will remember how much of a “lead” Hillary had over Trump in 2016 and will be at least relatively skeptical about polls that show such wide margins between the two candidates. And yes, a decent portion of the Democrats will still likely be blaming the Russians for 2016 and will likely claim they helped Trump win re-election if he were to do so, but I am giving these Democrat voters some benefit of the doubt here. I don’t think they are all quite so stupid as to take these polls at face value, especially considering they’re even lower than Hillary’s were.
 
Now, that was only one of the components that leads me to be skeptical about these numbers. Not only was Quinnipiac SUPER wrong about the 2016 matchup, but these numbers are way too distant (in terms of time) from the actual election for them to hold any sort of meaning. You can run hypothetical matchups for any race even beyond the next one and that will matter very little.
 
And while we knew fairly well that Hillary was going to be the nominee in 2016, the answer is not quite so clear this time around. Sure, Biden is leading the other Democrats by a good bit but you never really know. Like I’ve said before in other articles, Hillary was in Joe’s place in 2007, leading the Democrat field, before she was beaten by Obama. So just because Biden is leading right now doesn’t mean he is a lock for the nomination in the first place.
 
This far out from the election, what these types of polls say don’t really matter all that much. I’ve even said the same of polls that show Trump winning. Like I always say, we’re still less than two years away from the election. A lot of things can happen between then and now and the vast majority of the things that will most heavily influence the election will not occur until a few weeks before the election takes place.
 
If the economy is roaring just as well, if not better, by November of next year, and if Trump can make the focus of the election about the economy as well, then he’ll almost certainly win. If you recall an article I wrote from March, I said that economists calculated Trump’s chances of victory and how many electoral and popular votes he is likely to garner (at least a percentage for the popular vote) and had him winning with a margin of 294 electoral votes, meaning he is likely to receive 416 electoral votes total (if the economists are correct, of course). In the history of the United States, there have been 14 elections where the total number of electoral votes was 538. 416 would be the sixth highest number in the 538 system, with only George H. W. Bush (who was riding on Reagan’s coattails), Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan twice getting more electoral votes.
 
So as far as the Quinnipiac poll (or any other poll) goes this early in the election cycle, to claim that Biden will likely beat Trump is mostly a pipe-dream. Again, Hillary’s numbers were far better than Biden is showing, had supposedly strong numbers all the way to the morning of election day where she was supposed to have like a 99% chance of winning and then wound up getting stomped.
 
What exactly will happen on election day only God knows. Of course, I pray to Him that He will allow Trump to be reelected, but as of right now, no one on Earth knows what will happen for certain.
 
With the way things are going, particularly considering Trump’s approval rating (which even Quinnipiac is showing a decent number at 42%, one point shy of his record in that poll) and given the current state of the economy, where even CNN’s polls show roughly 70% say it’s good, then there really is no reason for Trump to come out of the election a loser, especially considering he’s running on a strong economy and every Democrat is running on “we hate Trump”, which is hardly a unifying or beneficial message for the country.
 
Philippians 4:6
“Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

As NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio joins the other 2000 candidates to run for President of the United States on the Democrat ticket, President Donald Trump is enjoying the best poll numbers he has had as POTUS.
 
According to a recent Zogby poll, President Trump is enjoying a job approval rating of 51%, the highest in his tenure as president in this poll. It is also higher than Barack Obama’s was at the same point in his own presidency, which was at 48%.
 
But that’s not the only thing that is great news for The Don. The poll also found, rather interestingly, that 51% of people in the age range of 18-29 approve of the job he is doing as president while 53% in the age range of 25-34 approve of him. In other words, a little over half of MILLENNIALS are approving of the job Trump is doing as President.
 
Zogby largely attributes his rise in numbers to the strong economic news we’ve had as of late with record-breaking stock market numbers, consistently low unemployment where there are virtually more jobs available than there are people to fill them, as well as consistently strong GDP growth.
 
Zogby writes: “President Trump’s job approval rating has seen a post Mueller report boost! We called it a few weeks ago. But that’s not the complete story as to why the president has reached a peak in his job approval rating. Trump is also riding high on positive economic news – a record high stock market, low unemployment, and solid GDP growth at home.”
 
Yes, they also attribute the Mueller report finding no collusion and no obstruction to Trump’s rise in his numbers, though they don’t quite count for everything. I hold the belief that those who completely bought into the idea that Trump colluded with Russia will never change their minds about the guy no matter what happens. Even when their supposed “savior” was supposed to deliver the goods, and failed to do so, they still hold firm to the belief that Trump colluded with Russia despite no evidence having popped up at any point in the two years of this “investigation” and despite Mueller’s findings that there was no collusion and flimsy, but ultimately not-good-enough, evidence that the POTUS obstructed justice (complaining about the unfairness of a so-called “investigation” is not obstruction, FYI).
 
The people who bought the collusion story hook, line and sinker were never going to be convinced that Trump was doing a good job as President. However, the vast majority of people, I believe, are completely exhausted of the entire narrative and are simply happy that there was no foul-play during the elections, at least not enough to actually alter the results (Russia did still meddle a bit, but even Rod Rosenstein said no votes were altered in the election, so the results of the election were not altered either).
 
But while the Mueller report finding no collusion or obstruction certainly helps Trump in the long-run, especially on the campaign trail when Democrats are entirely likely to still peddle the idea that he colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election (and will likely peddle the idea that he will try to do so again for 2020, especially if he wins), what really helps Trump’s approval numbers is the fact that “the new normal” of the Obama administration, 1% GDP growth, was absolute garbage and not a new standard which we would have to get used to.
 
Trump has shown that capitalist policies like low taxes, deregulation, etc. heavily boost the economy and provide millions of new jobs for people who were out of work, either seeking it or giving up on seeking it.
 
The boost in Millennial support is part of that, considering they actually have jobs now, at least many of them do. Rush Limbaugh theorized that the reason Bernie Sanders was so hot back in 2016 but not quite so much now is due to the fact that under Obama, these Millennials were out of work and Bernie was promising them a socialist paradise where they wouldn’t have to worry at all about that because the government would take care of every problem under the sun (seriously, I saw a Bernie Sanders poster on Facebook that said he would solve racism in America).
 
Millennials saw that they were in a poor financial situation, being the first generation likely ever to not be expected to do better than their parents’ generation. But instead of recognizing they were in such a poor state because of 8 years of Leftist, socialist policies from the Obama administration, they were led to believe that capitalism was the culprit, since there are those who are billionaires and were led to believe that under capitalism, there are winners and losers. They were led to believe the billionaires and rich people of America came to that sort of wealth by screwing the little guy and stealing from them. And who can blame them? Obama had been saying the same thing about America in general, about how America stole from other countries to build itself as a super power.
 
All a massive crock, but the Millennials believed it. But now, after only 2 years of a Trump economy that is so good Obama is envious about it and tries to claim it for himself, Millennials are noticing that they have jobs, their paychecks are increasing, they don’t have to pay as much in taxes (depending on where they live, at least) and are overall not quite in the same tight financial situation that they were in under Obama.
 
Now, despite all of that, many are still socialist and still support Bernie. He is, after all, in second place in a race that involves 20 other equally-as-Leftist candidates as him, with the only person ahead of him being the former Vice President to the former President many Millennials were indoctrinated to love (despite the fact he was the one who was constantly screwing them over financially). So while Bernie is not quite as hot as he was in 2016, he is not quite out of it yet either.
 
I don’t know who will be the Democrat nominee (despite what I have written previously, it looks like Joe Biden will be the nominee, but Hillary was in his place in 2007 before she was beaten by Obama, so you never know) but Bernie’s brand of socialism is still attractive enough to get him a decent place in the polls despite how many more Democrats are running.
 
But in any case, there is a majority of Millennials now who come to approve of the job Trump is doing as President, especially when it comes to the economy.
 
Zogby also reported that 58% of men approved of Trump while 48% of women approved of him. And while one will immediately notice the big difference in numbers between the two genders and claim that Trump is unpopular with women because “he’s a pig” or “he’s a misogynist” note that the number of women who approve of him is, while still a minority, pretty high, just not as high as the number of men who approve of him. Nearly half of women approve of Trump. Put that into a headline and watch as the fake news media goes haywire over the news.
 
When it comes to suburban voters, 48% approve of Trump while 60% of rural voters approve. That makes sense considering that rural voters tend to be more conservative and Trump’s economy really helps rural areas.
 
Zogby also added that, “One of the demographics to give Trump a very good job performance rating were self-identified social networkers (59% approve/40% disapprove – people who engage with social media)… The president also made strides with college educated voters (55% approve/45% disapprove), and saw support increase slightly with non-college educated voters (47% approve/50% disapprove).”
 
These numbers are fairly interesting to me. When it comes to the “self-identified social networkers” I don’t exactly know what to make of that. Who are “self-identified social networkers”? Does that mean people who use social media? Or people who have a heavy presence on social media like Ben Shapiro, Laura Ingraham, etc.? I imagine the former, which is still rather impressive, considering that the common belief is that the majority of social media users are at least Left-leaning and utterly Trump-hating (social media companies certainly want people to hate Trump and conservatives/conservatism).
 
And when it comes to the college educated voters vs. non-college educated voters, that one also surprises me. Considering college is the place where education goes to die and indoctrination is heavily engrained in young people’s minds, such strong approval of Trump is surprising.
 
But regardless, as Zogby says, the increase in approval rating is likely due to strong economic numbers. Numbers that you simply do not see under socialistic policies.
 
We must thank God for these great news and continually pray to Him that these numbers stay strong like this, improve, and that He would ordain for Trump to win re-election in 2020.
 
Philippians 4:13
“I can do all things through him who strengthens me.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

That can perhaps be counted as yet another one of my “no, duh” titles, but it is important to note just why I am talking about this now. After all, Rush Limbaugh has had his show for 30 years and has been the “Big Voice on the Right” for pretty much all of these years, but I do not think I have ever specifically talked about him or things he said.
 
Obviously, there is not much point, as one can listen to his 3-hour-long radio show any day of the week and find what he said himself (unless you work for the MSM and can’t stand to listen to him and have to rely on what other people say he said). However, he sometimes appears on other shows, notably with Sean Hannity, Chris Wallace and other Fox News anchors. Earlier this week, El Rushbo appeared on Fox News’ “The Story with Martha MacCallum” to discuss a number of things ranging from the 2020 presidential election and Democrat candidates to the Mueller report and investigation.
 
Let’s begin with what he said about the Democrats’ chances at beating Trump in 2020: “Here’s the thing: Joe Biden is probably the best chance they’ve got, and he doesn’t have a chance. They’re probably… I mean, Joe Biden and Crazy Bernie and Mayor Pete? I mean, you’ve got three white guys, two of them are brontosauruses from Jurassic Park, and that isn’t gonna sit well with the rest of this party which has gone so far left. You know, Biden’s putting off this announcement. I don’t know how badly he really wants this, and you have to really want this if you’re gonna have any chance of winning it.”
 
I’ve already written an article about how I seriously doubt that the Democrats would nominate Joe Biden for those precise reasons. Of course, I could be wrong, but those reasons are still very important to the Leftist Democrat base. For the last few years, old, white people have been victimized, harassed and attacked simply for being old and white. Jussie Smollett blamed white people for his hoax of an attack, the Catholic Covington kids were attacked for being white and Trump supporters, there are hundreds of instances where a white person was attacked for being white (and/or supporting Trump). So for the Democrats to have a nominee that is old, white and male is not going to jive with many on their base. Whether or not that means they would skip voting on election day, I cannot say, but the fact Joe is an old, white male is going to be a problem for him because his party hates that sort of person now (and I believe secularists would call that “karma”).
 
Rush was then asked if Trump is “vulnerable” to Democrats like Elizabeth Warren, particularly when she promises “free” stuff like college debt forgiveness and other things.
 
Rush said: “’Fauxcahontas’ is not gonna be the nominee. But, you know, these Democrats are all in the process of trying to out-leftist or out-liberal each other, and they’re in a contest of who can give away the most. But with Elizabeth Warren, forgiving college loans – forgiving that debt – and then promising free college and Medicare for All and a Green New Deal? Why is anybody gonna need to go to college? Because nobody’s gonna need a job, because the Democrats are gonna be giving everybody a universal basic income. So why does any of this matter? None of this is real. None of this can happen. This is disinformation. I think it’s an indication of just how little they think of their own voters, that their own voters don’t even want to work. They don’t even want to achieve. They don’t want to pursue excellence. They just want to have their hands out and vote for whoever is gonna give them the most?... What a way to ruin a life. Nobody would raise kids this way.”
 
And he’s completely right (I know, what a shock). Back in the beginning of April, I wrote an article about how college students support socialism unless they are affected by it negatively, such as redistributing the good grades they were getting to give to someone else who was not doing as well. College kids strive (for the most part) to get good grades because they want the best scores and the best chance to earn a degree and hopefully get a good job (even if that’s not exactly the way things work now because just about everyone is getting a degree and the value of a degree is diminished due to its surplus. Supply and demand works in a lot of ways).
 
Most college kids try to work hard to earn good grades and don’t expect to simply be given good grades. In real life, most people work the same way. They work hard at their jobs to hopefully get a promotion or a raise. And what the Democrats think of their own base is that they are all lazy and need the government’s help to even stay alive. It’s disrespectful, even if some of them are this way.
 
There is value in hard work. And even if a lot of parents don’t teach that value to their kids, the kids will come to understand it eventually once they start working themselves. Again, with those college kids, they all understood the value of working hard for their grades: they worked and studied hard and receive good grades for it.
 
That’s the way things work, even in a society where the value of hard work is not necessarily taught anymore by parents. Those who are successful work hard, whether that success means millions and billions of dollars or getting an A on a term paper.
 
But anyway, let’s get back to the Dean of the Rush Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies. Rush was then asked about Hillary Clinton saying Trump should be “indicted” on obstruction of justice concerning the Mueller investigation, he said: “For Hillary – you talk about irony – for Hillary Clinton to be talking about impeaching Donald Trump… Hillary Clinton needs to be investigated, she needs to be indicted, and she needs to be in jail, and many of her co-conspirators in this whole sordid affair, which amounted to nothing more than a silent coup to overturn the election results of 2016.”
 
“Hillary Clinton demanding that Trump – you talk about sour grapes, this is a woman that’s been rejected by the American people twice, rejected by her party in 2008. She had to rig the primaries against Crazy Bernie in 2016 to get the nomination. [Hillary] is the last person who ought to be listened to about what ought to happen to Donald Trump. She hasn’t accomplished anything anywhere near what Donald Trump has accomplished. She is in no position to sit here and say what she saw in the Mueller – well, she can say it, she’s an American. But she doesn’t have any credibility on any of this as far as I am concerned. And I’m not alone here.”
 
And he’s right in many ways. Hillary is in no position to be saying anything here about obstruction, considering her own HUSBAND was impeached for obstruction of justice, which the media tried to bury and say it was about “sex” and Monica Lewinsky. And without even mentioning the fact that SHE IS THE ONE WHO COLLUDED WITH FOREIGN AGENTS TO RIG THE ELECTION IN HER FAVOR!
 
America’s Real Anchorman then continued, talking specifically about the Mueller probe: “there was never any evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia. The collusion, as I said, was Hillary, the DNC, and the Russians via Steele. But the Russians – when Mueller announced the indictments of the Russian troll farm – actually it was Rosenstein that went out and announced them. And nobody paid any attention to this, but he said at the end of the announcement, ‘Nothing in these indictments suggests a single vote was changed. Nothing suggests the outcome of any election was changed. No American is named in the indictment had anything to do with it.’”
 
“This was not even an investigation of Trump. What it was was an attempt to overthrow the 2016 elections… unelected people came close to actually pulling off what is a coup. And it should never, ever happen again.”
 
Once again, he is right in many things. The only thing I would add is that Mueller was not actually all that close to pulling off a coup. He was at the beginning, or at least was closer, but never actually all that close. What do I mean? Well, not to give anyone any ideas, but generally what is necessary for a coup is unity.
 
What do I mean by that? Well, there has to be unity from the people that want the coup and people outside of that group. Mueller and his special counsel and some people in the intelligence community wanted Trump gone. But not everyone in the intelligence community agreed.
 
Mueller was not above lying on his report. If he wanted to, he could’ve alleged things and charged Trump with b.s. He could’ve lied, but he didn’t. Why? Because he didn’t have the full support of the intelligence community. He wasn’t assured security for lying, which he would’ve needed, as he would’ve had to testify in front of Congress.
 
He was not sure he would be protected, so he did not lie, but still not telling the full truth either.
 
Beyond that, no coup can ever actually happen without the military. And that is where Mueller was doomed almost from the beginning.
 
I mentioned earlier that Mueller was at least closer to pulling off a coup earlier in the investigation than later on. What I meant by that is he could’ve gotten the military on his side (not all that likely, but certainly was possible). But when he destroyed General Flynn, he also destroyed his chances at getting the military on his side. And a coup has to have military force. Sure, the FBI and CIA have guns, but guns don’t beat tanks and planes and helicopters.
 
A silent coup was not going to succeed ever. Every coup that has ever happened in history has been a military one. Lenin had his Red Army to fight against the Czar’s White Army. Multiple Latin American countries have gone through coups where the military was used to usurp the sitting government. Argentina is particularly known for that sort of thing, having a history of successful and failed coups.
 
Rush is right in as far as this was definitely a silent coup, an attempt to overturn the 2016 elections, but that was not going to be successful without the support of the military. And that in itself was going to be insanely difficult even without destroying Flynn. The U.S. has never had an actual military coup. There is no precedent for it and it was unlikely the military would’ve just gotten on Mueller’s side even without destroying Flynn. But him destroying Flynn made it certain that Mueller was not going to be successful in destroying Trump.
 
Granted, can’t really blame the dirty cop here. He was not given a specific crime to investigate, but rather a person. I don’t doubt he fully expected to find SOMETHING that Trump did that can at least be somewhat considered to be illegal. And while he found things that people connected to him were illegal, Trump was pretty squeaky clean.
 
At best, Mueller got allegations of having an affair with a pornstar. Immoral, if true (which I doubt), but not exactly illegal.
 
This was indeed a silent coup against Trump, but one cannot overstate the magnificent failure that it was. At no point did Mueller actually get even close to beating Trump. Matter of fact, as time went on, his chances were diminishing. AG Barr telling him to wrap things up certainly did him no favors.
 
But anyway, it’s interviews like these that showcase how intelligent Rush Limbaugh is (apart from his show, of course). Kudos to Rush for speaking the truth and backing it up with facts.
 
And also thank the Lord that He protects Trump every single day. Let us continue praying to Him for his safety in every aspect conceivable.
 
Isaiah 54:17
“No weapon that is fashioned against you shall succeed, and you shall confute every tongue that rises against you in judgment. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord and their vindication from Me, declares the Lord.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.