Important headlines for November 29th:

Important headlines for November 29th:   

Bottom Line: These are the stories you don't want to miss (but probably would if I didn't find them for you)...   

Excerpt: Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight calculated after the 2016 election that of the nation’s 3,113 counties, not even one in ten were actual battlegrounds, decided by less than 10 percent; in 1992 there were more than 1,000. Meanwhile the blowout counties decided by more than 50 points — went from 93 to 1,196. The share of voters living in extreme landslide counties has quintupled. All politics has never been so local. 

This is a highly instructive point regarding the magnification of political extremes. I'd argue the greatest magnifier of political extremes today as compared with times previous is the advent of social media, the endless quantities of online newsish organizations and prevalence of 24/7 news outlets competing for oxygen. We've seen the online and social media influence escalate every preexisting issue from bullying to harassment to politics. Right behind those influences though, I'd argue for the point(s) established with that research. Most of us politically have become a reflection of where we live. That's often a byproduct of demographics, economics and lifestyle. What's become increasingly lost in this political transformation of blue and red communities is pragmatism and checks and balances. As communities have become increasingly polarized politically but lacking political balance, they've been increasingly influenced by radical elements within their party pushing people ever farther to those extremes in their communities. In my view, the lack of diversity of thought, in conjunction with the hyper-partisanship is creating a dynamic that's highly unfortunate.  

As a right-leaning person in South Florida I understand very well what it's like to fight the uphill battle of political opposition. Too often valid concerns impacting all residents are ignored by local politicians because they believe (and unfortunately are often proven correct) that they can ignore those of us who attempt to hold them accountable, want transparency with our tax dollars and differ with their ideas. Those aren't ideological concerns yet they're treated as such.  

Though it's still extremely absurd talking about an election ten months into a Presidency, it happens pretty much daily for those on the left so what the heck, I'll point something out once again. "If it's the economy stupid" still (and there's no research to suggest otherwise), Donald Trump is the prohibitive favorite to win re-election. It's too early to waste time with hard research to create real stats for you at this stage - however he's already 60%+ likely to win re-election simply by being the incumbent President. If the economy is growing at 3%+ in three years that number will jump to 90%+. If that seems odd or unlikely to you... I'm rather certain you're still shocked that Hillary Clinton didn't win the election. That's the difference between research, reality and conventional wisdom that's anything but wise.  

Yeah, how's all of that "free love" working out for us now? 

Sponsored Content

Sponsored Content