The 2024 Presidential Election: Who Showed Up and Upset the Status Quo's Applecart?

86.7% to 13.2%. That's the percentage Donald Trump defeated Kamala Harris among early voters, In the end, the Electoral College total was 312 to 226 (popular vote percentages were 50.1% for Trump and 48.3% for Harris) It's not what the political Establishment expected. It's not what the not-so-subtle partisan news media predicted. It's not what the Left or limousine liberals hoped for either. Some of the celebrity types even threatened to leave the country if the results weren't to their liking. I guess that was supposed to be some sort of implied threat.

All the "big names" came out---Barack and Michelle Obama, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Oprah Winfrey, Whoopie Goldberg and the rest of the "The View", George Clooney---and even Taylor Swift to name a few. I guess their opinions weren't as important as they thought they were.

 Even the debates were a farce, at least as seen by the voters who bothered to turn in, further embarrassing the news media credibility and mocking its impartiality. Fact-checking one individual but not the other? Turning off the "mic" on just one in mid-sentence but not both? Giving extra camera to one candidate while the other is still speaking, plus the innuendos? Hardly "fair and balanced". I can see why some call it "soft propaganda". 

Some blamed President Joe Biden for waiting too long before withdrawing and thus giving Harris too brief a time to mount a properly organized campaign. But if so, then the blame needs to be shared by the Democrat Party for allowing an obviously ill Biden to be nominate in the first place, and then for encouraging him to stay the course. Biden has been in mental decline for much of his four years, becoming a running joke among foreign leaders, the international media, and a headshaking embarrassment to Americans of all political stripe.

A few have said that President Biden should have stepped down and allowed Harris to assume the mantle of President. It would have given her a certain clout to be running as the incumbent. It would have given her an opportunity to flex her presidential muscle, perhaps even getting some of ideas passed into law. 

At the very least, the Democrats could point to having America's first female president and Harris would have at least achieved something of note aside from having the worst consistent approval rating of any Vice President of either party in U.S. history.

Senator Bernie Sanders made a good point when he said "the Democratic Party left the working class. Now, the working class has left the Democratic Party". One voter in Pennsylvania who seemed to sum up much of the sentiment of Trump crossover voters when he quipped "It wasn't so much that I liked Trump more as it was that I liked Harris less". 

Many voters found her shallow, pandering, and basically unqualified to be president. Some remarked that they didn't like the fact that they didn't have a say in who the Democratic nominee was after President Biden withdrew under extreme pressure because of the decline in his cognitive health.

Maybe rather than being nominated as a "buy one get one free" ticket or allowing the presidential nominee (in truth, the party powerbrokers) choose the Vice Presidential nominee, the slot should be voted on separated by the party membership. But protest votes and finger pointing by disgruntled insiders and a partisan media aside, who upside their apple cart? Who peed in the Left's Cheerios? Let's find out.

 Early analysis of the race was a key factor in Trump's victory. Trump's advisors went back and reexamined who were their core supporters from his 2016 and 2020 races.  The majority are primarily  white male, mostly seniors, active duty military or retired veterans, law enforcement, business owners. Most are middle class with good representation among the working class and upper middle class.

They're strong advocates of the 2nd amendment. Dedicated nationalists ("America first"), and opposed to a open borders policy as well as to amnesty. They want a secure southern border, strict regulation on migration in general, and deportation of all illegal immigrants currently living in the United States (with some six to ten million embedded in the U.S., that would prove unlikely).

Trump supporters tend to be religious, mostly Christian fundamentalists. They oppose abortion, although they're split on whether the ban should across the board or allow for some exceptions such as rape or incest. They back legislation calling the adoption of English as the official national language.

Many advocate for the reduction of government bureaucracy and eliminating "red tape" which hinders business (especially small businesses).  Some want to do away with various government agencies like the Department of Education, the Department of Commerce, the IRS, Department of Energy, the EPA, and any other agency not specifically called for in the founding documents.

That's the core which has stayed loyal to Trump. That has been his base. But, would that hold true in 2024?  The 2024 election was a near record in voter turnout, with voters reportedly standing in lines for hours in some cases. According to pre-election polling, taken in late October by Gallup, 70% of voters said they were looking forward to casting their vote (70% of Republicans and conservative leaning voters and 67% of Democrat and liberal leaning voters). An estimated 54% said they intended to vote early.

Voter outreach was far more extensive than in previous elections. 58% of Democrats said they were contacted by someone in Harris campaign and asked to support their candidate. That compares 40% of Trump supporters who were contacted by a representative of the Trump team. 25% of registered Republicans said they were contacted by the Harris camp while 31% of Democrats said they were contacted by Trump supporters (as an aside, the polls excluded Independent and third party voters).  

The majority of Trump supporters over the age of 45, were 57% of men and 48% of women. Harris received 51% of the 45+ women's vote and 42% of the over 45 men's vote. The big surprise was the voters age 18 to 44, which includes the Millennials and GenZ. 53% of the males went for Trump compared to 45% for Harris. On the women's side, 44% voted for Trump while 55% backed Kamala.

Historically, the 18 to 40 age bracket has been strongly liberal (or at least, anti-Republican). This group---male and female---is the one we've heard so much about advocating democratic socialism, Communism, or anarchy (although a large minority is said to support libertarianism). Although women turned out for Harris, their numbers were slightly lower than expected whereas the men were backing Trump in strong numbers. If we compare these with numbers with those of the 2020 Presidential election we see just how significant there are.

In 2020, former Vice President Joe Biden received 60% of the vote from those 18 to 29 and 52% of voters between ages 30 and 44. When broken down by gender, Biden got 57% of the women's vote and 45% of the men's. Trump, by contrast, got just 39% of the vote from those in the 18 to 29 bracket and but 50% of those 30 to 44. Trump also received 51% of the vote from those 45+. When it came to gender, 42% of women voted for Trump in 2020 while he got 53% of the men's vote.

When it came to race, Harris picked up 83% of the Black vote which tends to vote lockstep Democrat. Trump earned 16% of the Black vote. In 2020, 87% of the Black vote went to Biden while 12% voted for "The Donald". 55% of the Latino vote also went to Kamala along with 55% of mixed or other race. 43% of Latinos vote in favor of Trump along with 41% of mixed or other race. When it came to white voters, Harris garnered 43% of their vote while 56% went for Trump.

In looking at the 2020 race, 58% voted for Trump compared to 41% for Biden. For Latinos, it was 65% for Biden and just 32% for Trump. Among Black voters in 2020, 12% voted for Trump with Biden getting 87%. Asians, who tend to be traditional, gave Biden the thumbs up with 61% of their vote. 34% said "yes" to Trump. Lastly, among mixed race results, only 41% sided with "The Donald" and 55% went with Biden.

The next category we want to examine is education. Among those who graduated from college gave Kamala Harris 56% of their vote and Trump just 43%. Voters without a college degree (as well as those who didn't graduate from high school or may have a technical/trade education) voted for Trump 56% to 43%. This group tends to be blue collar or middle class, as well as some small business owners. In 2020 Trump won the same bracket.  

Another important demographic is location. Who did better in suburbs versus the city and the hinterlands of rural America? Kamala Harris pulled in the vote among city dwellers with 53% of the vote while 35% voted for Trump.  Out in the suburbs, 47% of voters got behind Trump. A majority of 52% cast their vote for Harris. What about in America's farmlands? A strong 63% stood with "The Donald" compared to 35% for the current Vice President, Kamala Harris.   

When it came to gender out in the suburbs (irrespective of race), we find that 57% went for Kamala Harris. Trump got only 42%. Among guys, the story was reversed. 46% supported Harris while 52% backed Trump. The results here shouldn't come as a big surprise.  Most of us know that the majority of liberals and those registered Democrat tend to live in cities while many conservatives and Republicans often live in the rural farmlands of America.

 The tossup was in suburbia. This is Middle America. It's where the "America Dream" lives, tucked away in working class and middle income neighborhoods while the well-to-do are secluded in their gated communities. By and large, Middle America is traditionalist and typically leans conservative, though it's not rock solid conservative. It has some liberal tendencies too. It's not particularly fond of extremes from either side.

Most of the kids attend public schools while both parents work full time (some have to hold down multiple jobs just to make ends meet). In the 1980's we'd call them "latch key kids".  Much our country's veterans live in Middle America too. This is where you'll tend to find small business owners and factory workers. Many of whom are either members of unions or come from historically union families, which begs the question---who did best among union households?

According to a 2023 survey, 59% of union members were registered Democrat, and yet 39% intended to vote Republican. A October 14, 2024 poll by Pew revealed that 50% of union households surveyed said they would vote for Kamala Harris. 43% intended to vote for Trump while 6% planned to vote for a third party candidate. These are numbers which would have been unheard of just a few years ago.

So, what happened? The reasons Donald Trump won are varied. He was better at identifying his core base and better at persuading those who leaned in his direction. He delivered a more clear and articulate message. Vice President Harris was seen as not being a legitimate candidate. No one voted for her to be the Democratic nominee for President. She wasn't "their" choice.

 Harris was seen as a stop gap because President Joe Biden was falling apart and everyone on the Left failed to act in time. She offered platitudes instead of realistic goals that differed from Biden's failed policies. She appeared at times confused as she tried to appease everyone, and was often caught talking out both sides of her mouth. Her campaign was unorganized and unsure of its candidate or direction.

Another factor, which will undoubtedly be ignored is the news media. The news media's role is provide unbiased and objective news. Over the past decade (or longer), the news media has devolved into a partisan propaganda machine devoid of credibility. They've spent years doing everything possible to discredit Trump and aiding the Status Quo in its quest of character assassination (which likely contributed to the two attempts at the real thing). Their partisan bias was all too obvious. Too bad for them that the American Public isn't as ignorant or naive as they think we are. 

Lastly, American voters are tired of the same old bait and switch political game that's played every election cycle. They are tired of broken promises, condescending platitudes, and seeing the can kicked down the road and into their children's and grandchildren's laps rather solving the problem now. We've had enough of their bipartisan lies.

 We want our country back from the neo-fascist corporate elite who've hijacked our Republic. Trump, like him or despised him, represents the "outsider"; someone willing and able to challenge the corrupt Status quo for the soul of America, and it seems that most Americans are with him.   

 

Thank you for reading Another Opinion! We hope you enjoyed this article and will pass it along. Please don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly, please "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps beat the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Please find below the links we consulted in researching this article. 

 

How 5 key demographic groups voted in 2024: AP VoteCast

 

Gallup: More Than Half of U.S. Votes Likely Cast BeforeElection Day

Roper/Cornell: How Groups Voted in 2020

Key facts about union members and the 2024 election

With the 2024 Presidential Election Approaching, Is Biden Trying To Pick A Fight With Iran?

Americans like a strong leader. Something no one has ever accused Biden of being. It's not surprising then that as we go into the 2024 Presidential Election, Joe Biden is  perhaps the weakest incumbent in recent U.S. history. His approval ratings are the lowest of any president over the past 15 years. Even former president, Donald Trump, has an approval rating of 75% among Republicans, despite the bipartisan Establishment's best (or worst) efforts to destroy his character.  So, what's Biden to do?

Traditionally, America has never liked  to "switch horses mid-stream"  during a war or other national crisis, and that's what Mr. Biden is hoping for. In fact, he's counting on it. Biden has intentionally put U.S. military forces directly in harm's way in order to virtually guarantee to provoke a crisis with the radical Houthi in Yemen. The Houthi, along with other terrorist groups including ISIS/ISIL, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, the Taliban, Boko Harem, and others are believed to be actively supported by America's arch-nemesis, Iran

It's worth mentioning that there are approximately 100,000 members of the Houthi. They control roughly two thirds of  the most populated areas in Yemen. Hezbollah, which is most active in southern Lebanon, numbers to about 100,000 as well with roughly 60,000 full time and part time  fighters.  Boko Harem, which operates mainly in Nigeria, Chad, northern Cameroon, and Mali, is much smaller with roughly 15,000  followers.

No one knows for sure how many members of Al Qaeda are left. During the 20 year war in Afghanistan, thousands of so-called "freedom fighters" came from surrounding areas to take part in fight against the "Great Satan" (aka the U.S.). Best estimates indicate that as many as 20,000 of these "freedom fighters" were killed or seriously wounded. Currently it's believed that Al Qaeda/Al Nusra have about 3000 members.  

ISIS/ISIL came into being as a spinoff of Al Qaeda which they saw as too moderate. The United Nations has previously reported that volunteers from as many as 80 countries have ventured from their homeland to join ISIS (many were self recruited via the internet. ISIS has been unique among the terrorist organizations in its technological sophistication).

According to UN and U.S. intelligence reports, ISIS/ISIL may have had as many as 200,000 followers at one point. While many have killed, wounded, or simply drifted away, ISIS/ISIL still remains a potent force, especially in Afghanistan and parts of Syria which it has declared to be part of the "Islamic State". Nevertheless, best estimates put the number of active fighters at around 15,000 - 20,000.   

Behind all these organizations stands Iran, the archenemy of the United States since the Hostage Crisis of 1979 and the overthrow of the Shah. America, via the CIA, had previously overthrown the center-left government of Mohammad Mosaddegh, in 1953 and replaced it with Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, a secular, pro-Western and very conservative autocratic.  

However, in 1979, the Shah, as he was known, was overthrown by the followers of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Out went the Shah and a secular Iran and in its place Iran became an extreme theocratic country. All traces of equality and secular democracy went out the door. During the takeover, the radical Revolutionary Guard seized 52 U.S. embassy workers. They were constantly threatened with being murdered.

President Jimmy Carter authorized a rescue attempt which was poorly planned, poorly executed, and ultimately failed.  After 444 days, the hostages were finally freed as soon as Ronald Reagan was sworn in as president. Ever since, the United States has been trying to pick a fight with Iran.  Iran, on the other hand, has been attempting to exert its influence throughout the region, and has made repeated threats to destroy Israel (aka "the little Satan). To help accomplish this, Iran has sponsored  terrorists groups throughout the Middle East and beyond.       

All of these various terrorist groups have tend to subscribe to a intense hatred of the United States, Israel, and the West. This includes our democratic ideals such as religious and gender equality, free speech, free choice, and so forth. Some of these groups would love to prohibit music of all genres, dancing, singing, alcohol and drugs all types, smoking, or swimming just as an example.

Women may not be uncovered, nor can they vote, speak out, go anywhere without a male escort, drive, or even be educated. Gays in all their varieties are considered an "abomination". As such, they are to be killed without hesitation.  

President Biden previously sent two U.S. naval carrier strike forces, led by the USS Gerald Ford and USS Dwight Eisenhower, to the eastern Mediterranean and parked them off the coast of Gaza (the British dispatched a carrier strike force as well as part of the united show of force).  Officially, our presence was to "monitor" the situation between the Israelis and its ongoing operations in Gaza against the terrorist group Hamas.   

However, that role almost immediately changed from one of neutral monitoring to active participation as the U.S. has repeatedly intercepted missiles and attack drones sent by the Houthi in Yemen. Thus far about a dozen missiles and around 21 armed drones have been intercepted.

On Biden's orders, planes from the U.S. carriers made several strikes on Houthi compounds in Yemen,  resulting in several Houthi rebels and Yemeni civilians being killed and six wounded. That action has provoked a series of massive protests throughout Yemen as a violation of Yemeni territorial sovereignty.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon announced in early January that the USS Gerald Ford strike group would be returning home. It will be replaced by the USS Bataan, an amphibious assault ship and centerpiece of a Marine centered Amphibious Assault Group capable of delivering 1,687 Marines anywhere they're needed. In this case, Israel.  It also has a impressive complement of attack helicopters and short-hop attack aircraft such as the F35B Lightning II and the AV-8B Harrier II.

The USS Mesa Verda, a amphibious transport ship with a complement of 700 officers and enlisted personnel (of which 550 are Marines) , and USS Carter Hall, a amphibious dock landing ship with a crew of 24 officers, 397 enlisted sailors and about 500 Marines, make up the remaining complement of replacement ships. 

As an aside, the USS Bataan was used in the 2020 targeted killing of Iranian Major General Qasem Soleimani of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard and commander of the Quds Force, which I'm sure hasn't go unnoticed by Tehran's military leadership. In addition, in 2008/9, the Bataan and Peleliu  were secretly used as prison ships to hold suspected terrorists.

As if intentionally trying to makes matters worse, Biden sent a private message to Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi advising that the U.S. was "prepared" for any actions the Iranian government cared to undertake, in what can only be characterized as a clear and unambiguous threat designed to provoke the Iranians. But what of Biden's assertion that the U.S. was prepared? It turned out, he lied.

According to a Department of Defense "Fact Sheet", our military faces shortages on practically every front.  Equipment, spare parts, and resources from secondary or even non-military sources are having to be diverted to meet demand by the military. U.S. naval ships are in serious need of a general overhaul while aircraft in the Air Force and Navy need a complete update amid critical spare part shortages.

The U.S. Department of Defense also raised the question as to whether our armed forces would be able to adequately engage in a multi-front conflict on a sustained level. The report went on to provide an analysis of the readiness of each of the military branches.

First was the U.S. Army which was characterized as "marginal" by the DoD with having only 62% of the total manpower needed to meet its minimum operational goals. The Army lacks adequately trained personnel to deal with the modern high tech battlefield. The Army is aging at a rapid rate, making it less combat effective. That's because fewer young people are enlisting and/or staying in.

The Navy's capabilities are rated as "weak to very weak". To be effective, the Navy needs a battle ready fleet of at least 400 ships. It currently has 298, and the majority of those need overhauling. The fleet is expected to shrink further to 280 ships by 2037. Meanwhile, China has been aggressively increasing its regional fleet which could mean defending Taiwan from a Chinese invasion may be problematic at best.

The fighting capability of the Air Force is listed by the DOD as "very weak" which is dangerous since control of the air is the single key deciding factor in most every battle. The USAF is currently at 86% of its minimum strength and facing a shortage of around 650 pilots.  Most planes are at least 32 years old and because of a lack of spare parts, pilots are barely getting in adequate flight time to meet minimum standards to retain peak performance.

The Space Force is seen as a "weak" with its role still not clearly defined. However, like all the other military branches, it has to cope with aging equipment, a lack of properly trained personnel, and few spare parts.

Finally, the Marine Corp. Out of all the military branches, only the Marines were viewed by the DOD as being "combat ready" despite facing the same issues when it came to having ample aircraft and military equipment, spare parts, and adequately trained individuals.

As an aside, the Department of Defense report also mentioned our nuclear capabilities. There's no question that we are living in a far more dangerous world as rouge nations such as North Korea and Iran press ahead with their nuclear weapons programs and delivery capabilities. North Korea has been acting like a spoilt kid the way it's been lobbing missiles in the direction of South Korea, Japan, and even Hawaii just to see what kind of reaction they can provoke.

Iran has been actively developing its nuclear capabilities amid its incessant threats that once developed, they intend to use them against Israel even if it means their own destruction. What kind of country dedicates itself to its own national genocide?  Of course, we face the ever present possibility of a "dirty bomb" being used by some fanatic against a ill-defined "infidel" country. Of course, top on that list would be the United States (aka "the Big Satan"), particularly given our porous southern border.

Biden's recent taunt of Iran or stirring the hornet's nest in Yemen aren't the smartest moves a president could make, but that's what he's done. There's no question that Biden's moves are politically motivated. He's trying desperately to boost his ratings and project the image of a strong leader.

Sadly for Biden is that he has never been seen as a strong leader. Of what can be said about it him historically, much of it isn't complementary.  Worse still is that what the world sees is a tired old partisan politician who is quickly losing his grip on reality.

The worse thing that can happen right now is for Biden to get us embroiled in a war, either directly or indirectly with Iran. Despite his empty bravado, we are not prepared and our enemies know it. It really just a matter of whether they want war or peace. Meanwhile, we need to avoid stoking a fire in the Middle East which could spill over into a invasion of Taiwan by China and a move by North Korea against the Seoul in the south.  

In Europe, the situation in Ukraine shows no signs of ending anytime soon and the EU is facing a mounting crisis over the unchecked mass influx of migrants from Africa and the Middle East. At home we're seeing our nation balkanize over political correctness, "wokeness", rekindled racism, rising crime, a fundamentally unstable economy as the invasion along our southern border goes unchecked.

While we do need a strong leader, Biden has clearly demonstrated for all to see that he is no longer competent enough for the job of President and Commander in Chief.  However, the Right needs to accept the fact that Trump's credibility may have been irreparably damaged by this point as to be no longer effective, which leaves us with a serious national dilemma.  With both parties potentially having a lame duck candidate, is there anyone capable of unifying and leading the nation at this critical juncture in our history? 

   If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps beat the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!

 

DOD Fact Sheet: Sequestration's Impact to Regain Readiness

Executive Summary of the 2023 Index of U.S. MilitaryStrength

The USS Gerald R Ford aircraft carrier is returning homeafter extended deployment defending Israel

5 killed in U.S.-led strikes in Yemen, Houthi rebels say

The Evolution of Islamic Terrorism: An Overview

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Racism, Youth, and Distortions by the "Woke" Left

What's the first thing that comes into your mind when you see young kids shoplifting? It is "just one of those things" ? Is it "where are their parents" or something more akin to "if someone doesn't straighten that kid out they're going to wind up in jail"?

For most of us, we're not concerned about their gender, race or anything else. It's just the fact that they're are brazen enough to steal, usually right under the noses of management. In many locations, store management and security are hamstrung in what they can and can't do when it comes to shoplifting, particularly when it involves juveniles.  

Sadly, shoplifters tend to know this better than anyone. Not only do they know the best and easiest ways to steal from stores, they also know how each store responds along with what items will likely get them in serious trouble the quickest.

This knowledge is not just something adults or professional thieves know, but it's also something that younger kids seem to pick up on quickly too. They also know that if caught, it's unlikely much of anything is going to happen to them because they're minors. That's one reason professional thieves often employ minors for riskier crimes like breaking and entry, drug dealing, and, of course, shoplifting.

As a result, stores lose millions annually, at least on paper. In reality, they simply raise prices to offset the cost of the stolen merchandise, leaving customers to pick up the tab.  According to a Forbes article from November of 2022, shoplifting has become nearly a $100 billion dollar "industry" that we, the ordinary consumer, have to pay for.

The magazine, "Loss Prevention", wrote in January 2018 that nearly 55% of adult shoplifters and criminals got their start as juveniles. An article published by the National Association for Shoplifting Prevention, stated that nearly 1 in 4 adults started shoplifting between the ages of 12 and 14. Stores lose on average some $45 million dollars a day to shoplifters while law enforcement authorities estimate that approximately 550,000 shoplifting incidents occur daily.

The report goes on to say shoplifters are caught just once out of 49 times they steal, yet less than half are turned over to the police. Chronic shoplifters are arrested just once out of 100 attempts to steal. Lastly, 75%  of criminal justice professionals acknowledge that shoplifting, often starting out while a young juvenile, go on to more violent crimes which often includes some form gang activity. It's also worth noting that most juvenile shoplifters are white; some 70% according an FBI report. 

The Office of Justice Programs reported that between 14% and 30% of juveniles join gangs.  Their age range when they join is between 12 and 14, which is about the same age range that youngsters start shoplifting as noted above.

Approximately 39% of black youth living in large cities join gangs compared to 32.7% in the suburbs.  45% of Hispanic or Latino juveniles from large cities tend to join gangs with 51% of those living in suburbs do so.

As for whites, just 9.7% living in big cities are likely to join a gang compared to 9.1% living in the suburbs. Meanwhile, 5.8% of other racial groups such as Asians living in larger cities are likely to join a gang. Just 7.2% of those living in the suburbs will probably join a gang. As an aside, males are far more likely to join gangs than females. However, females gang members are more common in suburban and rural areas, 45.3% and 49.5% respectively.

In 2022, more than 1,300 juveniles between ages 12 and 17 were killed by gun violence with another 3,800 injured. In 2021, the number juveniles killed or wounded by guns topped 6,000.  In 2022, 300 kids age 11 and under were killed by gun violence. 700 were wounded.

Most violent crimes committed by juveniles (64%) typically occur on school days in the hours after the end of the school day through early evening (that is, between the hours of 2:00 pm and 7:00 pm).  On non-school days, violent crimes committed by juveniles tend to happen between 6:00 pm and 9:00 pm.

67% of black families are single parent, meaning that the majority of children lack the guidance of a father figure. 8.6% of black adults are unemployed according to the National Bureau of Labor Statistics latest report of 2021, followed by 8.2% for Native Americans. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate for Hispanics is 6.8% and 5.0% for whites.

In addition, as of 2021, almost a third of these families lived at or below the poverty line, meaning their mother is likely working and/or their children are being cared for by an elderly grandparent or neighbor, which in effect means little in the way of family structure.

I was recently watching a video on a Twitter site hosted by the Hodges twins, Keith and Kevin. The Hodges are conservative stand-up comics and political commentators (and for what it's worth, they also happen to be black which neither here nor there). I've been watching them for some time now and really enjoy their humor which is mixed with some really insightful social observations.

The video, which included a comment by the Hodges ("kids are being taught to do this shit..."), showed the apparent commission of crime being carried out by four or five wannabe "Jesse James" types. These wannabe gangsters were probably between 9 and 12 years old and male.  The crime was a "scoop and scoot" at what appeared to be a neighborhood drug store. The "goods" looked to be petty stuff, mostly chips, cookies, candy and so forth.

In the video you can see a store employee speaking with someone on the phone. The expression on his face is one of disbelief. Apparently the employee, aware of the crime in progress, had shut and locked the store door. Whoever he was speaking with had apparently told him that he couldn't do that and to open the door.

The employee reluctantly unlocks and opens the door as the "James Gang" make a break for it, shoving the employee aside, running across a busy intersection in triumph while other employees start picking up the mess left behind.  Finally, I feel that it's important that I should mention that everyone involved---the kids and employee---were black ( you'll understand why I mention that in a moment).

I could see the expressions on their faces of utter glee of a successful heist. I don't know if this was a spur of the moment job or if any planning had gone into it. Was this a first time "scoop and scoot" or had they or one of gang done it before? Perhaps it was a dare. With kids of that age, it could be almost anything. However, I had just started work on this article so I was already aware of the statistics.

I knew, thanks to the articles and statistics already read, that this little raid should be reason for some concern, not just for the store or its employees, but for the parents, teachers, friends and neighbors of these kids. Being male, a minority, and living in what appeared to be urban environment, the odds of staying out of trouble weren't too good. 

As it is, gangs are usually associated with all sorts of crimes (especially violent crimes and drugs), are the most prevalent in cities. Although blacks make up just 13% of the total population, the percentage of illegal drug use among blacks is 6.9% (the national average for drug use among other races is 7.4%), and young males are the most vulnerable.

So as you might expect, I had to make a comment. Here is what I said: "Thieves. Soon, perhaps in a few years, we'll be hearing about how they died. Maybe gang related. Maybe in a shootout with police. Perhaps a homeowner defending their property. And it will be their parents and neighbors bemoaning the injustice of their deaths".  

Now, you'll notice that there was no mention of race, gender, or anything else. My comment was one of empathy for their parents who, if this type of behavior goes unchecked, may find themselves crying over the body of their child and wondering "why" and "how" this could have happened. 

Based on the reports and statistics mentioned above, this is not a remote outcome . A kid laying dead somewhere, the victim of a drive by shooting, gang violence, drug overdose, or a crime gone wrong is far too common. Perhaps instead of being the victim, they got caught trying to rob someone or selling crack and now they're facing prison. Maybe they're the one who accidentally killed someone.

There's a whole myriads of bad results which started innocently enough with some petty theft. Heck, I just saw a video of a group of older teenagers randomly opening bags of chips, Cokes, cookies in a store helping themselves, and then trotting out after obviously enjoying themselves.

Well, you can well imagine the responses I received. According to the Hodge's site, my simple comment generated some 10.9 million views along with 2,452 comments. It also generated 21.6 thousands "likes" and was shared 5,140 times! The vast majority of comments were positive with most agreeing that this kind of behavior could have very serious consequences for these kids.

However, there was a minority of commentators who wasted no time in playing the racist card (which, of course, I'm far from) and making all sorts of racial slurs toward me, alleging that I was stereotyping these kids, that I was wanting these kids die while referring to me as "sick and deranged", an "old white clown", openly wishing I would die or "rot away", and so on.  

Fortunately, as I said, these were minority, but still I found it amazing how people could twist a simple remark about empathy into something barring no resemblance to the comment itself. Nothing in comment related to race (but their responses did). Nothing in my comment mentioned wishing death on anyone (but their responses did). Nothing in my comment mentioned joining a gang (although their responses did). I did, however, say they could end up being the victim of violence if this kind of behavior continued and statistics support me in that statement. 

I suppose this little exercise demonstrates how vicious and reactionary some on the "woke" Left can be. They certainly can't stand a contrarian opinion, at least on this occasion! They demand tolerance, but for them. Not you. They call you "racist" while they're on a racist rant. They claim to oppose hatred, and yet their comments are as vitriol as they can be. They claim they're wanting to avoid an argument while trying to trigger one with name calling, distortions, and not so subtle innuendos and implied threats.

In fact, several excused the shoplifting youngsters by saying they "might be hungry" while others blew the theft off all together as no big deal. Perhaps I should have condoned the theft since I'm white, "privileged", and all that just as they did. But that would be morally wrong. 

A few wanted to compared the shoplifting to "mass shootings" (which are obviously unrelated) by claiming that they are routinely carried out by whites to the relative banality of the shoplifters. They also claim that I ignore these type of crimes as well.  

To set the record straight, I do routinely condemn mass shooting along with any other form of mass murders including wars over economics in my articles as well as directly online regardless of race, gender or any other factor. Secondly, how would they know unless they regularly read my articles?

However, despite their apparent racial undertones, they are correct that whites are largely responsible for mass shootings. According to Statista, 74 mass shooting were committed by whites while 25 were committed by black individuals between 1982 and April 2023. Hispanic were responsible for 11 such shootings and Asian for 10.  Native Americans committed just 3.  

There's no question that shoplifting is a serious gateway crime which all of us eventually pay for. Although much of it is committed by adults, those under 17 years of age are responsible for a significant portion. Of those, many wind up on a path no one would wish on them.

Many come from an environment where the odds are already stacked against them---poverty, high crime neighborhoods, single parent households, little to no consistent adult supervision, underperforming schools and few opportunities in their neighborhood. Some are even taught to fear or hate police officers, disrespect teachers, and come to admire gang lifestyle. They see crime and drugs as easy money. But it's also a fast ticket to prison or to a short and tragic life.

We have to do better as a society. While pre or after school programs, especially when those programs can provide some nutritional meals are great, nothing replaces the active involvement of a parent in the daily lives of their kid  just as nothing beats a good education. There has to be a refocus of school curriculums to civics, critical thinking and business skills with an emphasis on basic math, proper English, the sciences, and history. 

After school and summer programs working in the community is another great avenue for teenagers. Perhaps too is redirecting those about to graduate from high school into the trades. College isn't for everyone and trade schools are a lot less expensive, pay well and have great benefits. It's also an opportunity to opening your own business at some point if that's what you want to do. We have to do better by our kids. What we've been doing is obviously not working.

 

If you want to know more about this article's topic, please check out the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you! 

 

Shoplifting Has Become a $100 Billion Problem For Retailers

The Shoplifting Problem in the Nation

 

A record number of American kid's were injured or killed in gunfire in 2022

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency PreventionStatistical Briefing Book

BLS: Labor force characteristics by race and ethnicity, 2021

Number of mass shooting in the United States between 1982 and April 2023, by shooter's race or ethnicity.

Hodgetwins

 

 

Joe Rogan and Cancel Culture: Freedom for Some But Not All

It seems like the establishment media, especially social media, has gone into overdrive to try and manufacture a media non-event into something resembling a "story". I'm talking about, of course, this "tempest in a teacup" over podcast host Joe Rogan remarks on Spotify which some on the Left disapproved of.  The result is the predictable backlash of the Cancel Culture's "PC" clique. 

The hubbub started a few weeks ago with Rogan making a statement opposing mandates and masks. That's his personal opinion. Rogan is also something of a "shock jock" who enjoys stirring the pot. Now (right on cue), videos from 2017 are popping up where Rogan was making light of the politically correct minefields whites have to tap dance through while others get a pass. Again, his personal opinions.

The latest is from Andrew Yang. He originally came out and agreed that Rogan, while somewhat crude, wasn't a racist.  Now, he's caved to pressure from a relative handful of Left Wing nuts (he's apparently of being called names), has reversed his position and has decided that Rogan is racist after all.

As some of you may remember, Yang, who is of Taiwanese ancestry, is a former Democratic presidential candidate. He's also a businessman and founder of a political action committee, the Forward Party which promotes a non-partisan approach to politics. Supposedly Yang also knows Rogan, and has admitted that Rogan regularly interacts and works with blacks. Yang even said that he had never known of any racist issues, but that was evidently before caving.

As an aside, the Forward party claims its "Not Left Not Right" and its goal is to create a new third party and breaking the rule of the Corporate owned Democrat/Republican duopoly.  It supports Rank Choice Voting, something called "Human Centered Capitalism", "Fact-Based Governance", a Universal Base Income, and a government based on "Grace and Tolerance" since people are fallible. Apparently they're indecisive when too.

Others, some of whom having overestimated their clout, have opted to leave Spotify include Neil Young, Graham Nash, Stephen Stills, Joni Mitchell, Nils Lofgren, India Arie, and author Brene' Brown as part of a "protest" that either Joe Rogan goes or they go. So far, it looks like Rogan is remaining. However, Spotify is now adding a "disclaimer" , warning listeners that Rogan's podcast may include "triggering" language. I guess that means having your blanky at the ready. 

For his part, Joe Rogan has denied being "racist" but has agreed to soften his usual acidic shows for the benefit of...who exactly? Joe's audience is mainly pretty conservative. Not that many "light weight" types listen to his podcasts, but I suspect there's a few trying to bait him, but whatever.  He's also repeatedly spoken out against Biden's mask mandate, as well as mandatory Covid-19 vaccinations.

Frankly, I'm not much of a fan of Joe. I've never found his podcast particularly entertaining. I get the impression that he's trying to fill Rush Limbaugh's shoes while using a Howard Stern or Don Imus format (both of whom also got into trouble over a racial remark). But, if so, that might explain all the manufactured ado over essentially nothing.  Of course, nowadays, it doesn't take much to set people off on some hissy fit.

 Lord knows that people aren't suppose to speak their mind or have independent thoughts outside the collective.  The Establishment Media, after all, provides the dicta to what's news and what's not or what we're suppose to think and say.  It tells us who to like or vote for, what is or isn't important, how to feel or look, and ultimately, what's socially acceptable or not.  In short, it conveys the ideals and attitudes that we are suppose to adhere to.

The Establishment Media is what's responsible for the current social and political climate in America. It rides roughshod over the herd mentality it creates.  It serves as the mouthpiece of the ruling Oligarchy on behalf of the Corporatocracy which has replaced our Republic. Cancel Culture is its bastardized offshoot, along with political correctness, "wokeness", and instant offendedness de jure.

As a political writer, the majority of my work is posted online. I've learned that if we stray too much from the accepted script (aka "guidelines") or "cancelled", which included being shadow blocked (something I know well), suspended or removed from our host site. They also restrict how often our posts are cycled through. We're also trolled, chastised, censured by self-important "fact finders" or called names (just like on a playground except they hide behind their keyboards).  It's all part of the "Cancel Culture".  

 Don't fret about Joe though. People like Rogan or Stern may take a hit, but they've got a pretty good management team that plays the game well. In fact, the so-called "controversy" typically boost their audience.  People love to live vicariously through others into today's media driven society.  

That's why we love watching shows like "The View", "The Bachelor", "90 Days and Counting", and other "reality shows" .  Face it, we've devolved into a voyeur society. We rather watch other people do what we wish we could do. That's, in part, the premise behind "The Running Man" and "The Hunger Games".

We wish we had the guts to stand up or speak out against "the system", but we prefer the comfort and safety of our couches while stuffing our faces and yelling at the television. As close as some get to standing up is playing video games where they exist in a virtual world with no consequences for our actions...or mistakes and almost always emerge as the hero.  That too is part of the Cancel Culture.

This fantasy world has been created for us as a way to vent off anger, frustration, and gives us a false sense of having "accomplished" something (they also comprise the core of so-called "fact finders"). We play a video games or watch a movies to emerge ourselves into some plot or character who saves the world or whatever. Meanwhile, the Corporate beast goes merrily on its way, having defused itself of any real threats to its control.  Who needs freedom when you can have "virtual freedom"?

There's a great line in the movie, "The Longest Day", in which Richard Burton's RAF fighter pilot character, Flying Officer David Campbell, says "the thing that's always worried me about being one of the few is the way we keep getting fewer". There's a great deal of truth in that statement. Those of us who do speak out often find ourselves isolated by the powers that be. When I first started writing articles back in 2004, there was about a two dozen of us locally. Now, there's just one...me. Nationally, it's the same story.

Some who posted on sites like YouTube found themselves blocked, censored, and defunded; sometimes even before their video was even posted!  In some cases, their video library was even deleted. For a few determined individuals, they've found other platforms to host their videos, albeit taking a hit in audience numbers and income. However, hundreds, if not thousands, folded out of frustration.

A few continued to write, post videos, do podcasts or radio shows have cut back on content. They no longer freely say what they want to say. They're afraid of being harassed, stalked, defunded, or being "cancelled" again. Several changed their formats to something other than political.  

That's the "self-cancelling" portion of the Cancel Culture, which is perhaps the most insidious since it forces you to second guess or silence yourself. You're no longer able to "speak your truth" out of fear. You have effectively imprisoned yourself to the delight of the ruling Oligarchy and it's "woke" minions.

Speaking of truth, the Cancel Culture has a funny way of defining theirs. However, hypocrisy seems key. If someone is white, Asian, Hispanic, male or non-feminist female says or does something it disapproves of, that individual must immediately apologize or face retribution. They must express the deepest remorse, seek forgiveness, and make some sort of restitution.

Case in point, if someone makes a comment or joke about race, they're usually suspended, if not fired. Same goes for comments not supportive of BLM, feminism, or LGBTQ.  However, comments and jokes about whites, Asians, Hispanics, or straights are okay. But understand this is a one way street.

Fairness and equality should allow everyone or no one to make similar comments or jokes about other groups, but this isn't about fairness or equality. It never has been. It's about creating two classes. One of the "oppressed" and one of the "oppressor". Don't believe me? Pay attention the next time you watch a standup comedian or almost any of the comedies on TV.

As the great Mel Brooks said, political correctness is "the death of comedy". Once, openly laughed at bigots, racism and racists on all sides. Now we're afraid too. The comic genius added that because of political correctness, movies like "Blazing Saddles" or "Young Frankenstein" couldn't be made today (or the "Blues Brothers" or "Smokey and the Bandit") Yet, we have movies like "White Chicks" featuring two black men in drag as white blonde girls.

Nick Cannon, host of "The Mask Singer" and several other shows on MTV, made an anti-white and an anti-Jewish comment. He was fired. However, after he offered an apology (of sorts) for his anti-Jewish remarks, he was rehired. Whoopi Goldberg was recently suspended for two weeks for making anti-Jewish and anti-Holocaust comments. Anyone else would have been fired.  On the other hand, look at what happened to Mel Gibson for making similar remarks. The guy is still an outcast in Hollywood.

Lastly, while we're still on the topic of double standards, let's take the 2021 miniseries "Anne Boleyn". While there have been other movies about ill-fated Queen of England, what makes this one stand out is that "Anne" is played by a black actress, Jodie Turner-Smith.  While she is a very accomplished actress, should she be playing the Queen of England? (disclaimer: Anne Boleyn and her sister Mary are ancestors of mine. Their origin was Norman, an admixture of Norse and Northern Frank, and Celt).

What about the British TV series "Merlin", which is about the great wizard, King Arthur and his court where Queen Guinevere is played by Angel Colby, another talented black actress. No one said anything, but was that acceptable?  The Arthurian story is central to the self-identity of the British. It's part of their national character as much as Helen of Troy and Achilles are for the Greeks or Siegfried is to the Germans.

Let's put it another way. What if an Asian actress played Tina Turner? Is that politically correct or should the Cancel Culture overrule artistic license? Could a Hispanic portray Martin Luther King ? Would everyone be okay if a white guy played Michael Jackson or Barack Obama?  How about a black guy playing Bruce Lee or Cesar Chavez? And in the realm of "fat chance", what do you think would happen if transgender actor of any race was to play Jesus, Moses, Buddha, or Muhammad? Yikes!  As an aside, Jews would be least likely to object over someone gay portraying Moses.  Ironic isn't it?

Where political correctness should have stepped in (but didn't exist at the time) was in the making of Westerns where Europeans were made up to play Native Americans and Mexicans, especially given that there were ample Native American and Hispanic actors available! Same goes for actors doing blackface (except in 1993, when Whoopi Goldberg's honey at the time, Ted Danson, did a roast for Whoopi in blackface.  Hollywood said that was okay).  Now, political corrected has gone too far the other way.

Fear is a powerful weapon. It causes self-doubt and silence. It's the "mind-killer" as Frank Herbert, author of the "Dune" series, wrote. On some occasions it forces people to turn on others...and themselves...by joining with the mob to silence others. There's a Faustian security in numbers. There's also intimidation too, which is the slimy underbelly of the Cancel Culture.

The Cancel Culture thrives on fear. It's power is there. It seeks to hide the truth. Political correctness would have no objections anyone of another race portraying someone of European origin, but not the reverse. The Cancel Culture would ensure that no one spoke out or objected less that be censured, fired, or purged. It has confused the etiquette of free speech with the right of free speech; of being respectful, and in its place imposed denial of free speech. It's the same type of fear mongering the Nazis spread during the 1930's and 40s. It's the same too as the McCarthy Era "Red Scare".

When it comes to expressing one's opinion about a topic, particularly something like Covid or vaccines, what gives the Cancel Culture the moral right to slap anyone down and tell them they don't have the right of free speech? The Founding Fathers didn't include an addendum to the 1st Amendment saying that we had freedom of speech and expression except when someone else disagrees with the mob.

If the politically correct "woke" individuals and groups behind the Cancel Culture truly want to celebrate and embrace diversity as they claim, they need to first start with diversity of thought and opinion. They need to move beyond the superficial like gender and skin color and look to ideas.

Cancel Culture is the unholy spawn of Political Correctness brought into being by the emotionally insecure and intellectually coddled. It attempts to hide the very things it advocates, namely openness and diversity. It strives to protect the artificial bubble of "wokeness", which acts as security blanket using forced compliance, intimidation and censorship in the name of "freedom of speech" for some, but not for all.  Somewhere Stalin, Mao, and Hitler are smiling.

 I don't know that I'd agree with Joe Rogan anymore than I would Whoopi Goldberg, Nick Cannon, Mel Gibson, or anyone else who has faced censure.  But I do know that I would, as the 18th Century French philosopher, Voltaire, reputedly said,  "I may not agree with what you said, I will fight to death for your right to say it". It's time to put an end to doublespeak of closed minded "wokeness", incorrect political correctness, suspend Cancel Culture and get on with freedom of expression and diversity of ideas.

If you want to know more, please take a look at the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free!

 

What Racial Slurs Did Joe Rogan Say? Viral Videos RevealPodcasters Past Remarks

Andrew Yang apologizes for saying Joe Rogan isn't racist because he works with Black people

Who has quit Spotify? A list of who have left over Joe Rogan

Neil Young quit Spotify because of Joe Rogan. These artistshave followed his leave

The Forward Party

 

Celebrities who got fired from their TV shows over racismclaims

Nick Cannon fired after calling white people, Jews 'evil savages, closer to animals' in racist podcast rant

Mel Brooks Says 'Blazing Saddles' Would Never Get Made Today Because Political Correctness 'Is the Death of Comedy'