Sixty percent of Americans' no longer Trust the Mass Media for News - Up from forty-five percent in 1999!

.

Fifty-five percent of Democrats do trust the mass media (radio, newspapers, and television), while just thirty-two percent of Republicans, and thirty-three percent of Independents trust the media, according to the latest Gallup poll.

Two things are clear from the latest Gallup results.  I guess we have to stop calling it the Main Street or Lame Street media since well below half of Americans trust it, and Democrats are more gullible since they are the last demographic still trusting the media.

 

There is no surprise in the numbers since the media has become the advocate for polarizing society, and long ago started moving in the direction of manufacturing news as opposed to reporting the news.

Today money and greed drive the competition between news sources rather than quality and fairness, and since the advent of the Internet more and more news stories come from cyber space than old fashion reporting.

The result is truth is no longer a necessary goal, plagiarism is an acceptable shortcut, and being objective is just plain stupid.  What a shame.

It seems we as a society apply the same twisted standards to content for mass media beyond the news.  When it comes to shows, or "content" to the politically correct, vulgar is kosher, more vulgar is kosherer, and downright disgusting vulgarity is kosherest.

If a television censor from the 1950's came back today, they would think the forces of Sodom and Gomorra had overrun America and that we finally achieved moral bankruptcy.  Demons would be ruling the land.  Then again, there might be some truth to the proposition.

The disintegration of faith in our institutions has been accelerating throughout the Obama presidency and today, with the unraveling of the American foreign policy throughout the world, the people are showing their disgust.

The policy of accommodation of all those forces in the world hating America, jealous of America, or tired of hearing about America as advocated by the Obama Administration and the major players under Obama like Hillary Clinton is taking a toll.

Even Obama's former Secretary of State Clinton is beginning to crack under the pressure of reality as she is distancing herself more and more every day from her former boss and his failed policies, policies that she developed and championed.

Gallup

Politics

September 28, 2015

Americans' Trust in Media Remains at Historical Low

by Rebecca Riffkin

Story Highlights

• Four in 10 Americans trust the mass media
• Ties 2014 and 2012 for the lowest trust level in Gallup's trend
• Younger Americans less likely than older to trust the media

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Four in 10 Americans say they have "a great deal" or "a fair amount" of trust and confidence in the mass media to report the news fully, accurately and fairly. This ties the historical lows on this measure set in 2014 and 2012. Prior to 2004, slight majorities of Americans said they trusted the mass media, such as newspapers, TV and radio.

Americans' confidence in the media has slowly eroded from a high of 55% in 1998 and 1999. Since 2007, the majority of Americans have had little or no trust in the mass media. Trust has typically dipped in election years, including 2004, 2008, 2012 and last year. However, 2015 is not a major election year.

This decline follows the same trajectory as Americans' confidence in many institutions and their declining trust in the federal government's ability to handle domestic and international problems over the same time period.

Trust in the Mass Media Has Fallen More Sharply Among Those Younger Than 50
Trust in the media continues to be significantly lower among Americans aged 18 to 49 than among those 50 and older, continuing a pattern evident since 2012. Prior to 2012, these groups' trust levels were more similar, with a few exceptions between 2005 and 2008.

Trust Among Democrats Remains Low, but Higher Than Among Republicans
For more than a decade, Republicans and independents have been significantly less likely than Democrats to trust the media. This pattern continues in the latest survey. In 2014, Gallup found that trust among Democrats fell to a 14-year low of 54%, and this figure is essentially unchanged at 55% this year. While more Democrats than Republicans continue to say they trust the media, the percentage of Republicans who report that they trust the mass media increased slightly this year, from 27% to 32%. This increase was offset, however, by a decrease in independents reporting trust, from 38% to 33%.

Bottom Line
Americans' trust level in the media has drifted downward over the past decade. The same forces behind the drop in trust in government more generally, as well confidence in many U.S. institutions, may also be at work with the media. But some of the loss in trust may have been self-inflicted. Major venerable news organizations have been caught making serious mistakes in the past several years, including the scandal involving former NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams in 2015 that some of his firsthand accounts of news events had been exaggerated or "misremembered."
Historical data are available in Gallup Analytics.

Survey Methods
Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted Sept. 9-13, 2015, with a random sample of 1,025 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. All reported margins of sampling error include computed design effects for weighting.


Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 60% cellphone respondents and 40% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cellular telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods.
.

The Liberal Media has lost their Memory and Mind

.

Ever since Ross Perot erupted on the scene back in 1992 and cost the Republican party the presidential election there has been a melt down in the minds of America's Fourth Estate.

Lost from the minds of the liberals is the history of liberalism in America and the desire of the American public to have balance between the conservative and liberal advocates.  At times, it seems our new generation of news reporters, ignore the tradition and values of Americans and try to push an agenda inconsistent with the public views.

When our country was founded the prevailing constitutional battle was between a dominate central government versus strong state governments.  Even back then, they understood the only obstacle to a successful America was the potential for a concentration of power in our nation's capitol.

Over the years, the pendulum swung ever so slowly between conservative and liberal views but in the 20th Century, the opposing policies became more entrenched.

Along came Franklin Roosevelt and with the depression followed by World War II dominating the USA, there was a massive move to the liberal left.  But once again it could not be sustained as Adlai Stevenson, the darling of the liberals, went up in flames as Ike took control of the post-war America.

Then Kennedy pulled off the closest presidential victory in history, which the liberals took as a mandate, and once again, socialism dominated our policies.  However, Kennedy, the political pragmatist, realized the limited value of socialism and moved to the center.

After his assassination, Viet Nam, the Great Society, Civil Rights, and academic freedom issues tore apart the nation.  Hubert Humphrey, Gene McCarthy, and George McGovern were the poster boys for liberalism.

Once again, the public mood swung to the right and Nixon was elected, dismantled much of the liberal control with his New Federalism, meaning a reduction in the power of the central government, and proceeded to destroy the liberal movement when he defeated McGovern by 18 million votes, the greatest margin in our history.  In the process, he won 49 out of 50 states.

For most of the next four decades, the moderate conservative policy ruled America except for the four years Jimmy Carter was president.  There was Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, who often sounded more Republican than the Republicans, and finally Bush.

Then along came Barack Obama who set out to turn America back into the socialist bastion he dreamed it should be but Barack could deliver on very few of his promises and refusing to take the road of compromise, he introduced partisanship into his leadership and brought the Republic to a near standstill.

Unfortunately, the liberal media played right into his hands and kept seeking out conservatives to be the bad guys, in blocking the Obama socialist agenda.  Thanks to the media, the social issues dominated the headlines throughout Obama's time as president and the government basically ground to a halt.

Back in 1992 when Perot robbed Bush of re-election, it marked the beginning-of-the-end for the two party system.  Since that time, there as been a steady erosion of eligible voters registering to vote, and a steady erosion of the control of the two political parties over registered voters.

This past year two major, milestones were passed in terms of voters.  Within the registered voters in the nation, it was the first time more people declared themselves Independents than either Democrats or Republicans.

Perhaps more foreboding, within the eligible voters, it was the first time more people chose not to register to vote than those registering.  The result was Obama won his last and largest victory with just 25% of the eligible vote.

Pythagorean Analysis of Voter reality in America

Total USA Population Today          325,332,205

Total Population under 18                 78,000,000

Total Population 18 and over          247,322,000

Total Eligible Voters 18+                 247,322,000

Total Registered Voters                    142,200,000

Percent                                                            57%

Total Voter Turnout 2014                121,757,000

Percent of Registered Voters                        85.6%

Percent of Eligible Voters                             49.2%

Total Obama Votes 2014                    62,615,406

Percent of Registered Voters                        44%

Percent of Eligible Voters                             25.3%                                                                        

Total Romney Voters 2014                 59,100,000

Percent of Registered Voters                       41.5%

Percent of Eligible Voters                             23.9%                                    

Total Eligible Voters not Voting       125,565,000

Percent of Eligible Voters                             50.8%                                                

Back on September 16, 2010, I wrote the following.

The March of the Invisible Americans - the Independents

In the past two years a fascinating phenomena has quietly taken place that could change the future of politics in America. Just 18 months ago for the first time the number of people claiming to be Independents has surpassed the total number of members of either the Democrat or Republican parties. If the political bosses of the two parties are paying attention then they better be preparing for an early retirement, their stranglehold on the political system and the government may be coming to an end.

So what if the Independents outnumber the Elephants and Donkeys? Well in simple words it means that nearly 40% of our voters have rejected the policies, programs and candidates of the two party system. It also means this huge voting block reflects the disenfranchised voters of America, the one group of our citizens subject to taxation without representation.

You see just 32 states allow registered Independents to vote in the primary election for federal offices, meaning for those of you who slept during American History class that means 18 states do not allow Independents to vote in the primary. Several are rather large states banning the Independent vote.

Now some enterprising Independents have formed a bunch of Independent political parties in order to get on the ballot but the states, thanks to the pressure from the two reigning political parties, have made the rules so difficult it is hard to accomplish. Even with his millions of dollars Ross Perot, without a doubt the most successful Independent candidate in the 20th century, still was not on all ballots.

Ross did what he had to do and in spite of the efforts of the two parties to crush him he still got 19% of the vote and cost Bush senior the election.  Clinton won by far less than the 19% Perot took away from both party candidates. More on Mr. Perot later as I intend to report on my years as a media advisor to Ross Perot and the things he was doing for people behind the scenes.

Why are states forcing Independents to set up their own political party when they are Independents because they are fed up with the political parties that exist? They don't want their own party, there is all ready to much politics in America. They just want the right to vote for candidates from either party or any of the many minor parties like the Green Movement, etc. in the primary and general elections.

Who gave the Democrats and Republicans the right to dictate who we can choose from on the ballot? In many cases the parties are protecting the worst candidates and the parties have demonstrated that their primary purpose is to protect the political system that is corrupt to the bone. If America is the land of the free then why do the political parties get to screen and virtually dictate who we can vote for in the elections?

As America has matured and both parties have demonstrated an equal zeal to promote greed and corruption the difference between the Democrats and Republicans has vanished. Oh it may be that most liberals are Democrats and most conservatives are Republicans but there are liberals, conservatives and moderates in both parties.

It may be that the party and presidential candidate have a platform to run on but as every winner the past century including the most recent candidate of change Barack Obama have demonstrated, once they win nothing really changes. Both parties are addicted to campaign money, both try to control government policy and in the end the rich still get richer while the middle class is left holding the bag. There will never be effective and honest campaign reform as long as the two parties control the candidates for president, the House and the Senate.

It is time someone sensible in our nation's capitol step up and give all the voters rights. It is time we recognize that control of the government is not the right of the political parties but the people. It is time we pay attention to what got us into this mess in the first place, taxation without representation, greed and a healthy dose of corruption.

I don't remember reading anything about the power or role of the Democrat or Republican parties in our Declaration of Independence or Constitution. There were no guarantees that they should be allowed to control our national policy nor pick our candidates. Fact is they weren't even in existence when our Founding Fathers were debating our future.

I believe both parties should have a voice in national politics, along with the Independents. Then the voice of the people will be heard. Right now only the political machines are heard. Someone in Washington should clean up the mess. For the first 100 years third parties were essential to our success as our forefathers knew there was an inherent danger in allowing political control to be concentrated in a couple of parties.

It was a system that worked quite well. Then came the party bosses who tapped the money and found out how financially rewarding control could become if only they could force the public to pick between two stooges. Occasionally we get good presidents. But there are a lot more good people that could be helping out the country but they will never get the chance because they do not have the backing of the political parties, unions, Wall Street or the money managers, all who conspire to preserve the status quo.

In summary, neither political party has an interest in preserving our future, just protecting their special interests.  Obama tried to tip the balance of interests in America by pushing his aggressive socialist agenda.  It failed.

Now the Democratic party is running a liberal, a progressive, and a socialist for president while the GOP have a mix of moderates and conservatives.  Our future is not about party, it is about people.  Is it really surprising that those outside the political system present the greatest challenge to continuing with business as usual?

I say let the liberal media and political parties keep living in fantasyland, and the people will rip the nation right out from under them.  Perhaps that is the only way to elect people to serve the people, a long, lost American principle.

. 

Who really won the election? Republicans, Democrats, Obama, or Undocumented.

.

First, I think the term undocumented is pathetic.  I cannot think of any descriptive word worse than the cursed terms Democrat, Republican, or Congress, except undocumented worker.  Maybe we should say the "underground" since they are part of the underground economy in America.

So far, the underground are the only winners in the election as they forced the president's hand after his six years of broken promises.  In terms of numerical impact, the GOP were big winners and the Democrats big losers.  Contrary to press reports, that is pretty much what happens every midterm election, the party holding the presidency loses and the minority party wins.

Still, my instinct tells me neither the Republicans nor the Democrats won because it was the Independents, the forgotten Americans, who brought the GOP to power.  There was no interest in the election by Democrats, and enough by Republicans to assure that only about 25% of all eligible voters actually voted.  So I guess that makes apathy the big winner.

I watched the returns even though long ago I had predicted a GOP tidal wave, and was stunned when I kept hearing how state after state saw major reductions in voting by both Democrats and Republicans, but up to a 40% increase in Independent voting.

Other obvious losers were Harry Reid, the war on women nonsense, the Kill the Koch Brothers campaign, liberal media, peaceniks, big brother advocates, and Democratic National Committee leader U.S. Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, Obama's handpicked propaganda mouthpiece.

Winners were much harder to find but did include those wanting bigger and better wars, the arms industry, bankers, Wall Street, oil dudes, rich people, and the many GOP candidates for president in 2016.

One group that always wins come election time is the news media who benefited from $3 billion dollars being pumped into the political campaigns.  If congress had the guts to ban paid political commercials for everyone and made the network television, cable, and radio outlets give all candidates free commercials, very few I might add, the media would finally lose out on the big bucks but until then the newest groups of fat cats are the media.

As for the short term future, it does not matter if the Democrats and Republicans get along because in the end there is little difference between the way they govern.  We can only hope the country survives long enough for the growing Independents to throw them all out of office.

Once congress is forced to adopt an Ethics Law that actually works bureaucrats and politicians will be lined up awaiting criminal indictments.

Tax reform is needed, both personal and corporate, but trusting those to fix it that now have us $17.5 trillion in debt while the private sector and stock market have record profits seems a little counter-productive.

Maybe the key to the future is to remember the past and as the founding father of America seemed to realized, perhaps a few prayers to God might help.

.

Why the media has it all wrong - they forgot about Independents

.

Sometimes the most obvious is the most difficult to see and when it comes to the American media the most obvious and most logical is most often overlooked.  Ever since Obama first ran for office there has been a peculiar Main Street media fascination with the Tea Party movement and when it comes to the liberal media, it became an obsession.

For some odd reason the Lame Street media has been afraid, fearful, and terrorized by the thought that the Tea Party and its seemingly radical right wing supporters represents a grave threat to the American political process.

If the media wants to condemn a conservative commentator they label them "Tea Party" whether they have any affiliation with the Tea Party or not.  It is the liberal way to stigmatize the on air personalities that cause so much havoc in their lives.

Yet most conservative commentators have never joined the Tea Party and view it as an element of the Republican party, not a separate institution.  So the Democrats have tried to diminish any threat from the Tea Party by talking about the splintering effect the Tea Party has on the Republicans.

I suspect they just don't get it.

The only threat to the two party system in America is their arrogance in thinking there really is just two parties in the country and their failure to see we are rapidly approaching the point of no return when more American are alienated by both political parties and their partisan nonsense when in truth there is little difference between them.

Every election we get closer to the point when there are going to be more Independents than BOTH Democrats and Republicans.  When over 50% of the public believes neither party serves the public but both parties have become their own Special Interests.

With the continuing decline in public confidence in our political parties, politicians and media and with the continued ignorance or deliberate effort by the media to disregard the growing number of Americans rejecting both political parties that day we cross the 50% threshold is rapidly approaching and will most certainly be here by 2016 or 2020.

The following is a Gallup Poll which most media failed to report on the continuing surge in the number of Independents in America.  They are the real danger to the two party system and the real hope for healing our Nation.

January 8, 2014

Record-High 42% of Americans Identify as Independents

Republican identification lowest in at least 25 years

by Jeffrey M. Jones

PRINCETON, NJ -- Forty-two percent of Americans, on average, identified as political independents in 2013, the highest Gallup has measured since it began conducting interviews by telephone 25 years ago. Meanwhile, Republican identification fell to 25%, the lowest over that time span. At 31%, Democratic identification is unchanged from the last four years but down from 36% in 2008.

The results are based on more than 18,000 interviews with Americans from 13 separate Gallup multiple-day polls conducted in 2013.

In each of the last three years, at least 40% of Americans have identified as independents. These are also the only years in Gallup's records that the percentage of independents has reached that level.

Americans' increasing shift to independent status has come more at the expense of the Republican Party than the Democratic Party. Republican identification peaked at 34% in 2004, the year George W. Bush won a second term in office. Since then, it has fallen nine percentage points, with most of that decline coming during Bush's troubled second term. When he left office, Republican identification was down to 28%. It has declined or stagnated since then, improving only slightly to 29% in 2010, the year Republicans "shellacked" Democrats in the midterm elections.

Not since 1983, when Gallup was still conducting interviews face to face, has a lower percentage of Americans, 24%, identified as Republicans than is the case now. That year, President Ronald Reagan remained unpopular as the economy struggled to emerge from recession. By the following year, amid an improving economy and re-election for the increasingly popular incumbent president, Republican identification jumped to 30%, a level generally maintained until 2007.

Democratic identification has also declined in recent years, falling five points from its recent high of 36% in 2008, the year President Barack Obama was elected. The current 31% of Americans identifying as Democrats matches the lowest annual average in the last 25 years.

Fourth Quarter Surge in Independence

The percentage of Americans identifying as independents grew over the course of 2013, surging to 46% in the fourth quarter. That coincided with the partial government shutdown in October and the problematic rollout of major provisions of the healthcare law, commonly known as "Obamacare."

The 46% independent identification in the fourth quarter is a full three percentage points higher than Gallup has measured in any quarter during its telephone polling era.

Democrats Maintain Edge in Party Identification

Democrats maintain their six-point edge in party identification when independents' "partisan leanings" are taken into account. In addition to the 31% of Americans who identify as Democrats, another 16% initially say they are independents but when probed say they lean to the Democratic Party. An equivalent percentage, 16%, say they are independent but lean to the Republican Party, on top of the 25% of Americans identifying as Republicans. All told, then, 47% of Americans identify as Democrats or lean to the Democratic Party, and 41% identify as Republicans or lean to the Republican Party.

Democrats have held at least a nominal advantage on this measure of party affiliation in all but three years since Gallup began asking the "partisan lean" follow-up in 1991. During this time, Democrats' advantage has been as high as 12 points, in 2008. However, that lead virtually disappeared by 2010, although Democrats have re-established an edge in the last two years.

Implications

Americans are increasingly declaring independence from the political parties. It is not uncommon for the percentage of independents to rise in a non-election year, as 2013 was. Still, the general trend in recent years, including the 2012 election year, has been toward greater percentages of Americans identifying with neither the Republican Party nor the Democratic Party, although most still admit to leaning toward one of the parties.

The rise in political independence is likely an outgrowth of Americans' record or near-record negative views of the two major U.S. parties, of Congress, and their low level of trust in government more generally.

The increased independence adds a greater level of unpredictability to this year's congressional midterm elections. Because U.S. voters are less anchored to the parties than ever before, it's not clear what kind of appeals may be most effective to winning votes. But with Americans increasingly eschewing party labels for themselves, candidates who are less closely aligned to their party or its prevailing doctrine may benefit.

Survey Methods

Results are based on aggregated telephone interviews from 13 separate Gallup polls conducted in 2013, with a random sample of 18,871 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±1 percentage point at the 95% confidence level.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellular phones, with interviews conducted in Spanish for respondents who are primarily Spanish-speaking. Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 50% cellphone respondents and 50% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by region. Landline and cell telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.

Samples are weighted to correct for unequal selection probability, nonresponse, and double coverage of landline and cell users in the two sampling frames. They are also weighted to match the national demographics of gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education, region, population density, and phone status (cellphone only/landline only/both, and cellphone mostly). Demographic weighting targets are based on the March 2012 Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older U.S. population. Phone status targets are based on the July-December 2011 National Health Interview Survey. Population density targets are based on the 2010 census. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting.

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

For more details on Gallup's polling methodology, visit www.gallup.com.

.     

Meet America's Next President - Chris Christie!

 .

Fresh off the largest win by a Republican moderate since Abraham -- Lincoln that is, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie won re-election in the Democratic state with 60% of the vote.

 

Now I worked for New Jersey Governor Thomas Kean and he also did pretty well in the governor races.  In fact, he had the closest and largest election victories in history in 1981 and 1985 respectively.  Moderate Republicans were about to become near extinct after the reign of Kean.

 

 

In 1981 Kean, a moderate Republican, won the governor's race by the closest margin in New Jersey history, just 1,797 votes of 2.4 million cast.  By 1985 Kean won by the largest victory margin in history, getting 69.5% of the vote in a Democrat state and winning by 794,229 votes.

 

Kean ran the most successful "voter inclusion program" ever undertaken by a GOP candidate in the nation.  Kean's record margin included over 60% of the Black, Union and Roman Catholic votes.   Kean was a lifetime civil rights advocate and Coretta Scott King, widow of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., endorsed the governor and campaigned for him.

 

 

 

It was the last time a Republican got over 50% in a statewide Jersey election.

 

Tom Kean was a Princeton blue-blood and genuine nice person, far too nice to be president of the USA.

 

 

But Christie, well he is another story.

 

He went to the University of Delaware and Seton Hall law school.  Not quite Princeton but quite good schools.  He was a volunteer for one of Tom Kean's governor's races.  Then he was United States Attorney for New Jersey.

 

With all the mob activity and corruption in the New Jersey/New York districts not to mention the Wall Street presence, the US Attorney's handled some of the toughest cases and characters in the nation.

 

 

Christie is a rough and tumble straight talking Jersey boy with plenty of girth, grit and gristle.  It is great to see that his diet efforts are paying off as he looked more fit and feisty at the end of the campaign than he looked in years.

 

So far this self-proclaimed conservative with the moderate to conservative leanings has demonstrated everything necessary to become our next president and it is a rare day in America when we have a New Jersey president.  Fact is only one president, Woodrow Wilson, was a Jersey boy.

 

 

Now the eastern liberal media is terrified of the thought of Christie as president so they have started a campaign to convince Midwest and Southern Americans that a smart talking, rather large, and often bombastic dude with a Jersey accent will never be accepted by the voters in the Midwest and South who carry the national elections.

 

MSNBC talking heads scoff at the thought of a Republican from New Jersey being on the primary ballot in Iowa, or South Carolina.

 

Well guess what media mouthpieces, I'm also from the Midwest, Iowa in fact, and there is nothing in our corn and pork diet or hayseed image that says we don't recognize a leader as opposed to a politician.

 

After five years of Obama inertia and Congressional constipation the voters of America, Democrats, Republicans and Independents all, are sick and tired of two party domination and paralyzed politicians.

 

Chris Christie is a rare breed of politician who actually tells you what he thinks and does what he says he's going to do.  Imagine that!  Honesty, even if a little ruff and gruff, would be refreshing.  The ability to do things no matter how big or small is, well, revolutionary in politics.

 

 

Straight talk was a Midwestern trait long before the media hijacked the term for politicians.  And an Iowan would NEVER put the special interests of a political party before what was good for the country.

 

A great, big, giant lie is stretched over this great land of ours like a sinister blanket of fog.  Politicians and financial people have hidden a deep, dark secret of the vulnerability of America to succumb to the overwhelming dark cloak of Greed powering a spiraling national debt.

 

The Madison Avenue pursuit of the young teen and adult demographic (what I call the Fountain of Youth obsession) now expects the children of the nation to pay for the sins of their fathers and mothers TODAY, not 25 years from now when they inherit the multi-trillion dollar debt.

 

 

I say kids can't possibly be that stupid.  They know the difference between a politician who works up a head of steam and one who is lost in a fog.  Christie will never allow that fog to envelop our youth and nation and that is why he will be elected by the Midwest and Southern voters, whether Democrat, Republican or Independent.

 

Move over Woodrow, another Jersey boy is headed toward the top.

 

Say hello to your next president.

.