Subscription Preferences:
10 months ago

Reeder on Tuesday’s elections: ‘To see this as a referendum on Trump is overstating it’


 

Listen to the 10-min audio:

 

Read the transcript:

TOM LAMPRECHT:  Harry, I want to take a look back to last Tuesday’s election. Interesting how a number of outlets are now saying that this was a referendum and a rejection of Donald Trump’s politics. The New York Times actually came out and called itself “the center,” while declaring the election “a rejection of Trump’s hateful politics.”

They pointed to the defeat of Ed Gillespie down in Virginia, the election of a new Democratic governor in New Jersey. Also, media outlets are pointing to two candidates that were elected to state governments who are transgenders. People are calling this a historic moment.

DR. REEDER: I think it is a historic moment. Let’s take a look at this election. People said, “Well, New Jersey likes to elect moderate Republicans as governor.” That was the thesis. Well, I would suggest that’s not quite accurate.

First of all, New Jersey’s very much like the rest of America and there is a tendency that, after someone serves a couple of terms, the opposition party usually gets the nod in many states, and New Jersey is not a state that goes for moderate Republicans or conservative Republicans.

Chris Christie, who had many conservative policies, was really a blip on the screen because he was following a Democratic governor who was guilty of gross corruption. Well, he’s had his own issues in the governorship and he’s had his own legal issues and so the fact that it flipped to Democrat is really not that surprising at all.

And New Jersey is in this northeast conglomeration of progressive politics. Any election of anyone with any tendencies toward conservatism is really almost an aberration and very unique.

The individual running for governor actually is to the left of the Democratic party and what would be called “mainstream Democrats,” promoting and advocating multiple issues from legalization of marijuana, to socialism, to healthcare socialism, etc.

But the more interesting case is Virginia, in which you had the establishment Republican who is a conservative but he is an establishment Republican, Ed Gillespie. If you laid out the counties of Virginia, what you’re going to see is almost a blanket red vote for Ed Gillespie, but where you’re going to see the blue is in northern Virginia and also in the Richmond Proper area.

Outside of that, you’re pretty much going to see red throughout the state of Virginia. Its population in northern Virginia that lives off of increased governmental resources and power because so many people who work in Washington live in northern Virginia and they have a vested interest in progressivism and socialism and the burgeoning Socialistic Movement in our country. You’re seeing almost a blanket vote and I think Gillespie’s probably going to end up with 30 percent or so of that vote at most.

But, to see this as a referendum on Trump is, I think, overstating it. I think what you’ve got is the millennial vote, the government vote, the progressive vote, the liberal vote and you have that coalition coming together in specific heavily populated areas.

That’s why I believe this is a bellwether state because what you’ve got in the United States is the flyover country that is almost all red with counties and states that vote Republican and the East Coast and the West Coast which are the highly dense population areas.

A perfect example is the mayoral election candidate handily reelected, who was an avowed socialist: Mayor Deblasio. This is a guy who declares communist dictators as his hero. And even though the things that have happened in New York under his initial tenure have been horrendous, he is handily reelected.

And then Ed Gillespie was articulating conservative policies, which would line up with a number of things that Trump is promoting, but, he clearly distanced himself in the previous presidential election and during the gubernatorial election.

He distanced himself, so it’s hard to see this as a referendum on Trump when Gillespie had already done his own referendum: I don’t want the President. I don’t want him here campaigning for me. He did not associate himself with President Trump and, therefore, whoever would be heavily committed to Trump would have taken offense, likely, and not voted for Gillespie.

One of the things that President Trump did was he was able to pull together general religious right, evangelicals, the Tea Party, conservatives, some established Republicans such as Reince Priebus and others and his coalition got him over the top and through the finish line.

Ed Gillespie left out much of that coalition, which could be explanatory as to why, when he ran away from Trump, that means many with Trump would run away from voting from him.

TOM LAMPRECHT: Do you see anything from last Tuesday’s election pointing to the election of 2018?

DR. REEDER: We’re a divided nation, there’s no doubt about it and you’ve basically got the flyover states and then you have the coastal votes – the East Coast, and the West Coast, and the major metropolitan areas like Chicago, Cleveland, Milwaukee, etc.

That’s what I see in place and I don’t see anything happening that is going to deny that analysis. And then the question becomes turnout, and then the question becomes motivation.

I know that a lot of people are saying, “This is an indicator of a Democratic sweep.” I am not sure of that at all. The elections that are going to take place on a Congressional basis will be in those states where counties matter, not major metropolitan areas.

I think you’re going to continue to see the representation from those large numbers of counties and the flyover states are going to keep sending the more conservative, while the major metropolitan areas are going to send the more, quote, “progressive liberals and socialists.”

The socialist movement in America is clearly hardening, as well as the sexual revolution. You see the election of transgender candidates, which is something that would never have happened except people are now sending a message and the loss of conviction concerning the created order of male and female and the created order of sexuality within marriage.

All of that is now disappearing in terms of what people determine as important in their elected officials and the policies of the elected officials. The left is hardening and, to some degree, expanding.

I think the right continues as it has, so I don’t see it as portending any gigantic sweep, but it is going to be a heavily contested election in 2018. Be engaged in the area of the public square and public policy.

Every election is a reflection of the worldview of that electorate. Thus, we now know something about Virginia and New York and New Jersey because it is a reflection of worldview.

Remember, the worldview change we long to see is a bottom-up, inside-out worldview change and that’s a Gospel movement of sharing the Gospel and discipling men, and women, and their lives and their families in Christ in which we think with sanity, and we live with temperance and we function with the sacred embraced in our life.

And that’s how we treat people and that’s how we treat policy because we desire to honor the Lord in all that we say and do.

Dr. Harry L. Reeder III is the Senior Pastor of Briarwood Presbyterian Church in Birmingham.

This podcast was transcribed by Jessica Havin. Jessica is editorial assistant for Yellowhammer News. Jessica has transcribed some of the top podcasts in the country and her work has been featured in a New York Times Bestseller.

2 hours ago

AL House Speaker Mac McCutcheon ‘can say for sure that you’ll see a lottery bill’ in 2019

With Mississippi recently adding sports betting to its legal gambling options, the pressure is on for Alabama to not only follow that lead, but to institute a state lottery as well.

While one prominent Republican state lawmaker already has predicted a sports gaming bill will be considered by the Alabama Legislature in 2019 yet be a long-shot to pass, Speaker of the House Mac McCutcheon (R-Monrovia) told WHNT that a lottery bill will definitely be on their agenda. However, its fate will be determined by the specifics of that now-hypothetical bill.

289

“I can say for sure that you’ll see a lottery bill in the first session coming up,” McCutcheon said. “Now, I can’t determine what the vote’s going to be because I’ve got to see the bill.”

A sizable part of the debate will revolve around where the lottery proceeds would go: to education, the general fund or a combination of the two.

“Could be both, it’s hard to say at this point,” McCutcheon advised.

State Sen. Arthur Orr (R-Decatur), who chairs the important senate appropriations committee entitled Finance and Taxation Education, echoed that specifics will shape a lottery’s case, adding that education should be a part of the equation.

“I do think if you’re going to have a lottery, earmarking money for educational purposes tends to generate a more successful lottery than monies just going to the government,” Orr explained.

While McCutcheon knows a lot of the details are yet to be determined on a proposed lottery, he outlined what could sink the bill-to-be.

“If we have a lottery bill out there, it must be clearly defined so that the people of Alabama have no doubt what the lottery issue is going to be,” McCutcheon emphasized. “We don’t want to confuse that bill with other gambling interests. If it’s going to be a lottery, let’s make it a statewide lottery, so the people can look at it, and then let’s make a determination on how we’re going to vote on it.”

The lottery would go to a referendum of the people as a constitutional amendment if it was passed by the state legislature. The governor has no power to sign or veto a lottery bill.

Sean Ross is a staff writer for Yellowhammer News. You can follow him on Twitter @sean_yhn

4 hours ago

VIDEO: Alabama Sen. Doug Jones’s easy out on Kavanaugh, Democrats must navigate state’s love of Trump, Alabama Socialist seek municipal office and more on Guerrilla Politics…

Radio talk show host Dale Jackson and Dr. Waymon Burke take you through this week’s biggest political stories, including:

— Will Judge Brett Kavanaugh be confirmed or not based on the he said/she said accusation?

— Does Sen. Doug Jones view his issues as a reason to vote against him or an excuse?

— How much does Alabama’s love of Trump effect Alabama Democrats’ chances?

46

Jackson and Burke are joined by Republican candidate for State House (District 3) Andrew Sorrell.

Jackson closes the show with a “parting shot” directed at those who judge Kavanaugh’s accuser as telling the truth with no evidence.

6 hours ago

Rep. Gary Palmer warns Brett Kavanaugh brouhaha threatens America’s ‘experiment in self-government’ — ‘I think this is going to have consequences for the Democrats’

On Friday’s broadcast of Alabama Public Television’s “Capitol Journal,” Rep. Gary Palmer (R-Hoover) expressed his skepticism over the sincerity of Senate Democrats regarding the sexual misconduct allegations aimed at U.S. Supreme Court associate justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Palmer warned that weaponizing a “scandal” in these situations may impact the country’s ability to self-govern.

“It looks to me like since the Democrats had this information as early as July, or maybe earlier than that, and they didn’t bring it forward — this was intended to derail the confirmation, not to do justice for an individual who claims to have been harmed,” he said. “And the thing that really concerns me about all of this, regardless of what side of the aisle you’re on, is how this impacts our ability to continue this experiment in self-government because when you weaponize scandal as a political weapon  — it’s very destructive to the process, not just the individuals involved, but the entire process.”

142

He added that ultimately, this could backfire on Democrats.

“I think this is going to have consequences for the Democrats,” Palmer added. “At some point, you can cry wolf too many times. And again, I think this is dangerous for people that have been harmed. It will get to the point where it’s just another claim. And at the same time, you’ve got Keith Ellison, who I serve with in the House, who has a claim against him by a woman who is being totally dismissed by the left, even though there’s more evidence there. There’s text messages, documentation from her doctor — you see where this is heading? I’m very concerned for our country and what we’re doing to ourselves. I think it has dire consequences down the road.”

@Jeff_Poor is a graduate of Auburn University and is the editor of Breitbart TV.

8 hours ago

Rep. Martha Roby: Tax reform 2.0 gains momentum

Less than a year ago, Congress passed and the President signed into law the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act to simplify our complicated tax code and lower rates for all Americans. Thanks to tax reform and other pro-growth policies, our economy is booming. You don’t just have to take my word for it – here are some numbers from the month of August:

–U.S. employers added more than 200,000 jobs as wages increased at the fastest year-on-year pace since June of 2009.

470

–Unemployment claims reached a 49-year low. The last time jobless claims fell to this point, it was December of 1969.

–Small business optimism hit a new record high.

–The number of individuals employed part-time who would prefer full-time work but could not find it has fallen to the lowest level since before the 2008-2009 recession.

–U.S. manufacturing grew at the fastest pace since May of 2004.

These numbers all serve as proof that the American people are better off now than they were just two years ago. I am eager to see this strong momentum continue, and I am glad to report that we aren’t slowing down our efforts to foster economic growth right here in the United States. Recently, the House Ways and Means Committee passed Tax Reform 2.0, a series of bills that would modify and build upon the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

The first bill in the series, H.R. 6760, the Protecting Family and Small Business Tax Cuts Act of 2018, would put in place several changes to the individual income tax rate. Since the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act provisions are set to expire at the end of 2025, perhaps the most important changes H.R. 6760 would implement are making the tax rate changes and the Child Tax Credit permanent.

According to a Tax Foundation study, making these individual income tax changes from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent would increase long-term Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 2.2 percent and create 1.5 million new full-time equivalent jobs.

The second bill in the series, H.R. 6757, the Family Savings Act of 2018, includes a number of important reforms to retirement accounts. For example, individuals would be able to contribute up to $2,500 into a savings account annually, and any withdrawals would be tax free.

The third bill in the series, H.R. 6756, the American Innovation Act of 2018, would allow businesses to deduct their start-up costs. Businesses could either deduct the lesser of their start-up expenses, or for firms with more than $120,000 in expenses, deduct a flat amount of $20,000.

Our tax reform overhaul provides much needed relief to American families, creates jobs here in the United States, grows our economy, and allows hardworking taxpayers to keep more of their own money in their pocket. We now have a unique opportunity to continue delivering on our promise to give the American people more of the results they deserve.

Committee passage of Tax Reform 2.0 is just the first step in the legislative process to make parts of our tax overhaul permanent. I will continue to listen to the people I represent in Alabama’s Second District and work alongside my colleagues in Congress to improve this package of legislation as we move towards advancing these pro-growth policies to the House floor for a vote.

U.S. Rep. Martha Roby is a Republican from Montgomery.

9 hours ago

What you need to know about Alabama proposed constitutional amendments 3 & 4

On November 6, Alabamians will vote on four proposed statewide constitutional amendments. Although the first two amendments will likely receive the most attention (API’s analyses can be found on our website), amendments three and four deserve notice as well. They are, in fact, changes to the longest known constitution in the world.

We’ll start with Proposed Amendment Three, which addresses the University of Alabama’s Board of Trustees.

Currently, the Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama System – which governs UAB and UAH in addition to the Tuscaloosa campus – is composed of three members from the seventh congressional district (which includes Tuscaloosa), two members from each of the other six congressional districts, the governor and the state superintendent of education.

426

If approved, this amendment would require that the Board continue to be made up of members of congressional districts as drawn on January 1, 2018. This means that, in the case that Alabama gains or, more likely, loses a congressional seat in 2020, the makeup of the board of trustees would not be affected nor thrown into disarray.

Additional stipulations include the removal of the state superintendent of education from automatic membership on the board and of the requirement that board members retire after their 70th birthday.

It is worth mentioning that the bill allowing this University of Alabama-specific amendment passed unanimously in both the State House and Senate.

Amendment Four, in contrast, will have a significantly wider impact if approved.

This amendment addresses something Alabamians have been hearing about for a while now–special elections. It is important to note on the front end, however, that it does not address special elections for the U.S. Congress like that of 2017. Instead, it impacts vacancies in the state legislature.

If accepted, legislative vacancies that occur on or after October 1 of the third year of a quadrennium (in other words, seats that become open only months before the final session of the legislature’s four-year term) would remain vacant until the next general election.

Currently, the governor is required to schedule a special election when state legislative vacancies occur. These elections cost the state money, create voter fatigue, and according to Senator Glover, the amendment’s sponsor, are “just bad government.”

In an interview with API, Senator Glover described one case where, thanks to a late special election, a legislator was sworn in on the last day of session. Cases like these, where relatively powerless legislators are added to the state payroll, will not occur if the amendment is approved.

The main purpose, according to Glover, is to “save some money and confusion.” He estimates that, if this language had been on the books earlier, the state would’ve saved “just under a million dollars” in 2018 alone. For example, this amendment would prohibit what will, come November, be four separate elections for Alabama’s 26 Senate seat in less than a year.

Additionally, the amendment received unanimous support when it passed the Senate and overwhelming support in the House earlier this year.

Although these two amendments are not as polarizing as amendments one and two, both are attempts to make the state better, and they should not be ignored.

Parker Snider is Manager of Policy Relations for the Alabama Policy Institute, an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit research and educational organization dedicated to strengthening free enterprise, defending limited government, and championing strong families.